Talk:Garden of Ninfa

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

About galleries[edit]

  • This article typically needs illustrations since the site is so different from any other gardens that it would be very difficult to describe in words. In this case, images in the gallery collectively do have encyclopedic value and add to the reader's understanding of the subject.

Galleries are not discuraged. Please see also this discussion here, Talk:Charles Marion Russell.

Per WP:IG:

Images are typically interspersed individually throughout an article near the relevant text (see WP:MOSIMAGES). However, the use of a gallery section may be appropriate in some Wikipedia articles if a collection of images can illustrate aspects of a subject that cannot be easily or adequately described by text or individual images. The images in the gallery collectively must have encyclopedic value and add to the reader's understanding of the subject.


  • Image use policy say: Sometimes a picture may benefit from a size other than the default; see the Manual of Style for guidance.


  • Manual of style: **As a general rule, images should not be set to a larger fixed size than the 220px default (users can adjust this in their preferences). 'If an exception to the general rule is warranted', forcing an image size to be either larger or smaller than the 220px default is done by placing a parameter in the image coding.


  • The exception from the general rule is most art and art related articles that they do fall into this cathegory, and they are this exception to the general rule .


Hafspajen (talk) 20:19, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Editor replacing images with his/hers own, less good quality[edit]

There is no point replacing images that are of good quality with images that are worse, and some of them even a duplicate of images already existing in article. Please discuss if you want to change images. These images were selected very carefully, from aroud 200 images from Wikipedia. They are here because they were exactly the best ones, and they are put together in this article so it should create a balanced picture of the garden, showing as many features as possible and chosen to fit together, and to create a visual balance between colours, shapes and the different features of the garden, and not chosen in a random way. Hafspajen (talk) 00:42, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • OK, here we go again, without any discussion, an Italian editor was replacing images with his own images, taken by Livioandronico2013, images that are much less quality images, thus not improving article, twice now.
  • Image removed left, image added recenly (also edit warring) right:
Image removed left, A image new right B

This image to the left, A is much more suggestive, showing two arcades istead of one, featuring climbing plants and has a better, clearer background, a blooming tree, and has a much better composition. The plants at left, above compensate the ruins sloping wall, but also leave place for light and luminosity. It is showing the structure of the wall better. The image to the right that was replacing it twice now, is of less good quality, also quite similar with one image already in the article, so in this case it becames a duplicate. No nees to use an image as lead picture when one similar already exists in the article.

  • As a compromise, I can imagine using the B instead of C in the gallery, but not using B in the lead and C in the gallery, because it is definitivelly not an improvment.
C. This image was already in the gallery , when editor repacing lead image with image B. h
Image removed left, image new right

This is clearly not an improvment. The old image is much better, showing up a dramatic quality, with clouds on the sky, and the composition is a much more interesting composition, including the shore. The image show more clearly the tower, also providing a good wiev of the village beside. The new pic is more blurry, dark and more unbalanced.

Image removed left, A image new right B

This image was already in the gallery , when editor repacing third image with image B. Duplicate again!! The image to the left that was replaced the image to the right, is of less good quality, also quite similar with one image already in the article, so in this case it becames a duplicate. The image C might need cropping to get rid of the fot to the left, but the image is illustrating a tree with fowers and there are almost no images with flowering trees of the Ninfa garden on wikipedia, pity. I need that image to show flowers, and I am not going to remove it. Might ask somebody to cropp it, thought.

C. This image was already in the gallery , when editor replacing third image with image B. Duplicate again!!
Image removed left, image new right

This image is showing not only the rest of the fresco, to the left, but it is showing the enviroment around it to. The image to the right shows only the wall.

  • And as I said before, these images in the article were selected very carefully, from more than 200 images existing on the commons, on Wikipedia. They are here because they were the best ones to find on commons, and they are put together in this article so it should fit together, not chosen in a random way. I was not making favors for any photographer. The images are made by Greymouser, Mentnafunangann, Efghilmno, Astrovega, Didimo69 and Eleonorapulcino, not because I like the guys but because those were the best pictures.
I am actually using 2 picture by Livioandronico2013 too, the Macello bridge, that was chosen in the gallery, and I replaced the File:Giardino di Ninfa 37.jpg with the other one File:Church Santa Maria Maggiore.JPG, made by Livioandronico2013, as a compromise, so he has now two of his pictures here in the article. No need to change the other ones with less good quality pictures, made by Livioandronico2013, by Livioandronico2013.

Hafspajen (talk) 13:04, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree the "old" (A images) are much better in terms of quality, interest, framing, lighting, etc. The other images would be okay in the gallery, but not strictly necessary. They're mainly just duplicates of what's already in the article, but not nearly as good. The one exception I can point out would be the fresco image, since it shows a close up of the fresco, but still isn't very good. Perhaps it could be cropped or touched up somehow, but it shouldn't replace the current image. It could be provided as an additional image. — Frεcklεfσσt | Talk 14:22, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh, yes, I was also thinking about the fresco image, in those terms. Also tried to add prew. but it did not added anything and it didn't looked like an improvment. The fresco is visible on the other picture too, actually is showing up just as good, but it is showing the enviroment around it to. So in that meaning the A is a better picture - because it shows where exactly this fresco is in the ruin. And this article doesn't have much place. If a section or two were added, yes, than it would be place for it, and possible to add it. Hafspajen (talk) 14:38, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Garden of Ninfa. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:


When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:58, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Question on verifiabilty[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians, In every source I found that mainly Lady Constance Adela (Ada) Bootle-Wilbraham created the garden, with the help of her sons. But here, its the son that is in focus, and if I look at the link to Ada Bootle-Wilbraham, an image of a bearded guy appears. Krokodilzahn (talk) 21:01, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:49, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Garden_of_Ninfa&oldid=1202212650"