On 10 March 2012 00:57, Ray Saintonge saintonge@telus.net wrote:
On 03/09/12 6:06 AM, Neil Babbage wrote:
Wikimedia is not supposed to be some kind of exercise in perfection for perfection's sake. It's supposed to be open, accessible and useful.
"Useful", like "notable" is another of those words that cannot be easily
defined. In many otherwise non-controversial articles we have pictures that do not further the contents of the articles. They may have a loose connection with the article's topic, but they don't add any information to the topic. They do, however, break up solid blocks of text, and make it more readable.
But isn't that an equally subjective matter; I know several editors who consider such images (to break up prose) a hindrance and they remove them with vigour.
To me you're just making an argument for a "Images used in a decorative capacity" category, so those people can read undisturbed :)
Tom