Commons:Closed most valued reviews/2009/11

Cathedral of Learning

View opposition Nominated by: Notyourbroom (talk) on 2009-11-09 06:26 (UTC) Scope: Cathedral of Learning Used in: unused Previous reviews  Comment Be aware that Stephen Foster Memorial is partially obstructing the Cathedral of Learning in this shot. —Notyourbroom (talk) 16:36, 10 November 2009 (UTC)  Oppose This is not a current photo and does not represent the structure in its original or current state. The Cathedral of Learning no longer has this coloration as the soot/staining was removed during a 2007 cleaning and restoration. The temporary fencing along the bottom left of the photo has also been removed.The base is also obstructed by the Stephen Foster Memorial which, to the those unfamiliar with the structure, might be confused as being part of the Cathedral of Learning. The plane to the top left of the Cathedral is also a distracting element. Crazypaco (talk) 22:50, 10 November 2009 (UTC) Scores: 1. Cathedral of Learning 02.jpg: -1 (current VI within same scope) <-- 2. Cathedral of Learning stitch 1.jpg: +2 3. Cathedral of Learning stitch 2.jpg: 0 => File:Cathedral of Learning 02.jpg: Declined and demoted to VI-former. <-- File:Cathedral of Learning stitch 1.jpg: Promoted. File:Cathedral of Learning stitch 2.jpg: Declined. --—Notyourbroom (talk) 06:50, 18 November 2009 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)	View promotion Nominated by: —Notyourbroom (talk) on 2009-11-08 04:24 (UTC) Scope: Cathedral of Learning Used in: University of Pittsburgh, Cathedral of Learning Reason: While other well-framed images with relatively-unobstructed shots of this structure exist, this image is of substantially greater resolution and quality than the others I checked in the category.—Notyourbroom (talk) 04:25, 8 November 2009 (UTC) -- —Notyourbroom (talk)  Comment There is already a VI for this scope : File:Cathedral of Learning 02.jpg, so please set up a Most Valued Review if you wish to nominate this new one. --Myrabella (talk) 22:33, 8 November 2009 (UTC)  Question Oh, I see. I checked several images which appeared to be likely candidates to see whether there was already a valued image for the scope, but I did not see the one you linked to. For future reference, is there a simple way to check for existing VIs for a given scope, or must the search be done manually? —Notyourbroom (talk) 00:54, 9 November 2009 (UTC) There is this list, but I agree that a search tool would be nice. I put it on my TODO-list, but I'm very busy IRL and it is not the ultimate priority with VI-related developments, so if somebody wanted to build a little search tool, I wouldn't be offended... --Eusebius (talk) 08:37, 9 November 2009 (UTC)  Support This picture is unmatched in its framing, aesthetic value, lack of other structures confounding the frame and identification of the building, and high resolution detail. This is also the angle that, according to architectural historian Franklin Toker, best reveals its Gothic tracery, setbacks and corner pinnacles. (see p. 85 of Pittsburgh: An Urban Portrait) The value of the image for the Cathedral of Learning category, especially at the size displayed in typical Wikipedia articles, far outweighs any (minor) technical issues that may exist. Crazypaco (talk) 05:28, 11 November 2009 (UTC)  Support Thanks to Crazypaco for his/her expert review. --Myrabella (talk) 09:52, 11 November 2009 (UTC) Scores: 1. Cathedral of Learning 02.jpg: -1 (current VI within same scope) 2. Cathedral of Learning stitch 1.jpg: +2 <-- 3. Cathedral of Learning stitch 2.jpg: 0 => File:Cathedral of Learning 02.jpg: Declined and demoted to VI-former. File:Cathedral of Learning stitch 1.jpg: Promoted. <-- File:Cathedral of Learning stitch 2.jpg: Declined. --—Notyourbroom (talk) 06:51, 18 November 2009 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
View opposition Nominated by: —Notyourbroom (talk) on 2009-11-09 03:48 (UTC) Scope: Cathedral of Learning Used in: Cathedral of Learning Reason: Another vantage point. —Notyourbroom (talk) 03:48, 10 November 2009 (UTC) -- —Notyourbroom (talk)  Comment Be aware that Stephen Foster Memorial is partially obstructing the Cathedral of Learning in this shot. —Notyourbroom (talk) 16:36, 10 November 2009 (UTC) Scores: 1. Cathedral of Learning 02.jpg: -1 (current VI within same scope) 2. Cathedral of Learning stitch 1.jpg: +2 3. Cathedral of Learning stitch 2.jpg: 0 <-- => File:Cathedral of Learning 02.jpg: Declined and demoted to VI-former. File:Cathedral of Learning stitch 1.jpg: Promoted. File:Cathedral of Learning stitch 2.jpg: Declined. <-- --—Notyourbroom (talk) 06:52, 18 November 2009 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

Johann Gottfried Brügelmann

View Nominated by: H005 (talk) on 2009-09-08 18:54 (UTC) Scope: Johann Gottfried Brügelmann Used in: de:Johann Gottfried Brügelmann Reason: Johann Gottfried Brügelmann was a pioneer of the industrial revolution. He was the first person to found a mechanical factory outside England by committing the world's first case of industrial espionage, thus expediting the spread of industrialism around the world. This is the only image of him on Commons. -- H005 (talk)  Oppose This image quality is very poor. I am surprised that it is nominated at all, since with a 30-s-search on Google I found a better one: File:Johann Gottfried Brügelmann.jpg, although it is not really good. Yann (talk) 17:44, 10 September 2009 (UTC) Yann, please read the VI criteria. It doesn't matter for VI whether the image quality is good on an absolute scale, it only needs to be the best one of all available on Commons. And thus it also doesn't matter whether there are better images out there on the web, only Commons images are considered. (Btw, I do not find that other image better, it's far too small). -- H005 (talk) 17:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC) Well, I upload this image. My comment stands. Yann (talk) 12:37, 12 September 2009 (UTC) From the VI rules: If you find one or more other images/sets which in your opinion are equally or more valued images within essentially the same scope, you should nominate these images as well and move all the candidates to an MVR. -- H005 (talk) 23:42, 12 September 2009 (UTC)  Done Yann (talk) 13:21, 13 September 2009 (UTC) MVR Scores: 1. BrügelmannMedaillon.png: -1 <-- 2. Johann Gottfried Brügelmann.jpg: 0 => File:BrügelmannMedaillon.png: Undecided. <-- File:Johann Gottfried Brügelmann.jpg: Undecided. --Myrabella (talk) 18:35, 20 November 2009 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)	View Nominated by: Yann (talk) on 2009-09-13 13:19 (UTC) Scope: Johann Gottfried Brügelmann  Oppose Far too small. -- H005 (talk) 18:12, 13 September 2009 (UTC)  Support Looks better. --Mr. Mario (talk) 04:09, 13 October 2009 (UTC)  Support this version -- George Chernilevsky talk 10:50, 13 October 2009 (UTC)  Oppose Far too small even for VI. Lycaon (talk) 17:26, 13 October 2009 (UTC) MVR Scores: 1. BrügelmannMedaillon.png: -1 2. Johann Gottfried Brügelmann.jpg: 0 <-- => File:BrügelmannMedaillon.png: Undecided. File:Johann Gottfried Brügelmann.jpg: Undecided. <-- --Myrabella (talk) 18:35, 20 November 2009 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

Cathédrale Saint-Samson de Dol-de-Bretagne (interior)

View Nominated by: Eusebius (talk) on 2009-11-01 11:16 (UTC) Scope: Cathédrale Saint-Samson de Dol-de-Bretagne (interior)  Request Please confirm the scope. Shouldn't it be an "(interior)" scope? (as you know, a VI for the exterior of this cathedral exists :-) --Myrabella (talk) 14:56, 1 November 2009 (UTC) Of course! Fixed. --Eusebius (talk) 16:03, 1 November 2009 (UTC)  Comment Despite an indubitable better overall quality, one can regret that the granite ogive is cropped in this image... --Myrabella (talk) 00:02, 2 November 2009 (UTC) MVR Scores: 1. Dol - cathédrale - nef.jpg: 0 <-- 2. Dol-de-Bretagne - Nef de la cathedrale 01.jpg: 0 => File:Dol - cathédrale - nef.jpg: Undecided. <-- File:Dol-de-Bretagne - Nef de la cathedrale 01.jpg: Undecided. --Myrabella (talk) 07:03, 21 November 2009 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)	View Nominated by: Eusebius (talk) on 2009-11-01 11:16 (UTC) Scope: Cathédrale Saint-Samson de Dol-de-Bretagne (interior) MVR Scores: 1. Dol - cathédrale - nef.jpg: 0 2. Dol-de-Bretagne - Nef de la cathedrale 01.jpg: 0 <-- => File:Dol - cathédrale - nef.jpg: Undecided. File:Dol-de-Bretagne - Nef de la cathedrale 01.jpg: Undecided. <-- --Myrabella (talk) 07:03, 21 November 2009 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

Suq Aftimos

View Nominated by: Rastaman3000 (talk) on 2009-11-05 17:46 (UTC) Scope: Suq Aftimos Used in: de:Muristan  Oppose Shows nothing special of this suq --Berthold Werner (talk) 17:33, 13 November 2009 (UTC) MVR Scores: 1. Muristan shop.jpg: -1 <-- 2. Muristan2.jpg: 0 3. suq aftimus.jpg: 0 => File:Muristan shop.jpg: undecided. <-- File:Muristan2.jpg: undecided. File:Suq Aftimus.JPG: undecided. --Myrabella (talk) 21:06, 26 November 2009 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)	View Nominated by: Rastaman3000 (talk) on 2009-11-05 17:45 (UTC) Scope: Suq Aftimos Used in: it:Muristan, he:הרובע הנוצרי, he:מוריסטן  Comment Shows the entrance that makes the difference of this suq, but lacks atmosphere of it. --Berthold Werner (talk) 17:38, 13 November 2009 (UTC) MVR Scores: 1. Muristan shop.jpg: -1 2. Muristan2.jpg: 0 <-- 3. suq aftimus.jpg: 0 => File:Muristan shop.jpg: undecided. File:Muristan2.jpg: undecided. <-- File:Suq Aftimus.JPG: undecided. --Myrabella (talk) 21:06, 26 November 2009 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
View Nominated by: Rastaman3000 (talk) on 2009-10-21 18:38 (UTC) Scope: Suq Aftimos Used in: en:Muristan, fr:Quartier chrétien de la vieille ville de Jérusalem  Comment about categorisation: I suggest to class the image in Category:Muristan; it would be more precise. --Myrabella (talk) 20:39, 21 October 2009 (UTC)  Done - Fixed! --Rastaman3000 (talk) 16:19, 22 October 2009 (UTC)  Comment I wonder whether the chosen scope isn't too narrow. Neither related category in Commons, nor dedicated article in any wikipedia, unless I'm wrong. --Myrabella (talk) 17:41, 28 October 2009 (UTC)  Oppose The scope seems quite narrow. However, there is a very short mention of "Suq Aftimos" in fr:Quartier chrétien de la vieille ville de Jérusalem and in en:Muristan. In he:מוריסטן, this photo shows the "Suq Aftimos" if I trust the caption of the image in that article read through the Google rough translation. As it shows a market, which is a common sense of the word "suq" (also "souq" or "souk"), I tend to prefer it. Of course, I may be wrong => further nominator's explanations welcome if necessary. --Myrabella (talk) 14:02, 3 November 2009 (UTC)  Comment - Suq (or Shook) means market in Hebrew. File:Muristan2.jpg shows the same location (with the exception of a few feet) as this Image, however it lacks source and author information. Geocoding it is possible, as it has the same Golocation as my Image. Maybe the scope should be changed to Murisitan? --Rastaman3000 (talk) 17:19, 3 November 2009 (UTC) Thanks for your explanations. After some readings, I think that "Suq Aftimos" may be considered as a "suitably generic scope"—and en:muristan speak of it a bit less shortly now ;-) There are several strong candidates under this scope, IMO: the nominated image, File:Muristan2.jpg (its description has been completed) and File:Muristan shop.jpg for a view inside the market (tranferred from :de:w) => what about a MVR? Changing the scope to "Muristan" may be an option too. But I read that the Muristan has been divided in two parts in the past, a German eastern part (with the Lutheran Church of the Redeemer) and a Greek western one (with the market) so I wonder if a suitable image for this alternative scope shouldn't show elements of both parts. Nevertheless, Commons is presently rather poor in this respect, so perhaps it may be a good idea. Other contributors' advice welcome. --Myrabella (talk) 12:55, 5 November 2009 (UTC) Thanks for your comment, I've decided to open a MVR. --Rastaman3000 (talk) Acceptable scope, after discussion => I remove my oppose. --Myrabella (talk) 07:11, 7 November 2009 (UTC)  CommentThe font is also special to this suq but perspective is not so good --Berthold Werner (talk) 17:39, 13 November 2009 (UTC) MVR Scores: 1. Muristan shop.jpg: -1 2. Muristan2.jpg: 0 3. suq aftimus.jpg: 0 <-- => File:Muristan shop.jpg: undecided. File:Muristan2.jpg: undecided. File:Suq Aftimus.JPG: undecided. <-- --Myrabella (talk) 21:06, 26 November 2009 (UTC) Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)