Talk:Eagle Creek (Multnomah County, Oregon)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Recent reversion and image
Please be careful when reverting, that you do not change more than you intended. Regarding posters, most scenic places wind up being used on posters, calendars, postcards, etc. I don't see why it's worth noting that this particular creek is used on posters. -Pete 20:04, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
- Um, its not the best image (faded and blurry), and with such a short stub, three images is a bit of overkill, don't you think? I'm also not too fond of "see below" wording in encyclopedia articles, though I don't know if that's in the MOS. I'd like BaseballBugs to let us know why it's important to keep this image and information in the article. Katr67 21:55, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
- Fair use images are supposed to be of inferior quality so as not to harm their author. Someone once put a "fact" tag on the statement that the fall was used on inspirational posters. The illustration serves as the citation. The overall point being that the waterfall is considered to be of above-average attractiveness. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, you're right about inferior quality, that's a good point. I also think it's a good idea to somehow note that the falls is "very" scenic, I'm just not sure this way (using posters as an example) is the best way. I'm fine with leaving it there for the time being, but hopefully one of us can think of a more "encyclopedic" way to make this point? -Pete 02:43, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
- Fair use images are supposed to be of inferior quality so as not to harm their author. Someone once put a "fact" tag on the statement that the fall was used on inspirational posters. The illustration serves as the citation. The overall point being that the waterfall is considered to be of above-average attractiveness. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:25, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

