Comment Interesting, but I am not sure about the scope. It seems there is a watermark in the left bottom corner. And could you add the description in English please? Yann (talk) 12:24, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think the scope can be ok (although, maybe the date 1875-1876 could be added to if it is of importance, and the scope could be linked to the corresponding category). However, this picture shows nothing specific to this archeological site (edit: well, it does actually, but the main subject is still the people). I think a picture like File:Curtius Olympia 1 t02.jpg could be more valuable. --Eusebius (talk) 13:37, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment but File:Curtius Olympia 1 t02.jpg is so ... expressionless (in German we have a word nichtssagend) - it doesn't tell anything valuable about the effort of the excavation, it just shows a lot of debris. I nominated File:Curtius Olympia 1 t05.jpg because all the people give me an idea of the huge scope of the excavation, the hard work of everybody involved in it, and, eventually, the great success to humanity. (Edit: Plus, it has debris, too :) Jonathan Groß17:01, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
