Talk:Franja Partisan Hospital

Gallery: proposal for removal
In my opinion the gallery should be removed from the article. It occupies almost half of its length, which is not suitable. I'm not against images in general, but they should be used along the text. Taking a look at other articles, like Paris or Pablo Picasso or Kakadu National Park or Machu Picchu, or a zillion of other good articles, in the vast majority of cases I have not noticed a large gallery there so I don't see any reason why it should be included in this very article. Feel free to expand the article and include additional images in the sections but I don't think an endlessly growing gallery contributes significantly to the understanding of the Franja hospital. It only clutters a page and makes things harder for people with slow Internet connections to read it. Per WP:NOT Wikipedia is neither a mirror nor a repository of links, images, or media files. Such a repository is the Commons, and a link to the more or less the same gallery there has already been provided at the bottom. --Eleassar my talk 16:50, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I have to say I don't quite agree. I don't think the gallery clutters the page at all. Further, I think a gallery is extremely helpful in forming a mental image of a place such as Franja and thus understanding what it was like. Indeed, there is a well known maxim that a picture is worth a thousand words. However, if there is a consensus that it should go, naturally that view should prevail. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 17:09, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not against including images in the article, but they should rather be used to illustrate the text than stand for their own. As for creating a mental image I have added an external link to the article that will help you much more than a gallery. --Eleassar my talk 17:25, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Third opinion
I'm with Eleassar on this one; this article has far too many images on it. The image at the top more than sufficient in illustrating the topic. &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 17:18, 30 March 2008 (UTC)


 * May I remove the gallery now? If there is no further opposition I'll do this in a few days, otherwise we'll have to go through further dispute resolution processes. --Eleassar my talk 09:59, 31 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Mate, I see that the overwhelming majority of those that have contributed to this discussion (66%) are against me, so I'll concede gracefully. :-) Seriously, I really don't mind that much. I'd rather see the gallery stay, but it isn't that important. Take it out if you want. I think the links you've added to Boštjan Burger's material are good. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 10:04, 31 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Heh, aw. I just want to say good job to both of you for resolving this issue so peacefully. Doing so puts you ahead of many of your fellow editors. Keep up the good work! &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
One or more portions of this article duplicated other source(s). Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a license compatible with GFDL. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:10, 29 September 2008 (UTC)