Talk:Hudson Greene

original lede image

replacement image

Lede image

There is a disagreement regarding the lede image of this article. The first photo on the right is the lede image that's been there for quite a while, the second one replaced it today, and I reverted it. Obviously the images are very similar, but I think the first is superior in a number of ways.

• Second image needs to be cropped at the top, too much sky, but this is easily fixed
• Second image is has less contrast that the first; this could be adjusted a bit, but still wouldn't come up to the first in quality
• Most problematically, the second image is taken from too steep an angle. Both photographers obviously had to get fairly close tot he building to get the towers into the frame, but the second is a bit too close, causing the feeling that the towers are falling backwards. The first photo has a bit of this as well, but not nearly as much, as it's shot from a slightly better angle.

There's no doubt that the second image could be improved, except for the problem of the angle. For this reason, I feel the first image is superior for our use. BMK (talk) 01:59, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Attribution

Text and references copied from Hudson Greene to Towers of America See former article's history for a list of contributors. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:55, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Text and references copied from Hudson Greene to Marbella Apartments, See former article's history for a list of contributors. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 15:26, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Text and references copied from Hudson Greene to The James Monroe. See former article's history for a list of contributors. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:19, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Proper text and references in article

The material I inserted is clearly relevant to this article. Provides context for the reader about the place and the history. I admit that oine of the two sources doe not explicitly mention this building. However, it does mention the location. It provides context and better informs our readers.
There is no requirement that every source mention the subject by name. To aid readers it is better to err on the side of too much of the irrelevant, rather than too little of the relevant.
To anticipate your upcoming mischaracterization, I'm not arguing that the second article is part of WP:Sigcov as far as WP:GNG.
I note that the block quote is quoted in the Horsley article, which does mention this building by name.
The issue is what belongs in this article. I am addressing this on the article talk page, per WP:BRD. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 11:07, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

This is the text being discussed:

It is seen as part of a larger long term revival of the Jersey City waterfront and warehouse district. In 2015, Robert Cotter and Jeff Wenger, one of whom is the urban planning director for Jersey City wrote:

“Since 1980, 18 million square feet of office space have been developed on the Jersey City waterfront, generating the highest price per square foot office deals in New Jersey history and marking the success of the original ‘Wall Street West’ concept. Currently over 6,000 housing units are under construction with another 20,000 units approved by the planning Board. Much of this development is accommodated with high rise construction with approximately 28 buildings over 300 feet tall and 6 buildings over 500 feet with several more under construction. China Overseas has approvals for a new tower of 889 feet. Within a few years, Jersey City will overtake Newark as New Jersey’s most populous city….”

It has absolutely nothing to do with this building specifically and needs to be removed. SportingFlyer T·C 19:11, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

It provides context. You are WP:Edit warring WP:3RR 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:13, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure it's ever appropriate to use a block quote to "provide context." SportingFlyer T·C 19:23, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

You are changing your reasoning and line of attack. You claimed relevancy repeatedly before. Of course, you disregarded Horsley's supporting use which includes this building.

I disagree. We should wait for consensus to build. And it will. And the AFD will disappear, too. Oh well. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:28, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

I put back the reference. Left out the quote. I will wait for other editors to chime in and revert your other work. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:50, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

References