This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool because one or more other projects use this class. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject River Thames, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.River ThamesWikipedia:WikiProject River ThamesTemplate:WikiProject River ThamesRiver Thames articles
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
Palace of Westminster is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
According to recent history, there seems to be a disagreement of which image should be used in the infobox. Initially, @PEPSI697changed the image and provided a reason in the summary. Following that, @5.70.188.253reverted the edit, which led to @SShreddies redoing the initial edit, which, from my POV, could be considered the start of an edit war. Subsequently, the latter two users and @OverlordQ engaged in this potential edit war.
To determine which of them is more suitable for the article, I would look at several parameters. First of all, the date: I currently don't see any good reason why a more recent image should automatically be superior to an older one with potentially higher quality, especially regarding structures like the Palace of Westminster, which have not changed in recent years to necessitate a new photo. Secondly, we could examine the previous images used in the infobox. Prior to the 2022 version, Parliament at Sunset.JPG adorned the article for over a whole decade, succeeding Westminster palace.jpg. Apart from the latter, both previous images share the characteristic of not being aerial images and covering the profile view of the buildings. The 2024 image has a lower resolution and less vivid colours than its 2022 equivalent. Therefore, in my opinion, the previous image should be reinstated. However, before proceeding, I would like to reach a consensus rather than just reporting people and further fuelling the edit war. –Tobias (talk) 16:36, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per response to this, sorry if an edit war between two users happened on a disagreement on which image they like better. Honestly, we can probably all agree on which image we like the most and use it in the info-box. I'll like to call other contributors to see their opinion on which image they like the most and we can use it in the info-box. PEPSI697 (talk) 22:11, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think so too. I would like to emphasise that you did nothing wrong. You just uploaded an image and placed it in the infobox without participating in any edit war whatsoever. Other opinions, especially from editors who are not involved, would be very useful. –Tobias (talk) 22:22, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. On 10 July 2024, on this diff, that was when I changed the info-box image. Correct, I didn't do anything wrong throughout the time, like not getting engaged in an edit war. Hopefully things go to plan soon. PEPSI697 (talk) 00:59, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A single edit isnt a war. An overhead photo showing the full extent of the subject of the article is, in my opinion, a subjectively better image to use. And with the anonymous editor using either no, or nonsensical, edit summaries to revert the changes, I made the decision to restore the image to PEPSI697 (talk·contribs)'s changes. QTC02:47, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great to hear, also, great decision! I would agree with you too. We can leave my photo in the info-box, it has a better angle of it and has the overhead view. PEPSI697 (talk) 03:45, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
While you didn't initiate the edit war, you clearly engaged in it, following several previous attempts by other editors to override each other's changes. Do you think the summary 'modern pic' is 'nonsensical' if it refers not to the date the photo was taken, but to the technical quality and colours? –Tobias (talk) 18:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
However, the colours and quality may not be great due to the fact it was taken from London Eye at one of the huge glass windows, also it was taken from a mobile phone. The June 2022 photo technically had better quality and colours, I agree with that. However, it could either be my image or the June 2022 image. PEPSI697 (talk) 22:56, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A better, brighter high-up view from the London Eye might be best - doesn't Commons have one? The current one looks rather dingy. Johnbod (talk) 01:01, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That could be another option as well. We'll look at the Commons categories at Palace of Westminster and other related categories. Good idea! PEPSI697 (talk) 01:24, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Only the first one looks useful to me; the rest are of similar poor quality to the whole category. However, even that one is not better or worse than the current one, just not good either. –Tobias (talk) 19:02, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It says the Queen, Now King Charles III, owns the Palace of Westminster, That's partly true, The King owns Westminster Hall, The working parts of parliament are owned jointly by the House of Commons and the house of Lords, I remember watching a programme in which it mentioned Queen Elizabeth II handed over the ownership of the working part of parliament in 1964 after a meeting with the th then Prime Minster Harold Wilson 81.98.243.229 (talk) 23:05, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
.svg){kind=small}
.jpg){kind=link}
