Talk:Italian guerrilla war in Ethiopia
Latest comment: 8 months ago by Generalrelative in topic Lead image
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Italian guerrilla war in Ethiopia article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
Untitled edit
Very interesting stuff.
- Yes, it is a very interesting stuff that has been "forgotten" even by the Italians after WWII. --Brunodam 01:52, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
- It is not so much forgotten as forbidden. Modern Italian schools are very anti-italy biased in their lessons on the second world war. --NEMT 22:07, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Lead image edit
I believe that it's better not to have any lead image than to lead with propaganda poster. Per MOS:LEADIMAGE:
Lead images are not required, and not having a lead image may be the best solution if there is no easy representation of the topic.
Lead images should be of least shock value; an alternative image that accurately represents the topic without shock value should always be preferred.
Some may not be shocked by the use of one-sided propaganda to represent a war, but others certainly will be, especially when it is the propaganda of the side of the aggressor in a war of aggression. Further, our policy of due WP:BALANCE refers to textual sources, but I would argue that it should be seen to apply here as well, since including only this image or highlighting only it in the lead tends to implicitly favor the POV of the Italian side of the conflict.
I removed the image but was reverted by Srnec [1]. I invite them and anyone else with an opinion on the matter to discuss here. Thanks, Generalrelative (talk) 03:49, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
- Why remove it entirely instead of just moving it? Srnec (talk) 04:09, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
- I'd be fine with that, actually. For a bit of context, I removed this as part of a mopping up operation after catching another sockpuppet of banned user Brunodam, the LTA who made this article and first added the image, and who remains highly active on all articles having to do with Italian colonization in Africa. Technically I can't remove the image simply on the basis of WP:BLOCKEVASION because it predates the ban, but to my nose it reeks of that user's nationalistic POV-pushing. Generalrelative (talk) 05:36, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
- I'm fine with it being moved somewhere else in the article. It does seem relevant to to the topic to me. Srnec (talk) 13:36, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
- Cool. Generalrelative (talk) 14:41, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
- I'm fine with it being moved somewhere else in the article. It does seem relevant to to the topic to me. Srnec (talk) 13:36, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
- I'd be fine with that, actually. For a bit of context, I removed this as part of a mopping up operation after catching another sockpuppet of banned user Brunodam, the LTA who made this article and first added the image, and who remains highly active on all articles having to do with Italian colonization in Africa. Technically I can't remove the image simply on the basis of WP:BLOCKEVASION because it predates the ban, but to my nose it reeks of that user's nationalistic POV-pushing. Generalrelative (talk) 05:36, 8 September 2023 (UTC)