Talk:The Big Pond

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Removal of "needs infobox" tag

This article has had its infobox tag removed by a cleanup using AWB. Any concerns please leave me a message at my talk page. RWardy 20:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the placement of images in this article

I've done a fair amount of work on expanding this article, including putting in additional images. One of the problems with film articles is that presenting the cast as a list, really the best way to do it, creates a lot of whitespace to the right. That's why I like to put images there, if I can find them and make a rationale for their use. The problem with putting them all the way to the right, however, is that if the plot section isn't long enough to push the cast section down below the infobox, the images will force the cast section down, thus introducing even worse whitespace between the "Cast" header and the cast information. This may be ne evident when you view the image under a smaller resolution monitor, but with a sidescreen monitor (where the plot text takes up even less vertical space) it's quite evident. This is why when I make those kinds of changes, I check them under both monitors settings to ake sure they work -- the goal being to have the article not have interruptive blocks of whitespace in it.

User:Hru692 has been removing the formatting I've used to create this balanced presentation, thus creating one where under widescreen, disruptive whitespace is created. I've asked the editor to discuss it on their talk page, but I've received no answer. I'll post this message both on the article's talk page and on User:Hru692's talk page in the hope that the editor will come to understand the purpose of the formatting, and will stop reverting it. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ^{(talk / cont)} 02:59, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've been repeatedly ignored in my request for a discussion with User:Hru692, who keeps reverting me. I tried a different way of solving the problem I'm having with the way the article presents using Internet Explorer (a problem with Hru has not yet acknowledged exists), but it also was not ackonowledged and reverted, so I self-reverted to my originally solution, which is superior.

I've suggested conflict resolution, but that suggestion has also not been acknowledged. I'm rather at a loss about how to keep the article's layout in such a state that it works for me, without continuing to revert. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ^{(talk / cont)} 06:36, 1 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]