Talk:Petrifying well is part of WikiProject Geology, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use geology resource. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.GeologyWikipedia:WikiProject GeologyTemplate:WikiProject GeologyGeology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Water, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Water supply-related subjects 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.WaterWikipedia:WikiProject WaterTemplate:WikiProject WaterWater articles
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Folklore, a WikiProject dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of the topics of folklore and folklore studies. If you would like to participate, you may edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project's page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to discussion.FolkloreWikipedia:WikiProject FolkloreTemplate:WikiProject FolkloreFolklore articles
Knaresborough, prophecy, England are links to be worked into this entry, which lacks context and a certain minimal breadth of vision. The mineral is calcium carbonate or is it not? Wetman 18:44, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
The article gallery was removed, and the lead photo changed without discussion. IMO, the "teddy bear" image is completely unreadable (and I am a visual person). While it is shot at an interesting angle, it's really hard to tell what it is until one deciphers the single recognizable teddy bear. The gallery was really helpful in understanding the phenomenon of petrifying well, and removal of it was a net loss for reader comprehension. I suggest that the gallery is restored and the lead image is exchanged for a better one. Courtesy ping Lord Belbury for discussion. Netherzone (talk) 18:56, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, and hello. The article didn't have a lead image, I think a photo that illustrates the "petrification" effect is probably the best thing to open with? I had to look around on Flickr to find something. The picture shows about a dozen teddy bears all hanging from strings, so maybe improving the caption would help.
The gallery images of the waterfall itself all seemed fairly similar to me, which WP:GALLERY discourages, with the exception of File:Petrifying Well top 05.jpg which is also hard to read, particularly the scale of it. I thought I'd kept the most useful one, in that it's a fairly wide shot where the petrified objects are still visible. --Lord Belbury (talk) 19:04, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Lord Belbury, Hi, and thank you for the quick response. I too will look for a better detail image, what I found on Flickr did not seem to have the type of license that the Flickr-to-Commons tool accepts. Will continue to look. There is this image that could be cropped to show petrified objects Petrifying Well 02 The focus is a little soft, but it might work if there isn't a free-use image on Flickr. I could do the cropping if you are agreeable to it.
Re: the gallery, keeping the wide-shot was a good choice to retain. The other images we can do without, meaning we would have one detail and one wide-shot. Sound good? Netherzone (talk) 19:51, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg){kind=link}