Talk:Slide Mountain (Ulster County, New York)

Mountains Mid‑importance

	Mountains portal This article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Contributing FAQ for more information), or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MountainsWikipedia:WikiProject MountainsTemplate:WikiProject MountainsMountain articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

New York (state): Hudson Valley Mid‑importance

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York 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 (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Hudson Valley (assessed as High-importance).

Untitled

Can someone determine whether the image is unrestricted or not? I'd love to keep it on the page, but we have strict rules here. Daniel Case 22:05, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Are you asking about the infrared aerial shot? Back when the state first put up their GIS application, I asked them about reusing images. Their reply was that the data was from the federal government, and could not be copyrighted. They told me I could use it any way I liked, but they would appreciate credit as the source for the image, as I did when I uploaded it. When I uploaded it I specified that it was from government sources, and was public domain, but I see it doesn't say that now. Don't know why.

The tag you used may not have been available anymore. But I think what you said is enough to justify a PD-USGov tag, although I'd like to know which agency ... NOAA? Because there are a growing number of agency-specific tags, including that one, that can and should be used where the originating agency is known. Daniel Case 17:05, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good. I see you put a USGS tag on the image. Excellent. Daniel Case 17:23, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As a sidenote, you can no longer zoom out this much in their application. Evidently it puts too much of a load on their servers. Makes it less useful, though. If you want, I can dig up that email from the NYGIS, I must have it somewhere (it was 5 years ago!). Also, I liked it better where I put it originally on the page, I wanted to fill that big white space. The page looks unbalanced now (IMHO).

Basic design rule is that you have pictures alternate to help guide the reader down the page. I hate having more than one picture with intro text, infobox or no. Almost every featured article with this many images does this, especially up top (although some specialized ones, like geography of India, have all or some pics in a column on the side so as to better illustrate the different regions described.

On another topic, I have been debating rewriting the paragraph on the ascent by the state commission. I think it is an exageration to say Dutcher "sabotaged" the trail. Sabotage implies an action, Dutcher did nothing. That was the problem, he felt no obligation to get the trail ready for someone else to guide the commission up. IMHO, the fault lay with C.C. Winne, the hotelkeeper appointed to guide the ascent. It was really his responsibility to scout the trail and make sure it was ready ahead of time. Anyway, I didn't change the text because I didn't want to step on any toes... Tim mallery 16:08, 11 December

Reviewing Evers (p. 579), I see that he says simply that Dutcher "made not the slightest attempt" to clear up the trail that morning, since he had been passed over for political reasons. I will make the appropriate change. Thanks for calling my attention to that. Daniel Case 17:05, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the images. I originally uploaded them, but since Wikipedia has decided that links to my webpages are inappropriate content, I deleted them.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tim mallery (talk • contribs)

But why? What are you referring to? What's the story with this? Daniel Case 01:22, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Han-Kwang decided that links to sites about the Catskills aren't appropriate for articles about the Catskills. You'd have to ask him to explain that. I see he deleted other sites than mine as well. Given his attitude, I'd rather not participate here anymore. Tim mallery 21:16, 5 October 2006

Tim, I have restored the images as a) they remained on the server but more importantly b) there seems to be no good reason to remove them based on your statements above. It seems you are acting spitefully, out of a personal dispute rather than concerns about their copyright status or accuracy. If you had a legitimate dispute with Han-Kwang about linking to your websites (and which ones would those be? I don't see any serious removals from Catskill Mountains, for instance), take it to RFC. If there were legitimate encyclopedic reasons for those links, I'll cosign. If you are genuinely spamming, though, they don't belong. But the pictures are still, IMO, not "yours" to remove once they're uploaded unless a valid reason for deletion is found. Daniel Case 21:43, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV or not?

In the "John Burroughs" section, I found something that is probably not NPOV. If we had this as a quote from someone, it would be fine. "...that offers the best view from the mountain." Smock42 (talk) 19:15, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure we could find a source saying something like that. I wrote the original article back when we didn't require sources to be cited so rigorously, and haven't had the time to really update it since. Daniel Case (talk) 01:59, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]