Jump to content

Talk:Stella Tennant

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

Untitled

[edit]

There is no source given for her birthplace as Scotland, UK. Most places in the internet seem to have "Chatsworth, England, UK", though many of them have also 1971 as the birthyear with no date. 85.217.39.114 (talk) 07:08, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The main image currently associated with this page is not of Stella Tennant, but of Imogen Morris Clarke. I believe the mistake was made because the image was named https:// upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/04/Stella-tennant-imogen-morris-clarke-by-tim-walker-for-vogue-italy-march-2010-lady-grey-10_%2815227609468%29.jpg/220px-Stella-tennant-imogen-morris-clarke-by-tim-walker-for-vogue-italy-march-2010-lady-grey-10_%2815227609468%29.jpg As you can see here: Stella-tennant-imogen-morris-clarke, Stella Tennant's name appears at the beginning directly preceding the name of the actual subject, Imogen Morris Clarke. Her name appearing in the address at all is a problem, but to list her first likely compounded the impression that she is the subject. The two appeared together in a pictorial by Tim Walker, called "Lady Grey," in the original source magazine, Vogue Italy (March, 2010). I do not feel comfortable removing an image. Please, is there someone else who might be more comfortable adding and removing images? FYI, this is what Stella Tennant looks like: https://www.google.com/search?q=stella+tennant+vogue+italia+march+2010+tim+walker&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS837US837&tbm=isch&source=iu&ictx=1&fir=HrXCitTeuHqxmM%253A%252C_u3In0t-V1krVM%252C_&vet=1&usg=AI4_-kRI0fij_DU3nsS8310VSyPPmlaS6A&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiRwYbVsPDnAhXIqZ4KHf-zAr8Q9QEwAHoECAoQBQ#imgrc=u-Gz0_1Mvh1KYM Thank you. AmyMaeBee (talk) 23:46, 26 February 2020 (UTC)AmyMaeBee 26 February 2020[reply]

Tone tag

[edit]

@Joofjoof: I've edited a new addition that I hadn't noticed earlier -- is this the part you meant? If not, could you clarify, please. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:26, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Should we use a not great image, or no image?

[edit]

Image 1 Image 2 Image 3 head and shoulders

@Escape Orbit, Abbyjjjj96, Espresso Addict, and AleatoryPonderings: We don't have a great free photo of Stella Tennant. But we do have a couple of not great free images. Since she was a model, known for her looks, showing what she looked like is rather important. Until we get a better one, do we use image 1, image 2, or no image? Pinging editors who have edited the article multiple times or so in the past few days, but everyone is welcome to give their opinions. --GRuban (talk) 01:32, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • No image. These are so low-res and blurry that nothing is better. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 01:34, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd suggest, as I did earlier, cropping the first one to head and shoulders. Given that the subject's notability was largely based on her photogenicity, better to have some idea of her appearance than none. Unfortunately, given the existence of these, afaik, there is no route to using a fair-use image. In the longer term, approaching the subject's agency and asking if a better image can be released under appropriate terms might be a way to go. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:41, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • No image. "Lead images are not required", per MOS:LEADIMAGE. I also disagree with the above suggestion to crop one of the images as they are both blurry and of poor quality. Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 02:07, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I always think that, unless it is really, really bad, a bad image is better than no image. Obviously these photos are not great, but since she was a model, a runway image is apt. Cropping and zooming to head a shoulders doesn't improve anything, since they're already blurry, and actually removes detail like her stature (which, as a model, is of significance). So I'd use Image 2, showing more of her face. Not great, but the best of a poor option. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 12:11, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • For me, I prefer a poor image over none, and these aren't actively bad, and do improve the article; she was a model, so seeing what she looked like is a big deal. The principle of Wikipedia is of gradual improvement, rather than not writing anything until it is perfect. I think I prefer image 1 to image 2, and would have to see what a cropped head and shoulders image looks like to see whether that would be better than image 1. --GRuban (talk) 17:11, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Poor-quality images—dark or blurry; showing the subject too small, hidden in clutter, or ambiguous; and so on—should not be used unless absolutely necessary.—MOS:IMAGES. I fail to see how these images are absolutely necessary and, as I noted in my vote above, MOS:LEADIMAGE says a lead image is not required. Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 22:09, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • They're not absolutely necessary, but only to the extent that us not having nearly any article about her at all is not absolutely necessary - if we only had the one line "Stella Tennant was an English model, died 2020." with one ref, that would still be an article. But as long as we have one, since she was a model, I find it hard to imagine the argument that an article about her could be complete without any image of her, so to that extent, they are necessary. And we clearly disagree to what extent they are poor quality - they are slightly blurry, but not ridiculously so, she is still recognizable, and they would certainly be better if they showed her full face, but they're what we've got. --GRuban (talk) 22:57, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • Do you or anyone else who wish to use an image actually have a policy or guideline to refute the ones I cited? See WP:PPOV. Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 01:39, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • We're not refuting the policies or guidelines. We're just saying you're applying them wrong. You can similarly "cite" WP:NPOV, WP:BLP, and WP:OMGWTFBBQ and they won't matter if they aren't applied correctly. Our rules here on Wikipedia are not magical incantations where whoever recites more abbreviations gets their own way, they're tools to help us editors build the best encyclopedia we can. That's what we're doing here. --GRuban (talk) 01:54, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
          • Many votes here say a variation of 'I think a bad image is better than no image' but the guidelines say the opposite. If they're tools to help build the best encyclopedia, then why not actually follow them? Your argument just seems to be to use an image because you like it better that way. Abbyjjjj96 (talk) 02:41, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
            • "Bad" is by definition a judgment call. You think these images are so "bad" that they shouldn't be used. So far, most others here disagree. If just having anyone say an image is "bad" were enough for it to be unusable, I guarantee we would find a troll - or a perfectionist - that would randomly traverse Wikipedia and call every single image we have "bad". --GRuban (talk) 02:55, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Here, I took my best shot at cropping Image 1, and brightening it a bit. Let's call this crop Image 3, and I'll put them all in one line. (Gallery widths seems to be broken.) I'm ambivalent between 1 and 3 now, either is better than 2 (which is more blurry), and 2 is better than no image. --GRuban (talk) 22:57, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Andysmith248, Williamsdoritios, and Launchballer: We're pretty close: 2 for "no image", 3 for some image, though with different preferences for specific image. I'll ping a few more people with multiple recent edits to this article, and see if we can get something closer to Wikipedia:Consensus. --GRuban (talk) 23:23, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think an image is better than no image. I will say Image 1 as it shows more of the model side of her than Image 3 and Image 2 is too blurry. Andysmith248 (talk) 23:42, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, a day without new opinions. Looks like we have 4 for an image, 2 for no image. Out of the 4 for an image, there are opinions for each of the three; I'm going to put in #1, as full length and less blurry. --GRuban (talk) 14:27, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A year later - a much better image! Hope everyone likes. --GRuban (talk) 18:06, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Stella_Tennant&oldid=1210654738"