Talk:National Register of Historic Places listings in Manhattan below 14th Street

Neighborhoods
it would be useful to categorize the places by neighborhood, using the column now showing "New York" for all of them. Perhaps List of Manhattan neighborhoods provides an adequate partition of the areas within Manhattan below 14th? doncram (talk) 20:45, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes. For that matter, it's so big that separate sections would be a good idea, divided at Canal Street, Broadway, or additional suitable demarkations.  But yes, for a start a neigborhood entry would help.  Minor snag; when I did that for two Greenwich Village locations I used to frequent, the column widened.  I'd hate to see that happen when we localize a place as Lower East Side.  Presumably someone knows how to make this column wrap every entry of two or more words.  Jim.henderson (talk) 17:19, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the "width=" parameter in the table column heading row restricts the column widths. --Sanfranman59 (talk) 20:17, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Table tech
Sorry I didn't get back to this sooner. Also sorry I understand so little about tables. Far as I see, the header with its "%" sign is trying to make the column wrap, but it isn't happening. Maybe something is broken.

More interesting, I am delighted to discover that there's a sort option. Sorting on location can be very convenient. Alas, it sorts on the first word of the name of the location, such as "under" or "corner" or a street name (not consistently an east-west street or north-south one) when what I want is to sort by latitude or longitude to make it easier to trot from one to the next snapping pictures all the way, for example for WP:Wikipedia Takes Manhattan. Any of our table tech people know how to make the table do that? Jim.henderson (talk) 16:52, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:StMarksChurch1.jpg
The image Image:StMarksChurch1.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --07:35, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Photos needed in Manhattan below 14th Street
May not be complete or accurate

Question: Have the boats moved, sunk or are otherwise unavailable for photos?

Are there photos that should be retaken? Smallbones (talk) 15:39, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:22, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
 * 40 Wall Street Manhattan New York City.jpg

User Beyond My Ken's reversions
Flickr user ajay_suresh has taken, edited, and uploaded hundreds of high quality images of landmarks in the city. I've been trying to make sure these valuable photos end up in articles rather than just sitting unused on Commons. Unfortunately Beyond My Ken has reverted every single addition of these images, almost always to preserve the inclusion of his own, lower quality photographs in articles. Here are some of the new, high quality, images and the dated, lower quality images he's replaced them with in both this article as well as other articles on NY landmarks.

I find BMK's behavior troubling (bordering on WP:OWNERSHIP or WP:HARASS behavior) and worry it is coming at the expense of the quality of Wikipedia's NY content.Filetime (talk) 15:30, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Without commenting on the merit of the images, I should note that Ajay is in fact @Epicsunwarrior. I haven't taken a look at these comparisons yet, though. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:45, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * In my opinion the new images attributed to Ajay are indeed of higher quality. If this were put to a vote I would support using the new images. Auguel (talk) 17:19, 29 November 2021 (UTC)


 * In each instance, the left images are of a higher resolution and have a better FOV. Additionally, BMK's first and bottom three images suffer blown out skies, while ajay's do not. Unless BMKs images depict some sort of historically significant properties of the subject, ajay's higher quality images should be used. At a minimum, for images 1, 2, and 3, ajay's should be be used over BMK's in the leads of the appropriate articles per MOS:LEADIMAGE. – Pbrks (t • c) 17:32, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Whoops, the last photograph was taken by rather than Epicgenius. Like Epicgenius's photographs, however, it is a wider angle image with better lighting and corrected perspective that was likewise reverted by BMK without explanation. Filetime (talk) 18:01, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Indeed, regardless of the photographer, the left images are of better quality. – Pbrks (t • c) 18:07, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I think you mean Epicsunwarrior (who is Ajay). Regardless, though I respect BMK's work, I think Ajay's pictures for some of these are better, particularly that of the Bowery Savings Bank building and the Cooper Union. In others, like Judson Memorial Church, it's a bit of a toss-up. – Epicgenius (talk) 00:43, 30 November 2021 (UTC)


 * This discussion is a duplicate of the one that Filetime opened on Talk:Wikiproject New Yory City, hence a violation of the proscription against venue shopping. One discussion, Filetime, not multiple ones. Our efforts here should go to improving the encyclopedia, not in "winning". Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:23, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Here's wht I wrote in the original discussion:
 * Actually, what's troubling here is Filetime's long-time continuing behavior of acting as the self-appointed god of article images. He constantly changes article images and reduces the display size of galleries, all without ever inquiring in advance if the changes are needed or wanted. This wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the sad fact that his changes are almost invariably not improvements. He replaces good images with newer but less interesting ones, often with the excuse that the new images are technically better, but an image which is better technically but does a bad job of presenting the subject of the image is not an improvement over a technically adequate one which presents the subject significantly better. In other words, Filetime has no criteria for judging whether the new images are improvements or not except extremely narrow technical ones, as his judgment concern presentation is almost totally lacking. His judgement of quality is almost exclusively about numbers and not about the visual or informational value of an image. He's been doing this for quite a while, and doing it specifically to images which I happen to have taken to the extent that a he was warned by an admin that his behavior was verging on harassment and that he needed to stop before he would be blocked. As it happens, he did not stop, and was blocked for 48 hours for "hounding" me.


 * Here Filetime continues that behavior, so I am pinging the admin: @Drmies:. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:48, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Original discussion. Filetime: Pick one discussion or the other, and stop venue shopping. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:28, 30 November 2021 (UTC)


 * This is not simply an issue of technical quality. How does a photograph of the James White Building that shows only a portion of the building and has overexposed highlights that obscure ornamental details do a good job "presenting the subject"? How does a grainy image of Washington Mews that shows the street obscured by a gate (and fails to capture the diverse facades) accomplish this goal? In almost all of these cases, Ajay's images are taken from comparable angles but are better composed and offer wider angle views, showing the buildings in full and providing the viewer with a better understanding of the structures' relationships with their surroundings. Filetime (talk) 03:54, 30 November 2021 (UTC)


 * BMK's images of choice are consistently small and blurry, demonstrate poor composition, and often show buildings blocked by trees and other distracting elements. Here are some more: Filetime (talk) 04:04, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
 * In the case of the St. Paul's Chapel, the way I see it, he seemed to just want an image from another angle. Sure, there's a tree in front of it, but the leaves have fallen off, so it's still visible. That's one of the reasons I like to come back up north in the fall. You don't have trees obstructing structures as easily. -User:DanTD (talk)  11:39, 15 December 2021 (UTC)