Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2011-08-02/Exeter

Where is the dispute?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exeter

Who is involved?
The list of the users involved. For example:


 * User:Simple Bob
 * User:Horza1972
 * User:Ghmyrtle

Acceptance of Mediation
Please place your signature here to indicate that you are aware of this mediation process and want to participate in it:

Horza1972 (talk) 19:55, 2 August 2011 (UTC)



What is the dispute?

 * Update - I've been advised by the participating parties that it's too early for me to refer this to anyone else and that it would be better to let the discussion run its course for longer. Therefore please can this be put on hold for the time being. Thank you.Horza1972 (talk) 23:29, 2 August 2011 (UTC)*

It's a dispute over the profile photograph used on the main Wikipage for the city of Exeter, UK. I feel that it is totally unrepresentative of the city as a whole and creates a completely false and misleading impression. It is a fact that 75% of the city centre's buildings date from after 1900 i.e. the vast majority of the city as it appears today is a product of the 20th century. There are older areas in the suburbs and there are older fragments in the city itself, but the city centre IS overwhelmingly 20th century in appearance. At the moment there is a montage of five images in the main profile picture. One shows the medieval cathedral, Exeter's most important and architecturally significant structure. It dates from between 1140 and 1350. One shows the Iron Bridge which was built in 1834. One shows the clock tower in Queen Street which dates to 1877. Another shows the corner of the Cathedral Close with a medieval church and an Elizabethan townhouse dating to the 1500s. The last, bizarrely, shows the County Hall that most people either living in Exeter or visiting the city would never see anyway, and which is some distance from the centre of the city. The County Hall was built in the late 1950s. So out of the five photographs only one shows a 20th century structure. The others, when combined, give the impression that the centre of Exeter is a city full of historic and/or pre-20th century architecture. It is simply incorrect to make this implication. I created an alternative montage showing areas of the city which are representative of the 75% that has been rebuilt. I admit that it was a mistake in not including the cathedral, which is indeed Exeter's signature building. During the course of the discussion it was implied that the images in my montage weren't pretty enough. To me that is utterly irrelevant. As I said in the discussion, the object of the montage should be to show what the city is like, as a whole, and not act as a tourist promotion page for Exeter City Council. If over 75% of the city dates to the 20th century then why on earth does 80% of the photo montage show pre-20th century structures?

What would you like to change about this?
After some discussion on the talk page. I suggested a compromise montage that would include one image of the cathedral, one image of the Guildhall (another of Exeter's most important historic buildings), one image of the 1950s High Street, one image of the recently constructed Princesshay shopping development and one image of the river. It would show less of the 20th century architecture than I would like but at least it would be preferable to the status quo. All five of these images would be familiar to anyone either living here or visiting as, apart from the river, they are all in the central part of the city. As it is I feel that the current montage cannot be allowed to remain unchanged.

Having had some discussion on the talk page the people involved seem to have abandoned the debate and the current photo montage for Exeter has been left in place. I don't know what else I should do. I don't think my arguments are unreasonable and the others seem amenable to making some changes to the profile picture. We just need to decide what to change and what to change it to.

How do you think we can help?
I'd like you to help by trying to get some agreement across all the parties as to how this can be resolved. The other parties have acknowledged that some changes could be made but unless they communicate their thoughts then I don't see how it can be progressed.