Talk:Fingerboard (skateboard)

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Cleaning up this article

This article needs more valid research, and to be written better. I fixed a few issues. I've added [citation needed] to a few sections that need citations. --Dan LeveilleTALK 19:44, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was in the middle of added citations and fact checking when you deleted some of the items I was working on. Please remove the Original Research tag unless you can specify which section or statement is OR. Benjiboi 19:58, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't delete anything. There were a few statements that I removed because they were un-needed. I'm not sure which you're referring to. Thanks for adding the references though. I removed the OR. --Dan LeveilleTALK 20:50, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Lol. I was trying to add to the Popularity section which was removed and i need the techdecks link but i can find that later. I'm still digging through some articles and then will move onto books. Benjiboi 20:53, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The techdecks bit was repeated, so I removed it, sorry about that haha. The link is http://www.techdeck.com. Don't you think there should be some sort of explination for the chicken? (Even though I'm not convinced that the uploader knew what he was doing nor understood the copyright policies) --Dan LeveilleTALK 20:57, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You think the chicken is going to sue us? Benjiboi 00:41, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Seconded. This article has made quite the improvement. Amazing job - props to you Benjiboi! Just a friendly suggestion - I think you should condense your edits into fewer, because the History log is completely full of edits, perhaps try grouping changes together so it keeps the history log efficient. --Dan LeveilleTALK 03:10, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, and actually it's a part of what could loosely be termed short-attention span. I need to catch mistakes and correct them quickly or I simply move onto something else that catches my eye. I'm quite a bad speller so it's a wonder the entire page isn't redlinked. Benjiboi 10:29, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possible source

here, not terribly great but some fine pix as well as a list of several woods used. Benjiboi 05:30, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

other companies

I've boldly removed this as it's just a magnet for replacing your company name with mine. They can all sit here until there is consensus if it's even needed and if so how to determine what's notable to include and where to insert any of it. Banjeboi 00:47, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are several companies that create and distribute professional fingerboard products. Some of the more notable companies are Frost fingerboards, BerlinWood Fingerboards Blackriver Ramps, Flatface Fingerboards and Fingerboardstore. While these are the largest and most prosperous, there are many smaller companies that produce quality fingerboard products. Homewood Fingerbaords, Make Believe Marble, Prete Fingerboards, Arctic, Chaos Fingerboards,4 Corner Fingerboards , Nollie Wheels, Jet Black FB, C24 Fingerboards, Holywood Fingerboards, Substance Wheels,and Summit Hardware/Bushings.
Thanks for sharing, any reliable sources that assert this? -- Banjeboi 10:51, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

removed "Influential People" section

This seems rather POV and otherwise lacking in sources. -- Banjeboi 22:30, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

removed "Vendors" section

Wikipedia is not a yellowpages, those interested in purchases should be able to navigate to find online sources without our help. -- Banjeboi 22:32, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image of snowborader

I have removed the image of the snowboarder since this is an article about fingerboard. Also how is the image of the chicken? on a mini skateboard rather than a handboard which the section is about helpful? Hopefully I we/you can find some more appropriate images for the article that match the subject matter. Anyways, Tom (talk) 04:09, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We have exactly one actual fingerboard image and it's used it the lede. The rest are used to illustrate how fingerboards correspond, as the text clearly spells out, the connection between the miniturized and traditional uses. Showing a snowboarder doing a trick is perfectly helpful to understanding what a finger-snowboard is a how it is used. The mini-skateboard / handboard is specifically talked about. It's an amusing image and as chickens are universal it helps explain the scale of the item. -- Banjeboi 01:43, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
But it is not an image of a hand board, correct? So what does scale have to do with anything? Anyways, you like the chicken riding the mini baord, ok, like I said, can't we/you/I/somebodywithacamera snap a photo of a hand board and a fingersnowboard and whatever else and improve the article that way? Tom (talk) 04:27, 17 April 2009 (UTC)ps, I still disagree that showing a snowboarder "helps" since using your fingers would be markedly different. Also, snowboarding is link already, editors can click through if interested, ectTom (talk) 04:30, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A link is certainly not the same as an image so let's not go there and personally I've never seen a fingerboard or a handboard so if you can take photos of them then certainly that could help. -- Banjeboi 09:59, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

needs more pictures of actual fingerboards

why are so many pictures of people skateboarding and not FBing? 70.73.151.34 (talk) 06:04, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Deleted all the skateboarding pictures. Vidor (talk) 19:06, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I restored them. There is absolutely no policy or even a reason why every image on an article has to be of the subject. We use images, such as these to illustrate ideas. The correct response is to invite people to add images that serve our readers better. Show a fingerboard in action to replace a person skateboarding; add an image of a fingerboard layout with ramps and such to replace the skateboarding one we have. We improve not just delete. -- Banjeboi 19:13, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Of course there is. Of course there is both a policy and a reason. Wikipedia policy discusses RELEVANT images. Images must be relevant to the article that they appear in and be significantly related to the article's topic. As for what we do, one thing we don't do is clutter up articles with images that have no bearing on the subject. I concur on the need for further pictures of fingerboarding. I hope a fingerboarding hobbyist provides us with such. That is not a justification for posting pictures not related to the topic. You might as well post a picture of Tiger Woods to illustrate miniature golf. Vidor (talk) 19:21, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • A fingerboard is a type of skateboard, we show a skatebaorder doing a trick and explain that fingerboarders use their fingers instead - how is that not related to this subject. The same is true with each of these images. If you have better ones that are licensed for use here then please present them. -- Banjeboi 19:26, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A fingerboard is a type of skateboard No. No it isn't. Just as a Matchbox car is not an actual car, and a model train is not an actual train. Vidor (talk) 19:36, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it really is, from the very first sentence of the article - A fingerboard or finger-skateboard is a miniature version of a skateboard. Whether it is a miniture skateboard or toy skateboard it was invented by skateboarders and has also been tied to skateboarding. -- Banjeboi 19:51, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Third Opinion

Hi, I found this on WP:3. The images should be included in the article because they help to increase the readers' understanding of the subject. Even though they do not directly depict the subject of the article, they (along with the provided captions) are still relevant to the article and have enough Encyclopaedic value to merit their inclusion. If there are better alternatives available (i.e. showing an actual fingerboard or someone using one), they should be used, but in absence of those, the current images should be left in the article. Mildly MadTC 21:54, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • No they do not. You are incorrect. Does posting a picture of a Matchbox car help you to understand how a car works? What does a picture of a snowboarder tell you about fingerboarding? Can I put a picture of a Strech Armstrong doll in an article about wrestling? Honestly. Vidor (talk) 22:33, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • That seems like a false analogy but to answer your question, it might. That more apt question is, if we have an article explaining the development and history of a toy car would images of actual cars help understand the subject. The answer is, of course, probably but it would be nice if we had images of toy cars instead. -- Banjeboi 23:23, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And do I need to point out that two other people posted their opinions in this discussion page before I came to this article, and said, correctly, that the pictures in question are not pictures of fingerboarders or fingerboarding and thus have no place in a fingerboarding article? Can I post a picture of an F-22 in an article about model airplanes? Vidor (talk) 22:36, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You could point out that similar discussions pointed out the main problem is that we don't have but one photo of a fingerboard. In fact one was questioning a specific image and the image caption was amended to indicate it looked similar to the handboard being described. The other comment was simply that they wished to see images of people fingerbaording not that all the other ones had to be removed. Until we have more and suitable photos the points is that these illstrate aspects of this subject to help our readers. Some of whom may never see one for themselves and may have never seen anyone skateboarding or snowboarding. For them an image of the activities being described is immensely helpful. We are the world's encyclopedia ergo we write to educate a very broad audience and include information that you or I may know already. -- Banjeboi 23:23, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry I've fixed it. I came to this page and saw way too many images of real skateboards compared to fingerboards. Images removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.128.254 (talk) 13:37, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fingerboard News

This website is the official fingerboard news site sponsored by Blackriver, Flatface and Mitt Skateboards. Link to be added:

http://thefingerboarder.com/

Link to be removed:

Fingerboarding in France

Why in god's name is that even there..

Thank you

Matejuks (talk) 21:04, 22 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matejuks (talk • contribs) 06:04, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Types

Are there different types of fingerboards? I believe there are more than 1 type of fingerboard.

2603:9000:820B:3D00:4D81:724C:5DE4:254F (talk) 22:29, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/Talk:Fingerboard_(skateboard)"