File talk:Asphalt - good.jpg

Is this "good" because there are some repairs or because the surface is more rough than usual? It is difficult to see because anything to estimate the scale is missing. If the asphalt surface itself is not more rough, I think this should still be excellent as some tiny repairs like this certainly don't make it ineligible for skateboarders and skaters --Westnordost (talk) 11:14, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, it's more rough than usual (but the repairs also contribute to this "rating") - it's not a good sample picture for this case because "roughness" is sometimes hard to evaluate from photos. It's on Tempelhof Airfield in Berlin - so it shows the surface on a former airstrip. (However, personally I am very strict(? [streng]) about the creteria for tagging "excellent" and use it only in the case of really great surfaces...) --Supaplex030 (talk) 13:11, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Heh, like those teachers in school that would only give an A if you got 100% :-P --Westnordost (talk) 13:14, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Haha, that's exactly what I was thinking when I wrote it! Gaussian distribution, you know ;) So excellent may only appear as often as impassable :-p --Supaplex030 (talk) 13:28, 6 January 2022 (UTC)