Talk:Red Rock Island

message: I'm pretty sure the 3rd photo in the Red Rock Island article is not a photo of Red Rock Island. Just from looking at it, the photo seems to depict a different island. The characteristics: there is no Coast Guard structure on the other pictures of the island (the island is private, so I think it would be odd to have a Coast Guard structure). Also in the foreground of the picture, you can see rocks that look a lot like they are on the shore (which would also explain the photographer's proximity to it without being on a boat) and a small wave emblematic of the coastline. Red Rock Island, however, is quite far from the shore. It is also bigger than what appears in the photo in question. Is there some format for dealing with this? I'd just assume erase it, but I don't want to be presumptuous. It's also being used in another article, Richmond. Lastly, the photographer who uploaded it is red-linked, so I don't imagine he/she's coming back soon. Advice?
  
Almonroth 23:52, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: That looks like a photo of a sub-island just south of the main island.  In the lower right corner of :File:Red-rock-island.jpg there's a light smudge just above the largest of the sub-islands; that's probably the fog bell pictured in :File:Redrock.jpg.  I assume :File:Redrock.jpg was contributed in good faith, but I can also see how gives a misleading impression of the island's size.  I would support re-captioning the photo or even deleting it from the article. —Stepheng3 (talk) 00:13, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I think it was submitted in good faith, but I think it's an error still. But now you have me second guessing myself :) Also, I'm the smart-ass who put that caption on the photo thumbnail on this talk page. It's captioned in good faith on the one that appears on the article. Check out this photo below and notice that the island on the south is really tiny, and there is no further island to shoot from, which would be what was required to get this, I think. Unless they were on the main island shooting back at the little island, but that just seems a bit odd to me. And it is weird that the wave is present, given how still that part of the Bay is. Ultimately it's probably a bit of a trivial issue, but I noticed it recently as I'm trying to convince a tug boat driver who takes great photos from his ship to upload a photo he has of the island to Commons. Thanks, Stepheng3. I suppose we should hold off for a while and see if anyone else has a strong feeling one way or another. Best,  Almonroth 00:39, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe the photo was shot from the south shore of the main island.  I imagine the waves were caused by local winds, which my kayaker/sailor friends have told me get quite strong in the Bay on certain days.  What I think is misleading is captioning it as a picture of "the southern point of island" when in fact it's a sub-island or large rock that's usually separated from the main island. —Stepheng3 (talk) 01:19, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the photo shows the little rock at the southern tip of Red Rock Island. Zooming all the way in on Google Earth shows the straight boom sticking out from near the top, the boom pointing west by southwest. It looks like a perfect match. Binksternet (talk) 02:06, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  mis-labeled photo?