Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives July 21 2022

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Borey-A_class_SSBN.svg

[edit]

  • Nomination Silhouette of russian Borei-A class SSBN (project 955A). K-549 «Knyaz Vladimir» --Mike1979 Russia 05:21, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
  • Promotion
    I understand this campaign of yours as a provocation, for the record. --Poco a poco 08:32, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
    I understand your review as persecution, for the record. And you didn't answer my questions in previos nomination. --Mike1979 Russia 09:14, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
    And your review violates not only COM:QIC where not place for politic but COM:GOODFAITH too. Please, review my own work no politic. --Mike1979 Russia 14:38, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
     Comment I see no need for a sinister motive behind the accumulation of submarines in non-photo QIs. And they are not all Russian btw. But I generally find it annoying when people nominate huge amounts of similar images. In my view it would be good manners to nominate a few images pars pro toto. --Watchduck 20:18, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
    Many users nominate five images of same theme every day. I don't do anything out of the ordinary. --Mike1979 Russia 14:42, 7 July 2022 (UTC)  Comment That was my point, mainly directed at Poco's criticism. What he calls a "campaign" is not more annoying than what sadly seems to be the norm. --Watchduck 17:55, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
    How do we know these are accurate representations? --Charlesjsharp 11:17, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
    You can compare my drawings with published photos. --Mike1979 Russia 13:52, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
    It would be definitely a good practice to provide that source to be aligned with the Wikipedia policies where the images are used. --Poco a poco 19:25, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
    There are most of photos which I used: Подводные лодки проекта 955 и 955а. But it seems to me that you are nitpicking, because you are not going to check my drawings, but are looking for an excuse to declane them. --Mike1979 Russia 05:24, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
     Oppose Too small. --Tournasol7 20:22, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
    It contradicts Commons:Quality images candidates#Resolution --Mike1979 Russia 05:49, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
    @Tournasol7: How can an SVG be too small? --Watchduck 09:58, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
     Oppose simple black drawing. --Hillopo2018 06:12, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
    This is an outright lie. The complexity of this drawing is several times higher than the best photo on this page.--Mike1979 Russia 06:28, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
     Support The downvotes by Tournasol7 and Hillopo2018 are obviously in bad faith, so I add my support to compensate this nonsense (although I disapprove of mass nominations like these). --Watchduck 10:05, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 Support I find the quality of this silhouette is similar to several SVG of submarines that have been promoted as QI. Per Watchduck, the oppose votes are unjustified. --Tagooty 10:25, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support--Ermell 14:03, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support --Mosbatho 20:20, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support More great work. -- Ikan Kekek 20:02, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support --GRDN711 02:05, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
Total: 6 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 21:19, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

File:Graney_class_SSN.svg

[edit]

 Support I find the quality of this silhouette is similar to several SVG of submarines that have been promoted as QI. This image is used in ~20 wikis including uk.wiki, ru.wiki, en.wiki, etc. Per Watchduck, the oppose votes are unjustified. --Tagooty (talk) 10:36, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support per Tagooty.--Ermell 13:58, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support @Mike1979 Russia: Please, do not get demotivated! --Mosbatho 20:19, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support More great work. -- Ikan Kekek 20:03, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support --GRDN711 02:06, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 21:20, 20 July 2022 (UTC)