Support - This is great work, but it raises a small problem. My dear mother called it "an embarrassment of riches". Montrealais is capable of creating this fine work for every metro system on the planet. They can't all appear on Featured Pictures. This one (Madrid) documents an interesting metro system, so gets my vote. If Montrealais wished to create a user sub-page of all these maps I would welcome a link from Features Pictures to that page. - Gaz 01:42, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)
That's a good idea. I don't know about "capable of creating one for every city on the planet" - ars longa, vita brevis - but I'll put together a page to show off the ones I have done/will do. For the time being, I'll withdraw the nomination above. (Note: Self-nomination of Map of the Barcelona metro withdrawn.) - Montrealais
Thanks, folks! For the record, could you say whether you are supporting the nomination just of the Madrid map, or of the User:Montrealais/Metro maps page collectively as suggested by Gaz? - Montrealais
I was voting for this image alone. - Bevo 14:48, 21 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Oppose (very reluctantly, as it's a super image). It's not a rule (although depending on what one takes "transparent copy" to mean, perhaps it should be) but I really think structured drawings should be accompanied by an upload of a zip with the corresponding structured version (in whatever program the creator uses). This way some future editor has a chance of keeping the structured diagram up to date (add/remove stations, lines etc.) should Montrealais be run over by a lightrail car. Although not required, I think this is "best practice", which featured images should be. If, however, Montrealais' diagrams are like Morwen's maps (i.e. maschocistically drawn in a bitmap editor) then I of course withdraw my objection. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 00:32, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
I can do this, if necessary. It is semi-structured in that I drew it in Photoshop, with each line represented as a layer; but the image is bitmap, not vector. Would it, then, be useful for me to upload? - Montrealais
That was indeed me. I don't always log in. - Montréalais 04:49, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Sure, that would be great. There's still a lot folks could do with that - they could produce images of just a single line (which the london underground pages have), and assuming the text layers aren't rasterised they could easily rename a station. You might like to rasterise the copyright-message layer anyway, but that's your call. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 01:23, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Support (following addition of sourcefile). Great image. (yeah, I see what you mean about the text layers). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 11:16, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Support (for whole page of maps, and for this image as representative) -- Andrew 07:14, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
Oppose - too small. Lupin 09:04, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Oppose, too small, no copyright/source info. I like the image though, if it were a better size, tagged (and didn't have the black border), I'd support. fabiform | talk 15:26, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Beautiful image, but I agree with objections above. SamSpade 19:34, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Support if copyright status is okay. LUDRAMAN | T 19:25, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC) PS I think the reflections on the building are cool. LUDRAMAN | T 21:07, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Oppose (but ONLY because we have no attribution) - what a fantastic shot!! - Gaz 13:18, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Oppose, mostly on basis of size of image (we seem to be getting more picky about the original's total pixel count), but I also don't see any traceable data as to the origin of this image. - Bevo 22:23, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Oppose until attribution appears. --Andrew 07:14, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
I have left a message with MattSal, who originally uploaded this image. Lets leave the nomination here for a little while longer in the hope that we will hear from him. It would be a shame to reject such a startling image. - Gaz 16:11, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
How much longer should we wait? - Bevo 15:15, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Ok, lets leave it here for another day or two so people can see this message, then move it off to archive as "rejected". If MattSal ever provides attribution, I propose that we move it immediately to
WP:FP as the majority seem to like the image in its own right. - Gaz
15:32, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Not promoted. - Bevo 18:10, 4 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Spot Fetcher, the late dog of George W Bush. I don't know why, but I really like this picture. It's extremely cute, and (IMHO) the best picture we have on springer spaniels. →Raul654 02:16, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)
Support - This shot captures the very essence of the breed - Look at those eyes, and the cocked paw (Hope you're reading this Dubya) - Gaz 14:06, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Glass beads. I thought some modern art glass would be nice to complement the fancy cut-glass stuff on Glass. Since I live with a glassblower, I took out the digital camera. --Andrew 07:14, Apr 23, 2004 (UTC)
Oppose - I fail to see how this "adds significantly" to the article - Gaz 13:27, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Glassblowing now uses it. Does that help resolve your objection?- Bevo 19:33, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Radcliffe Camera - I took this photograph when I went back to Oxford to vote on the University Chancellor in March 2003... and took the time to do all the touristy things I never had the time to do when I was studying! I think the view of the Rad Cam from the spire of the University Church illustrates the building's unique shape and location. - MykReeve 12:23, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Support. This is the "classic" view of the Camera which you'll find in textbooks and is to my mind way better than the ground view. -- ChrisO 12:59, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Support. Kaihsu's photo was good, but this is better. -- Chris 73 | (New) Talk 13:01, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Support. Lucky you, having a vote in the Chancellor race. Maybe I should ask you for some career advice. -- Kaihsu 15:38, 2004 Apr 26 (UTC)
Abbey - Took in hot summer 2003. The liquor's monkmonks liquor is damn good. Greudin 18:35, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Support. Very nice picture; nice to supplement the diagrams with a photo. Do you mean "monks' liquor"? Is it that strong? --Andrew 20:47, Apr 26, 2004 (UTC)
I question the copyright status of this image (I'm looking into it) - Until I find out more, Oppose - Gaz 14:21, 3 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
This image is original for Wikipedia by User:J.J.. If I remember correctly, he uploaded a truecolor JPEG. I took that image and turned it into a PNG, because a 16 colour PNG cartoon image was smaller than the JPEG originally uploaded, and PNG was a lossless format. The original image is here; the upload note says that "I drew it." Smerdis of Tlön 15:08, 3 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Question withdrawn - Support - Gaz 12:50, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Support. -- for those who (perhaps rightly) doubt that there can be such a thing as a wikipedian who can draw, JJ's cartoon site is here. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 02:25, 5 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Armthewhales 19:00, 2004 May 18 (UTC) While I enjoy the illustration I'm concerned it's too Eurocentric, too Snidelywhiplashish for an international Website. What is the Chinese image of a villain? A Samoan? A Rwandan? etc. This guy looks more like a greedy undertaker to me than, say, an Enron executive or some guy selling Pygmies as bushmeat. While the mad scientist looks both perfectly mad and a scientist, perhaps an illustration as notorious as "villian" might be best kept as constantly changing as new villains come ever to light.
Please do share those images of "new villains" as they are discovered. For today, this villain's picture will do nicely! If the others are as well done as this one, we'll have a whole gallery of villains some day. &mdash Bevo 19:01, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps we could come up with a few villains from old newspaper caricatures? Some old pictures of the
Yellow peril, the Red menace, or the uppity Negro. Somehow, I don't think this would improve things any. Like it or not, it is more socially acceptable to portray Europeans (and their descendants) as villains than any other ethnic group. Besides, this guy is not supposed to be every villain, just a villain. --Andrew
01:40, May 23, 2004 (UTC)
Promoted. +12 -1 - Bevo 15:26, 25 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
I love this picture. Such a great view. I asked gaz to upload a higher resolution version before nominating and he did. →Raul654 16:17, May 6, 2004 (UTC)
Support! I want to go! --Andrew 16:51, May 6, 2004 (UTC)
Oppose. I'm sure it's a great place to visit but it is the photograph we are judging. This one is just not strong enough. NickP 03:55, May 10, 2004 (UTC)
Oppose. The road itself has to be assumed to be that discontinuity. I don't think this particular photo adds significantly to the article. - Bevo 22:09, 10 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral (THIS IS MY PHOTO) - See comments on the other nomination - Gaz 13:00, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Not promoted. +2 -2 (1N) - Bevo 15:39, 27 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Ditto. A weak composition—too many irrelevant features, and the subject, the road itself and its relation to the mountain is not strongly depicted. Read the first paragraph of this page. NickP 03:55, May 10, 2004 (UTC)
Support. This one shows the road in enough detail and scope to be a great contribution to the article. - Bevo 22:06, 10 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Shows the road in context, and is nicely framed. - MykReeve 19:56, 11 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral (THIS IS MY PHOTO) - I have said nothing up until now so as not to influence opinions either way. I regard these as competent photos of a very beautiful place. But they are not "brilliant". I feel the two photos, together, add the proverbial "thousand words" to the article. This is a place that is VERY difficult to properly describe without photos. I leave it to others to decide their final fate. - Gaz 12:58, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the comments. I strongly hope that this nomination is promoted. Any photo that conveys the feeling of being on location (as this one does for me) is brilliant, IMO. Rounding that farthest curve shown on that road must be an adventure every time! &mdash Bevo 18:57, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Not promoted. +4 -1 (1N) (borderline, but since the photographer doesn't consider them brilliant quality, then that tipped it for me) - Bevo 15:39, 27 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
I think this picture is neat - it's not often we have pictures of a virus, and I think it really adds to the article. →Raul654 01:58, May 8, 2004 (UTC) (The article is HIV --Andrew 19:56, May 9, 2004 (UTC))
Support -- good picture, supports the article. Oddly named. --Andrew 19:56, May 9, 2004 (UTC)
Oppose. I fear that, at least in the context in which we use it, this is serving more as decoration than as a proper informative illustration. I can see a correspondence between most of the structures visible in the illustration and stuff I understand to be in an HIV virion, but our HIV article really doesn't describe the physical structure of a virion, and there isn't a concomitant key to this illustration. I'd change my vote if there was a decent textual description of the virus' structure (protein coat, envelope, capsid, RNA core) and a key or description that correlated these with the different parts of this illustration. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 00:45, 11 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
No. It looks more like a decorated bathroom tile. No value as a useful schematic. -- Kaihsu 07:17, 2004 May 13 (UTC)
Support image, Strongly oppose comment above, an image this strikingly beautiful does a tremendous service to the reader as well as the subject. Its entirely possible a young student may be so inspired by this image as to enter a career researching such a disease. I find it breathtaking myself. SamSpade 01:05, 14 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Agree with Sam Spade. Unless I'm mistaken, the picture is inaccurately named (AIDS isn't a virus- HIV is.). -Frazzydee 02:45, 22 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
(not a vote) Indeed. The article in question (HIV) does label it correctly, however. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 02:56, 22 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
It is a strikingly beautiful schematic, but of little value as an illustration as it stands. Together with a labelled photograph of an HIvirus, this would be an awesome companion to an article. Unlike a photo, this one is actually memorizable. Denni 22:12, 2004 May 27 (UTC)
+4 -3 not promoted. - Bevo 15:42, 28 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
_daytime.jpg){kind=link}
