Talk:Mercedes-Benz TN

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Which image should be used to show the rear of this vehicle? –Davey2010^Talk 22:23, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• 
  1
• 
  2
• 
  3
• 
  4
• 
  5
• 
  6
• 
  7
• 
  8
• 
  9
• 
  10
• 
  11
• 
  12

!votes

*1 - My personal opinion is that 1 and 7 are the best images however with 7 it shows rust everywhere whereas with 1 it's just a bodged paint job/fix. That being said lighting-wise 7 is better than 1. Obviously we're not a brochure but I don't see a need to show a vehicle covered in rust when we have an image of a near-spotless one (paint job aside). Anyway that's my 2p. –Davey2010^Talk 22:42, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• 7 - Having relooked at the images I would agree 7 is the best image, #5's contrast ruins the image, With #3 it's too much rear, with #1 the rear seems dark and obviously with #2 you can't see much rear which defeats the whole purpose of why we're here really.

Out of the images we have I would say 7 is the best. –Davey2010^Talk 19:04, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• No preference between 3, 5, and 7. IMHO those are the ones that prominently show the back of the vehicle. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 23:33, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• 3 gives a nice, clean view of the rear of the vehicle. I think it's the best choice.
  LEPRICAVARK (talk) 00:24, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• 2 or 3 are the best of a crummy lot. Many appear to have been modified, including #7 (fender extension, camper-style window) which would otherwise be the best one.  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:59, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• 2 or 5, because the image should not be the same vehicle as the infobox (or any other image in the article), and the windows are not pained over, and it's not painted a weird color. Softlavender (talk) 05:48, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• 2 is the least bad for various reasons, IM(H)O. Looking at some of the other votes, 7 is ok in terms of angle, but the colour of the van and the colour of the background are unnecassarily close, and the van itself is in a terrible state. Also it appears to have a home-made chimney coming out of the top of it. 3 I don't care for the angle. Due to a combination of where the photographer stood and what s/he did with the zoom there is an unnecessary amount of distortion of the van's shape, looking along its side. 5 is ok, but the sun is on the wrong place, meaning that the side in full sun is over exposed and the back of the van is underexposed. But maybe that's a quibble too far: it's not a bad picture. I think this would be my second choice. Be well. Charles01 (talk) 14:40, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• 3 or 5, no large preference between them. 2 doesn't show enough of the rear. 1, the lighting casts the rear in shadow and doesn't show much of the rear anyway. For 7 (I suppose my 3rd choice), Charles01 raises a good point about bg color and the van isn't in the best of shape. 3 or 5 both prominently show the rear, though 5 does have the advantage of giving a bit more context as to the van's size. —Danre98^{(talk^contribs)} 14:56, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• 3, 7, or 5 are the best images, from the ones presented, for showing the back of the vehicle (without other distracting vehicles in the photo). -sche (talk) 00:39, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• 11 has the best angle, but the van has a bit of rust and is awkwardly parked. 2 and 3 show vehicles in good condition but don't have the desired 3/4 view. The rest are all generally unusable, although maybe 12 could be cropped. Of the three usable ones, I'd lean most towards 3, with 2 as my second choice. --Sable232 (talk) 21:24, 23 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Implementation

Since the RfC seems pretty clear that image 1, the current image, is not the best image, I've gone ahead and updated the page by putting image 3 in its place. I chose image 3 because it has the most favorable mentions in this RfC (by my count 2 had 4, 3 had 6, 5 had 5, 7 had 3, and 11 had a single mention). If anyone else thinks that a different image from this RfC belongs there, they can go ahead and change the images; I just don't see any reason why the first image should languish on the page given its level of support. —Danre98^{(talk^contribs)} 15:35, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for changing the image and for your well-thought out analysis User:Danre98, It's greatly appreciated, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 20:46, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]