Talk:69th Regiment Armory

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Emilyfernandez19.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:08, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Sources that might be used for the article
This article about the Victoria's Secret show loaning generators and other equipment to the armory after Sandy might provide material for a paragraph in the article: http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/victorias-secret-sandy/

--Benthatsme (talk) 04:31, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on 69th Regiment Armory. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110629134819/http://www.iaaf.org/mm/document/competitions/competition/05/15/63/20090706014834_httppostedfile_p345-688_11303.pdf to http://www.iaaf.org/mm/document/competitions/competition/05/15/63/20090706014834_httppostedfile_p345-688_11303.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

--Lineagegeek (talk) 20:22, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:26, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Choice of infobox images
Thoughts? Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:23, 7 October 2022 (UTC)


 * The second image is superior according to virtually all conventions of photography. The image by Beyond My Ken is overexposed, leaving the sky and adjacent building a bright, washed-out white. The image is grainy and the colors are oversaturated. The image appears haphazardly composed, with the horizon askew and the top corner of the building cut off. This image wouldn't elicit a passing grade in an introductory photography course and shouldn't even be considered when such a high quality alternative exists. Filetime (talk) 20:10, 8 October 2022 (UTC)


 * #1 - The problem with the second image is that it has been digitally altered to "correct" the perspective. The "correction" badly distorts the vertical line of building at the corner, creating the impression of a sharp angle and a vertical point at the top, neither of which is true, as the first, more reliable, image, shows.  The result is an image of the building as if it was seen from an impossible position.  It should be remembered that the function of an infobox image is to present the building in such a way that the reader will recognize it, not to be the technically "best" possible image: quality of presentation is much more important than absolute technical quality, especially considering the small presentation size available in the infobox.  The best, of course, would be an image which provides both, but that's not possible with images available on Commons. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:19, 8 October 2022 (UTC)