Oppose I'm sorry, it's a great image but I don't see it being useful in web articles because of its sheer size. In order to see the text, you have to blow it up into full-size and that's not possible in an article, and when viewing it in the size it will be displayed at in articles, you can't even really see the individual mountains clearly.--Peulle (talk) 15:52, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you, @Peulle: for your comment. I see your point. However, for the following reason I think it is still a VI:
Commons:Valued images says: Valued images are images which are considered especially valuable by the Commons community for use in online content within other Wikimedia projects. The panorama still looks good in lower resolution in an article (see here for example), and if you are interested in the names of the peaks, you can click on the picture and get it in full resolution. That's exaclty the advantage of online usage.
Commons:Valued images says also: The project also provides recognition to contributors who have made an effort to contribute images of difficult subjects which are very hard or impossible to obtain. I think nobody can deny that I put much effort in the picture (quickest route to the peak is 4¾ hour and not easy, stitching together 194 pictures is time consuming and technically complex and labeling is extremely time consuming), and..
..the weather on that day was so good that the view was extremely exceptional. I personally have never experienced before a day where I couldn't see any clouds or mist all around and the view in all directions was > 150 km. Therefore I'm quite sure that it is very hard or impossible to obtain again a picture like this from that peak. --Capricorn4049 (talk) 23:28, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
