I think it is of "more than local interest" because of its registration as a "monument historique", even though there is no separate WP article about it. -- Eusebius (talk)
Comment I am very interested by other reviewers' opinion about the point you raise, because there are dozens of churches in France without an article in any WP but nevertheless classified "Monument Historique" (and I would be pleased to be allowed to nominate some ones). A previous case related to a French official building here. --Myrabella (talk) 16:26, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I too find the restrictions for churches inappropriate. Of course a standard post-war suburb church or a village chapel will hardly be of interest. Probably that's what the authors of the rules feared. However, "architectural exceptional" is a very unspecific criterion. "cathedral" seems very specific, but in fact isn't, since it's not well defined over all languages and denominations (What about File:Karlsruhe ChristusKathedrale.jpg?) So I'd suggest to execute the rule liberally and taking e.g. age as indicator for relevance. --Ikar.us (talk) 17:42, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment about the scope. Maybe Préfecture "in" Nantes is better. This image shows the Préfecture "of" Région Pays de Loire, or the Préfecture "of" Département de Loire-Atlantique, and it is "in" Nantes because Nantes is the capital of Région and Département. As a city, Nantes has a townhall (the townhall "of" Nantes). IMHO, the scope (and the category) is not according to the french administrative rules. --Jebulon (talk) 16:54, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would have gone for "Prefecture of Loire-Atlantique" (without accents because it is not a proper noun and should be translated in English IMO), but I had doubts after seeing the list of prefectures in the Commons cat. I wouldn't be against a big renaming sweep in that category. I don't have time right now though. --Eusebius (talk) 17:00, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Info About the registration as a "Monument historique" : please note that this building is only "inscrit" ("registered") but not "classé" ("classified") in the French "Monument Historique" directory. "Inscrit" defines a weaker State heritage protection than "Classé". --Myrabella (talk) 11:48, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Opposeas not yet eligible for VI status. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it cannot at present become a valued image since it currently fails valued image criterion 2 (does not have a suitably generic scope). The scope wording seems somewhat inaccurate; moreover, I am not convinced that this building is worth a scope by itself, see discussion above. I have not reviewed the nomination against all the criteria, but if you are able to fix this issue and would like me to re-evaluate the image please leave me a message on my talk page. --Myrabella (talk) 12:06, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This picture is not recent, I uploaded it a while ago but never nominated it because I thought it didn't warrant a scope. I nominated only after someone (Coyau?) added the Mérimée template about the French "monuments historiques". In the light of this discussion, and of the fact that the monument isn't really "classé", it seems very reasonable to me to decline this VI candidate. --Eusebius (talk) 20:48, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
