Question Could you indicate why this particular building is of interest, please? We can't have a valued image of every building in the world and presumably there is some particular interest in this one that makes it worthy of being the subject of a valued image? --MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:00, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is an article about it in wikipedia, which I think is good enough reason. A question for question — why every single species is of interest? This building is quite a landmark. If it were the Eiffel Tower I think you wouldn't ask a question about it. A question arise now, which buildings are worth having VI? I think a good border between buildings in "particular interest" and out of it, is existance of article about on the one of wikis. --Sfu (talk) 20:38, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support and Comment You ask about plant species and the relevance of those. These are quite clear I think due to the presence of WikiSpecies as a Wikimedia project, as documentation of all living species is in scope of that project. When it comes to buildings, it is a little more subjective, but I tend to agree with the nominator that the fact that there is a non-stub Wikipedia article about it is an indicator of value, and I also note that the architecture of the building makes it a landmark type of building which is probably quite notable. It should not get much lower on the relevance scale for me though to make it a VI. It satisfies other criteria. Geocoding could be improved by providing a heading parameter. -- Slaunger (talk) 18:07, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My question was rather rhetorical. I did not mean anything against the plants on VI. All species are worth having its article on wikipedia (not speaking of the wikispecies) so as VI scope. There is no buildingpedia — happily I think. --Sfu (talk) 18:23, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
