Talk:Northern Counties Paladin

Image reversion rationale

@Davey2010 To avoid potentially triggering WP:3RR and to hopefully get a bit of clarity, could you please explain your rationale in reverting this and so many other bus articles' images to prior versions?

I'll outline mine first: I personally believe that Wikipedia pages of buses should have, if they exist, in-service photos of the buses with their first operator and in as best physical state as possible. In this article's case, I say preserved buses stand as an adequate equivalent, too. As-new photographs (or photos in as-new condition) highlight elements of the bus as they were intended by the manufacturer shortly after it rolled out the factory. In my opinion, they also help provide context for the history of the bus type - i.e. by demonstrating them with the operator they were most commonly used by at the time they were relatively new.

I don't see why, therefore, we seemingly can't part with the images as they now stand here. Why the insistence of sticking with photos from 2006-2009 and onwards from when the buses were near the end of their service life/with second or third-hand operators, when new photos can be made available that better demonstrates them? And please, tell me what constitutes "fine", "better" or "no issue" in your edit summaries? What precedence does the photo of the back of a Paladin Dart have over a photo of a one-in-four Paladin Atlantean in this article?

Another point that I'd like to pick up on is that as a regular mobile user (i.e. both through browser on iPad and Wikipedia app on my phone), I'm very mindful of making these pages accessible for other mobile users. As @Kermelei also probably disputes, this image reorienting you have undertaken with this article, as well as on, say, Alexander ALX400 (why have you added a new image, by the way?), is causing quite a bit of sandwiching of the main body of text. I'll admit, I've done some arguably weird orienting of images on this article before, but that was to avoid sandwiching text between image and infobox and demonstrate the Atlantean rebody under its own heading. I'd just be mindful about that as you go on.

Again, all I ask is that you explain what it is you are trying to do without just leaving it in the edit summary as "past images were fine" or something as vague as that. What's the rationale, here? Why not allow these new images to stand? Hullian111 (talk) 06:37, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi, In regards to the infobox - your image is too dark and you can't see a great deal whereas with the current one you can see the whole vehicle and it's obviously not dark

I apologise for removing the Leyland Atlantean image that was unintentional (I hadn't properly read the article so assumed it was just another image) - I've reinstated that image

As for sandwiching - What am I supposed to do ? ... I create a gallery and this guy removes it per WP:IG, So I add it to the text and now it's a sandwich issue and he has to remove them again. I've tried with him. Anyway I would care more over the sandwich issue if he wasn't all "removed gallery per IG". Yet again the ALX400 images were changed etc because of him - I had no real desire to add new images but was left with no option due to the article layout and him hating galleries –Davey2010^Talk 11:42, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

Now that I'm able to have the time to digest matters, I'll say that on the infobox image front... you raise a good point. I'll still try scouring for something from when the type was new, but I'll hopefully keep it in mind for the future.

The only real sticking point for me is the arrangement of images. Now I personally aren't a fan of galleries, either - there was once a particularly egregious example on the Humberside FRS page that eventually turned me against them in the end - and in their place, I'm in favour of a neat line-up of images that demonstrate variants of the bus type (though I'm also in favour of justifying imahes to the left in order to avoid an infobox, e.g. on Wright Eclipse Gemini). To take Alexander ALX400 as an example, I'm now sort-of seeing what you're trying to do by putting them underneath the relevant paragraphs, but having the images justified left and right all around the article kind of looks a bit messy and is prone to sandwiching on my end/smaller screens. Hence why I like to keep images on the right-hand side.

Would appreciate your feedback on the matter, hope it clarifies things so we can move on. Hullian111 (talk) 17:19, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

When it comes to image replacements I always stick to one question/rule of thumb: Is it a real improvement over the one I'm replacing ? If I think no then it doesn't get replaced (i'll be honest that's happened once or twice), I don't like changing images for the sake of it,

(The rest of the reply was about the ALX400 - Discussion has been moved to User talk:Davey2010#Image reversion rationale as per Hullian111's reply here) –Davey2010^Talk 17:48, 29 May 2023 (UTC) (Moved discussion at 22:24, 29 May 2023 (UTC))

Moved to User talk:Davey2010 § Image reversion rationale