Talk:Picking Up the Pieces (Paloma Faith song)
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Sources[edit]
Small text[edit]
I think that it would be good practise to remove the small text from the info box. A good value on Wikipedia is making it readable to all. However, small text is can be a hindrance to the partially sighted. I think it would make life that little bit easier to keep the text at one standard size. This is not the most controversial of matters - but it could be seen as an act of good will. There seemed to be a little disagreement forming on the article - so thought it would be good to discuss this.Rain the 1 19:50, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
- The small text denoting the length of the song as either the album cut or a radio edit is not something that is that fucking important that we need to have full sized text to denote it. It is a common practice on the English Wikipedia to use the
<small>tag to change the size. This is not at all banned by WP:ACCESS, and this practice is utilized on featured articles on songs such as All You Need Is Love (The JAMs song), City of Blinding Lights, and Smells Like Teen Spirit. If articles that the community have decided are the pinnacle of writing, verifiability, and neutrality utilize this format of having the different lengths of the song noted in text one stage smaller than the rest, then we should by all means stick to this formatting.—Ryulong (竜龙) 20:15, 8 May 2012 (UTC)- You have not offered any valid reason for the use of small text nor have you adressed my concern. You seem to think that citing featured articles is good enough to follow the crowd - when it is not. Even then you are assuming that small text was discussed in each of the FAR's. If it is not important, as you claim above - then it probably shouldn't be included. There is also little need for profanity.Rain the 1 21:57, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
- I'm showing that it's an established practice on Wikipedia to format the duration in the infobox in this section. Dropping the text size down one stage makes it no more difficult to read than a navbox's 85% size decrease. Your concerns are not valid for this minute issue. I cannot find it written in the infobox, but if it's good for such articles in high esteem, it's fine for these. If it's truly an issue, perhaps you should raise the issue on WP:ACCESS rather than attempting to change one article that you had never edited before.—Ryulong (竜龙) 22:13, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
- In fact, I've gone ahead and posed the question myself. So rather than unnecessarily focus on 30 bits of text on this page, we can gauge whether or not it should belong on any page.—Ryulong (竜龙) 22:27, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
- You have not offered any valid reason for the use of small text nor have you adressed my concern. You seem to think that citing featured articles is good enough to follow the crowd - when it is not. Even then you are assuming that small text was discussed in each of the FAR's. If it is not important, as you claim above - then it probably shouldn't be included. There is also little need for profanity.Rain the 1 21:57, 8 May 2012 (UTC)
Images[edit]
Personally I do not see what the non-free image adds to the article or the reader's understanding, but I thought I'd start a discussion about it. Faith sitting in a car isn't central to the plot of the music video, so perhaps an image of her melting would be better. I also think there is room for the free image of David Lynch too. Faith explained that he and his television series, Twin Peaks, was the inspiration for the video, so there is good reason to include it. Opinions? - JuneGloom Talk 20:54, 10 August 2012 (UTC)