Talk:Sherman Firefly: Difference between revisions

While I'm at it, what's your relationship? On images like [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HMS_warriorjune20092.jpg this] and [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Pluto_pipline.jpg this] - which are inadequate for any purpose - you're a tag-team. Do you go around Wikipedia voting on each other's photographs? What's the point? [[User:Diliff]] absolutely wipes the floor with both of you and has successfully used Wikipedia as a marketplace for his work; you have the same equipment but you're never, ever going to match him. So what's the point? -[[User:Ashley Pomeroy|Ashley Pomeroy]] ([[User talk:Ashley Pomeroy|talk]]) 20:01, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

::It certainly one of the classic British photographs of the war, and one of the best tank pics ever taken. I think it's a beautifully battle-weary Firefly of the [[11th Armoured Division (United Kingdom) |11th Armoured Div]]. They were going to be re-equipped with [[Comet tank|Comets]] but they got pulled into covering the northern flank with their knackered kit. Just adds to the pic imo. First saw it in the [[Battle of the Bulge]] edition of [[Purnell's History of the Second World War]] in 1975 when I was 14. It was 30p weekly, serious money. It is technically excellent and rather atmospheric. I am purely sticking to the topic here. [[User:Irondome|Irondome]] ([[User talk:Irondome|talk]]) 21:45, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

:Not aware of any particular relationship. As for the lead image in this article as far as I can tell historically it was [[:File:ShermanFirefly.jpg|this]] added in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sherman_Firefly&diff=14547414&oldid=12622406 2005] then [[:File:SouthAfricanFirefly1.png|this]]. Then mine. Mine was simply the latest in a series of museum pics and since it shows the whole tank without cropping out anything or having anything in the viewer I'd stand by it being superior to its predecessors.