Reason:
Being perhaps one of the most photographed landmarks of Lucerne, it is a little bit ambitious of me to nominate this image as VI. However, checking the other images of Wasserturm in WikiMedia, I really think this one has a chance to be VI on this scope. For you to decide... -- Murdockcrc (talk)
Comment This general scope contains plenty of good images. I think that the nominated photo meets the scope: The Old Water Tower in Lucerne where it should compete with the great photos of the subject we can find here...--MrPanyGoff11:40, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the input. The problem is that the category you suggest is "View of Pilatus from Lucerne", and on my image mount Pilatus is not visible. However, people can indeed find other great images of the Wasserturm on that category for sure. I will update the scope. --Murdockcrc (talk) 16:39, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't suggest this category as a scope. I just found there many good images of this tower. The category in Commons we are talking about is not created yet. It should be created as a subcategory of Buildings in Lucerne and should be named after this tower if the tower has some name or just The Old Water Tower, Lucerne. Let others also give opinions for the scope. Just to mention (don't want to discourage you) but seeing the competitors I think that your photo has a little chance to win ;) --MrPanyGoff17:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you can create a valued review and add some more candidates, and so make the nomination even more interesting :-) Thanks for the feedback. --Murdockcrc (talk) 18:08, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
* So, as I've understood after reading some sources, the tower and the covered bridge are the main landmarks of this town. Furthermore, they are both treated as an inseparable ensemble that is called Kapellbrücke and it has a category in commons. So we can finalize the scope as Kapellbrücke, Lucerne... what do you think?--MrPanyGoff22:08, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".
Reason:
Very beautiful, dynamic and informative perspective of the bridge and the tower with the Church of St. Leodegar in the background. -- MrPanyGoff
Reason:
Good perspective of the bridge with the whole tower visible. In addition the Pilatus mountain and the Jesuit church can be seen in the background. -- MrPanyGoff
Info this picture shows the dogs at work in natural habitat,should we change the scope to that? Sarplaninac at work? it would be an single image. 12:45, 19 December 2010 (UTC) This was from me --- Mdupont (talk) 07:59, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".
Info I formatted the scope such that it is without the Category word. It is really confusing that several scopes are used for images competing in an MVR. I do not think scope changes should be made in an MVR. I propose we keep this wordign though because it matches an existing category, and the other image in the MVR is not eligible due to missing geotag. --Slaunger (talk) 22:15, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reason:
An outstanding portrait of Mark Twain. The eye-contact was the decisive thing here when choosing among the A. F. Bradley's photos. -- MrPanyGoff
Reason:
An earlier portrait of the writer as some alternative of the other nominations. -- MrPanyGoff
Comment I'd tend to prefer a portrait taken after Twain published The Adventures of Tom Sawyer and The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, i.e. after 1884. --Myrabella (talk) 15:53, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]