Article imagesChanjya

Dydh da! Just thought I'd share my rationale for the change of images, and suggest you revert them back to the former images. This wiki has no hard and fast policies due to its small size, but the en.wiki policies and norms can be used as a best practice guide. There is no requirement either here or on en.wiki that the images used of public figures be their official portraits; often this can be counter-intuitive (when official portraits are not freely available to use). Rather, it is advised to use "the best quality images available" - that is of the highest resolution and, for individuals, portraits of the subject alone ("without clutter").

The image you have put on Nicola Sturgeon is 'cluttered'; there is the Scottish flag and flowers in the image. This detracts from its value, especially when there are better alternatives available. In the image you put on Dewisyans ollgemmyn Ruwvaneth Unys, 2017, the image is highly zoomed in, making it visibly pixellated when clicked on to view. Once again, where there are better quality images available, these should absolutely be used.

I would suggest you revert your reverts and make sure you haven't replaced perfectly fine images with poor quality ones in your other edits. If in doubt, have a look what is used on en.wiki or other large wikis. Let me know if there's anything else I can do to help. Meur ras, Gazamp (keskows) 19:42, 30 Ebrel 2021 (UTC)[]

Hi there. I’m sorry to say but I have to disagree. My rational for using this image of Nicola Sturgeon is because this is her Official Portrait used, taken and released by the Scottish Government. I refer you to the Scottish Government website: https://www.gov.scot/about/who-runs-government/first-minister/ This shows Nicola in a professional, First Ministerial type manner so it should be used. Ciaran.london (keskows) 01:25, 1 Me 2021 (UTC)[]
You seem to miss my point - official portraits do not have any particular right to be used on a Wikipedia page just because they are used on a government website or whatever. In this case it is especially important that these portraits are not used becuase they're cluttered and lower quality images. In adding these crops of an official portrait, you've removed photos that were actually recent and good quality - this drastically lowers the quality of the whole page. Please actually read en:MOS:IMAGEQUALITY. Gazamp (keskows) 11:46, 1 Me 2021 (UTC)[]
Just to let you know, I'll probably replace the photos at some point this week if I don't hear anything more. You can let me know if you've replied by putting {{ping|Gazamp}} at the start of your message. Oll an gwella, Gazamp (keskows) 10:39, 3 Me 2021 (UTC)[]

@Gazamp:, I don’t think we’re both ever going to agree on this matter, I’m afraid. Ciaran.london (keskows) 21:09, 3 Me 2021 (UTC)[]

You're probably right - I'll try and get some other active editors to see if we can come to some sort of consensus. @Brwynog, @Gwikor Frank, @Llywelyn2000: If any of you would mind coming and giving an external opinion on all of this it'd be much appreciated. Meur ras, Gazamp (keskows) 13:09, 4 Me 2021 (UTC)[]
Personally I prefer the current photo (2017) to the one from 2019, but to be honest, I don't really think this is particularly worth the time and energy of the small group of active editors that KW Wikipedia has. Let's leave worrying about this sort of niggle until we're a nice big Wiki. In any case, we now have infoboxes for people so tbh she should probably get an infobox added which will come with a photo from Wikidata and then if you want any additional ones we can always add a gallery. Thank you both for your passion towards improving kw-wiki. --Gwikor Frank (keskows) 13:16, 4 Me 2021 (UTC)[]
We could use the one from en.wiki as a compromise (find here) - it's both an official picture and higher quality, so could tick everyone's boxes. Gazamp (keskows) 13:25, 4 Me 2021 (UTC)[]
I forgot about the infoboxes! That makes it a lot more cut and dry. Meur ras for the comment. Gazamp (keskows) 13:29, 4 Me 2021 (UTC)[]
My tuppence worth here, for what it's worth:
1. We do use official images on cy-wiki
2. Smaller wikis do not have to be copies of larger ones, which very often are very biased against minorities
3. The decisions on this wiki should be taken by the Cornish speakers alone, not outsiders like myself
4. Any images fed into the new infobox can be over-ridden by:
| image = NameOfImage.jpg
if the WD image is unacceptable.
Wonderful things happening on this wiki - just wish I could speak Cornish myself! Ymlaen!
Llywelyn2000 (keskows) 13:40, 4 Me 2021 (UTC)[]
It seems I've been away from kw.wiki for too long and got caught up on the little things - meur ras for the comments, the patience and the perspective! I'll go and make myself busy with something more consequential :-) Gazamp (keskows) 14:19, 4 Me 2021 (UTC)[]
Firstly I’d like to compliment both of you for your commitment to wikipedya Kernewek. Secondly, and personally I couldn’t see much difference between the two photos, they both had a saltire in the background and portrayed Nicola well. I’ve had a quick look at commons.wikimedia and there are several other photos available. If both of you are dead set against each other’s choice, could you agree on another photo. I quite liked this one, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nicola_Sturgeon_SNP_Conference.jpg and even the cropped version is high quality. Looking foward to seeing a lot more content from both of you in the future.Brwynog (keskows) 15:33, 4 Me 2021 (UTC)[]
Brwynog I'm afraid that https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:First_Minister_Nicola_Sturgeon.jpg is a better image for the infobox than https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nicola_Sturgeon_SNP_Conference.jpg - but the image isn't a very big deal!! Ciaran.london (keskows) 12:31, 5 Me 2021 (UTC)[]