Talk:American Idiot/cover dispute

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Straw poll: Which image should be used?

thumb|200px|left|Version A

Image:Green Day American Idiot.jpg
Version B

[edit] I prefer version A, Greenday_americanidiot.png

  1. Dpbsmith (talk) 12:25, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  2. Actel 21:19, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  3. Greedy 21:24, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  4. WB 23:12, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
  5. Dan100 (Talk) 07:38, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC) Better quality. BTW why the need for a poll? Is this disputed?
    There was a minor revert war about it and and a request for page protection. See history. Dpbsmith (talk) 09:49, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  6. the wub "?/!" 13:33, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  7. Cbing01 (talk) 22:34, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  8. Aslate 19:30, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  9. Jobe6 06:44, July 26, 2005 (UTC)
  10. Verison B is too low-quality, this one captures the true colors better. --Saint-Paddy 03:55, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] I prefer version B, Green_Day_American_Idiot.jpg

  1. I choose mine. There's no problem with it everytime I keep reverting the page. -- Mike Garcia 13:56 Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
  2. Much smaller, and less controversial. anthony 02:36, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Comments

As displayed on my screen, the red areas in version B are mottled due to JPEG compression, and the image is not as sharp. Dpbsmith (talk) 12:25, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Also, version B's "black" is more like a grey.. Therefore version A is slightly superior in terms of quality imo. --Johnnyw 14:02, 2005 Jun 23 (UTC)

At this point, it seems to me there is a consensus in favor of version A.

However, since I don't think it's important, and I am not knowledgeable in the subject matter, I am not going to be the one to edit the article to include the preferred version.

I suggest that people interested in this put the article on their watchlist.

Should it become necessary at some point to exercise the Three-revert rule, this can be done by listing the user at Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress, mentioning the three-revert rule and referencing this Talk page. Since I created the straw poll, and having expressed a personal preference for version A, it would not be appropriate for me to enforce it personally myself. Dpbsmith (talk) 19:47, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hasn't Mike done this before? -anthony

A is just better quality hands down. Jobe6 06:45, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Who cares?

Who cares whether the image is better or not (the one I keep re-adding)? Why should I stop reverting it? Next time I (or Mike Garcia) re-adds it you're not removing it again! And who cares what the rest of this talk page says? Huh? -- 205.188.117.66

And now it's protected, so you'll have to discuss it instead of reverting. violet/riga (t) 18:35, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
But, violet/riga, you protected The Right Version. What a shocking departure from tradition. Dpbsmith (talk) 21:09, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Pretty stupid

I thought this was stupid initially... I didn't think it would get this stupid... It's pretty obvious Mike Garcia just likes to keeps "his image" up there. I would like to "assume good faith" here but, it appears to me that he doesn't really care about the quality of the article, but rather wants to make the Wikipedia where he could see how he's done so far. Of course, Mike Garcia has made some useful contributions. However, he fails to comply with the Wikipedia's majority rule (well, sorta). He has been banned before, plus, he has had warnings countless times, yet he hasn't yet done anything the others suggested him to do. He is also known to use sockpuppets... 1-- WB 22:22, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)

  • Actually, it's skillful trolling, and I, for one, was hooked. But then, that's pretty easy, as I'm easily sucked into such things. I've actually been manipulated into spending time on this and even into caring about the outcome, and the beautiful part is that there's not a nickel's worth of difference between the images. I can see my daughter asking "What have you been up to?" And me saying "Oh, tinkering with Wikipedia as usual." And her saying "What have you done for Wikipedia lately?" And me saying, "Well, I've gotten involved in a personality conflict over which of two images is very slightly the better of the two." I've suggested to User:205.188.117.66 that many people find that it pays off in the long run to care about the opinions of others. Oh, well. It'll all be the same in a hundred years. Dpbsmith (talk) 22:54, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • I think we are fine as long as we don't have Mike Garcia around this place. There are lots of vandalism around, yet, this person's worse than normal people's "YOU SUCK" at the end of the articles. -- WB 05:36, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Moving on -- POLL

Question: In 50 words, more or less, what do you object to, in the article in its present protected state?

Answers:

  • It's protected, I think protected articles are contrary to wikipedian principles. Pedant 21:01, 2005 Jun 25 (UTC)
    • But petty revert wars are worse. violet/riga (t) 22:51, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)