Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Collier de Penne.jpg

File:Collier de Penne.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Aug 2010 at 06:53:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Collier de Penne.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Collier de Penne.jpg

•  Info created, uploaded and nominated by Archaeodontosaurus -- Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Support -- Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:53, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Question Pourquoi y a t'il des écrits modernes sur les perles? Ça gâche un peu l'authenticité du collier...(Why is there of modern writings on the beads? It wastes a bit of authenticity of the necklace.)--Citron (talk) 10:48, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment Ce sont les notes autographes de Jean Baptiste Noulet , qui peut être regardé comme l’inventeur de la préhistoire en tant que science. Ces graffitis ont une valeur historique. Les artefacts préhistoriques sont souvent « enluminés » de ces notes qui sont conservées si elles sont du XIXe siècle. (These are the autographs notes of Jean Baptiste Noulet, which can be regarded as the inventor of prehistory as a science. These graffiti are of historical value. The prehistoric artifacts are often "Illuminated" of these notes are retained if they are of the nineteenth century.) --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:24, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Haha! C'est ce qui s'appelle signer sa découverte! --Citron (talk) 12:55, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --The High Fin Sperm Whale 13:52, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Great encyclopedic value. --Cayambe (talk) 13:57, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment It would be nice to have the description in English, due to the fact that it is practically the universal language. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:11, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Done --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:11, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Support very rare ancient object, high EV -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:36, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Cathy Richards (talk) 15:00, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Support A suggestion, however: photograph these type of objects on black velvet, the reflexions distract, specially the double reflexion. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:04, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose - fascinating object, likely a valued image, but the reflection distracts too much for FP, in my opinion. Jonathunder (talk) 19:00, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Jonathunder. --99of9 (talk) 20:17, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment The reflection is natural: the necklace is placed on a glass plate, the double reflection is due to the thickness of the glass --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:34, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
  •  Comment Sure, it's just distracting and unnecessary IMO, a matte surface would have been better for my personal preference. --99of9 (talk) 10:50, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Support reflection is not a problem to me. Very nice, interesting, rare and high (pre)historical and encyclopedic value.--Jebulon (talk) 16:57, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Other qualities, including educational value, outweigh the small annoyance of the reflection for me. Steven Walling 14:25, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Support really nice work! --mathias K 08:11, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Support--Mbz1 (talk) 16:46, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:01, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Neutral Reflection keeps me from supporting. -- Sdgjake (talk) 15:13, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:03, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects