One of the statues of the Grande Commande for the Parc of Versailles castle, 1674. I nominate it because this one is the original and must not be confused with the copy, outside in the Parc. -- Jebulon (talk)
Comment To me, a complete set of the statues of the Grande Commande would be more appropriate, or at least of each main group (the four statues making up The Four Parts of the World for example). --Myrabella (talk) 06:48, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Please note that this sculptor hasn't an article on its own in any Wikipedia, and there is no relevant echo about this work of art in Google Scholar (considering that thread discussed at the moment, whit the following proposition: "A scope is usually broad enough if it is the topic of one or more articles in our sister projects, or occurs more than a few times in a search of the scholarly literature (e.g., Google Scholar)." and the current guideline: "Not every work of art is worth a Valued Image scope. A scope is justified for instance if the work is the most significant work (or one of the most significant works) of an artist having an article on its own on any Wikipedia, or if it is a seminal work in some way."...) Furthermore, this statue (like the others of the group) was ordered and delivered as a part of a whole. In addition, the sculptors were the executers, the original design being the work of Charles Le Brun inspired from Cesare Ripa’s Iconologia.--Myrabella (talk) 21:44, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support This image deserves the label. COMMONS VI and must provide incentives for the various Wikimedia we prepare the work, which leads to the article. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:48, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
