== Changes to Ned Kelly Page == 

 I notice that you have reverted the addition of photo's to the Ned Kelly page. Most of the photo's have been there for some time but in you latest slew of edits you have decidied to arbitrarily remove them with no justification. I also see that you have a history of this type of behaviour. I have simply put them back, and put them in a spot more relatable. For instance, the photos of amour, in the armour section. It's good for readers to be able to see actual photos of the armour, as no amount of text will ever be able to properly describe them. Also, relating to the photo of the person in armour, this was added some time ago for a reason. The reason being is that photo has been used by the popular media in the past, but they would say that it was Ned Kelly himself. This is obviously incorrect, and so it's good for Wikipedia to give the real situation. You are unaware of the history, and delete the images with no justification. I have also added photos of historical areas of interest as they appear today so that others who are interested in Kelly may seek to find them for themselves. 

 Now I know that you are not a fan of Trove, with your edit comment 'why is the Burra Record, an SA newspaper, singled out as a publisher of excerpts of Kelly's letter when numerous VIC and NSW papers got there first? this is the problem with using Trove', but I did not single out the Burra Record, someone else added the 'according to the 'Burra Record'' comment. (But I respected the changes) You then replaced that with just 'press', but did not provide any other citations. There was no reason to remove that section of test, and was in place because another editor found the original text confusing. By just deleting text with no justification, you are ruining the history. 

 Just show some respect, and leave the images in place. I may not agree with the images that you have added, especially since you have not provided any in text attribution, but I respect the changes you have made and would not engage in an edit war with you just because of my own subjective opinion. Unless the images breach copyright, you have no real justification other than 'your subjective opinion'  to remove them. I think the more images that can be added to enhance the article the better.