Talk:Nikon D50

Example image gallery

Do we really need an example image gallery? See also Talk:Canon EOS 350D and Canon EOS 350D for an example of an bloated article. As I've said earlier, camera articles should deal with the tool, not the produce of them. You would not list individual highways that one may drive on with car brand foo, nor list books & publications one may read wearing foo's reading glasses. Scoo 06:26, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article really needs a better main picture, it is about an SLR, after all!

Discontinued

The D50 is no longer oin Nikon's product list. That should probably be addressed in the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 140.175.214.33 (talk) 14:18, 26 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

I added a note about the discontinuation, with a link to the D50-less Nikon USA website. I will also put the first sentence into the past tense (perhaps Rogerd disagrees?). Josh Thompson 04:12, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, I'll leave the first sentence as it is. It is still an entry-level DSLR from Nikon. Josh Thompson 04:14, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, it is pretty clear that it is now discontinued. The Nikon D1 article doesn't mention the discontinuation until the third paragraph, and the Nikon D100 article clearly mentions it in the opening paragraph. I don't think there is a clear precedent for either. As far as the past/present tense ("was"/"is") issue, I have asked the community for consensus about this in Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Products - past/present tense? --rogerd 04:55, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If I remember it right, the D50 was not discontinued until the introduction of the D40x. The D50 sold side by side witht eh D40 until that point. So, was the D50 really replaced by the D40 as the article says or by the D40x or not at all?--NikOly (talk) 22:30, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]