Talk:Blackwater railway station (Isle of Wight)

Trains Portal

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trains, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to rail transport on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. See also: WikiProject Trains to do list and the Trains Portal.TrainsWikipedia:WikiProject TrainsTemplate:WikiProject Trainsrail transport articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated projects or task forces:
/
	This article is supported by WikiProject Stations.
	This article is supported by WikiProject UK Railways (assessed as Low-importance).

Isle of Wight Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Isle of Wight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the county of the Isle of Wight in South East 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.Isle of WightWikipedia:WikiProject Isle of WightTemplate:WikiProject Isle of WightIsle of Wight-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Image caption

The consensus is against using:
The old station house in 2018, now a private residence. The rightmost of the three bays is a later extension built over the old platform.
as a caption per WP:MOSCAPTION, which says, "Captions should be succinct; more information can be included on its description page, or in the main text."
The consensus is to use a shorter caption such as:
The old station house in 2018

The old station house in 2018, now a private residence

The old station house in 2018, converted into a private residence
There is no consensus on which of these shorter captions is preferred so there is no prejudice against further discussion on which of the three to use.
Cunard (talk) 23:43, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Please comment on whether you think the following caption is too long or is of acceptable length:

As far as is possible given that length also entails content, please comment only on the length of the caption, as this is what is disputed.

(Question reframed.) Mypix (talk) 01:06, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

My opinion is that the caption is of reasonable length and contains reasonable relevant information needed to understand the picture. I say that the additional information about the extension is "needed to understand the picture" because otherwise it certainly reads as if the whole building is "The old station house", intact. A quite significant part of it is not actually "The old station house" at all. Mypix (talk) 17:50, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Where is third bay window? Only two bay windows are visible. —Sladen (talk) 19:20, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You are confusing bays with bay windows. If you look at the windows in the upper storey, each one of those corresponds to a bay. The rightmost is still a bay, even though it may not have a bay window. Mypix (talk) 14:23, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The caption is far too long. MOS:CAPTION states Captions should be succinct; more information can be included on its description page, or in the main text. and so the caption that I can accept is "The old station house in 2018". I have no objection to the additional text concerned being added to the main prose of the article (on condition that the policies on verifiability and original research are observed); but it should not be in the infobox, the purpose of which is to summarise key points. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:20, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For those arriving late, see also User talk:Redrose64#Deleting information and User talk:Mypix#November 2018. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:23, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The instructions at MOS:CAPTION have already been highlighted above. As I stated in my edit summary the rest belongs in the body of the article. MarnetteD|Talk 20:28, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, captions should be succinct, this is in line with the guideline (and also my opinion). I agree with Redrose, if the info in the caption is verifiable, it could be included elsewhere, but a caption should be a caption, not half an essay. Ted Edwards 22:25, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Half an essay"? That is absurd. Mypix (talk) 14:25, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"The old station house in 2018, now a private residence" is perfectly adequate as a caption. The stuff about the bays is unnecessary in understanding what is being depicted.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:29, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Saw this posted at the Help Desk and was just beaten to also writing that the ay to solicit opinions is an RfC. I agree with the shorter caption in this case in large part because the photo does a poor job illustrating what the proposed longer caption says. Can you get a photo showing the bike trail going around the house? You could then maybe get away with “Cycle path passing railway station house now built over old track line” TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:52, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mypix: Why have you not provided a brief and neutral statement as required by the RfC process? Why did you also not provide an RfC category? I have fixed the latter: but I cannot fix the former since I am already involved here. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:10, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can't see anything obvious in the picture that shows a cycletrack. The lay-person has a picture of a house, a road and a fence. How can we lead that picture into the flow rest of the article? —Sladen (talk) 10:59, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think the current caption in the article is sufficient and complies with MOS:CAPTION. I believe the extended caption in this RFC is longer than necessary. Schazjmd (talk) 22:07, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I think the caption fails MOS:TECHLANG. I hadn't a clue what 'bay' meant in this instance and seemingly at least one other editor was confused. "The old station house in 2018, now a private residence" is a sufficient caption. Cesdeva ^(talk) 13:47, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Content required, perhaps trim/rephrase a bit. The photo is not of the railway station as it was - but rather of the station-house converted into a house with various additions (e.g. the "third bay"). I agree bay is somewhat technical. I do think that we should make clear in the caption what we're seeing in the photo (e.g. the current (19 December version) - "The old station house in 2018" is misleading in my eyes). I would suggest: The old station house in 2018. The station has been converted into a house, with an extension build over the old platform or The old station house in 2018, converted into a private residence Icewhiz (talk) 14:15, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.