Commons:Valued image candidates/6sided dice.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

6sided dice.jpg

promoted
Image
Nominated by Diacritica (talk) on 2011-02-12 16:34 (UTC)
Scope Nominated as the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
6-sided dice
Used in Global usage
Reason This image is sharp, colorful and represents well what people have in mind when thinking about 6 sided dice -- Diacritica (talk)
Review
(criteria)

 Info Link to the related category added to the scope. --Myrabella (talk) 18:38, 12 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Request I have gone through all the Commons:Valued image criteria and I see all of them met. Are there any concerns I didn't forsee when I nominated this image? Thanks --Diacritica (talk) 08:08, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment I personally value clarity and didactic value, and find this illustration more direct and less cluttered. Being colorful, in my mind, distracts from the purpose. Jon C (talk) 18:39, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment I understand your concern but dice are objects that people tend to touch and identify as tangible. A dice is something that you hold in your hand, has a size, weight and colour. Whan I see the image you link I see no value regarding these matters. It was that particular reason what made me decide to take this picture. I am a svg fan :) but if I strongly believe that if I had to ask 100 people and ask them "which image represents best what you have in mind when I talk about dice" a majority would chose the first one. Actually, the svg file doesn't show the side with the six dots and I would prefer not to infer it from my general knowledge.--Diacritica (talk) 14:06, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support I loved the picture when I saw it. Those are definitely the best pictured six-sided dice in Commons: colours are pure and uniformly beautiful, the image resolution is excellent. And I really find the pictured objects as being immediatly identifiable and representative. Kintaro (talk) 19:07, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky talk 10:55, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
[reply]