This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
Latest comment: 3 years ago7 comments2 people in discussion
An editor has made changes to the images in the article which I do not consider an improvement, but is edit warring instead of discussing. Editors are invited to compare the status quo ante[1] against the editor's version [2]. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:29, 11 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
One of these images is overexposed and shows poor composition. The other, a photo with reasonable and realistic light levels, offers a well composed view of the park in springtime. Can you tell which is which? Filetime (talk) 22:36, 11 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
I agree with you that the current infobox image is not the best possible image, but at least it shows a unique feature of the park, its central fountain. Your replacement is simply a pretty picture of a walkway which could be any part almost anywhere, it is not specific to Stuyvesant Square. Once again, technical quality is not the most important aspect of an image, suitability of the image's content is. It would be wonderful if we could always have both, but if that's not possible, content must prevail over technical quality. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:42, 11 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
<insult ignored> I have no objection to your replacing the current infobox image with File:Stuyvesant Square Park.jpg, and I'd further suggest that you take your walkway image and replace my "walkway in summer" image with it, since the contents are similar and yours is better both technically and in composition. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:51, 11 July 2021 (UTC)Reply
