Review
(criteria) |
 Comment : I think she's a politician but it would be nice to add it in the caption and to add a translation of this caption in English. --JLPC (talk) 15:42, 14 September 2013 (UTC)* Done--Jean11 (talk) 17:04, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, but when I wrote "the caption", I meant the caption of your file (File:Manuela Schwesig.jpg), not about the scope, which was OK. I think it's easy to fix. Sorry for my English. --JLPC (talk) 20:15, 14 September 2013 (UTC) I had done both. --Jean11 (talk) 08:56, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I've seen it but a scope isn't a caption and your scope is too long, which is a pity because the picture is OK, of course. I don't want to be pricky, I just want you to apply to your picture the rules all users apply to theirs. I hope you'll understand. Regards. --JLPC (talk) 17:18, 15 September 2013 (UTC) I had done it because of YOUR "but it would be nice to add it in the caption". At the file page it says "description". Now it´s time for your vote. --Jean11 (talk) 17:47, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose To me, the more smiling portrait is better--Jebulon (talk) 19:36, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment On my photo, she smiles deeper. Sculpt your mouth like them and you can feel it. And her face tell there much more. And in "your" picture she looks to the right. But the Wikipedia texts are left. --Jean11 (talk) 18:16, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, Jean11, I've not used orders like the one in your last sentence, or capital letters as you did previously. I've tried my best to help you because some users did the same for me a few months ago. I've already apologized for my English but every one on this page knows what "caption" means and if it doesn't mean "description" it doesn't mean "scope" either. Now I think, in these circumstances, a longer discussion would be a loss of time. So, I let more experimented reviewers vote or not for your picture. Regards. --JLPC (talk) 21:25, 15 September 2013 (UTC) I´ve not used orders too. It was a reference only. en:Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith. I dont´t have the right to change filename, like many other. So, I thought you meant one of the other two. The "YOUR" was a reference too. See en:Wikipedia:Assume_good_faith too. --Jean11 (talk) 18:16, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I think I have to apologize again : according to the Valued image criteria, "English description is preferred although not essential. "... But there's another criteria : "There should be a full and informative description of what the image depicts" , which wasn't satisfied the first time you nominated this picture. Regards. --JLPC (talk) 11:56, 16 September 2013 (UTC) There was a link to the de, en, fr, ja, no and pt Wikipedia article. According your "it would be nice" I had the description of the 6 languages addition of a sentence. Now all ok? Peace? I give you my hand. Greetz --Jean11 (talk) 18:16, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Support I would have preferred, as Jebulon, the smile of another image. But the caption is excellent. Must prefer the caption done well, rather than a smile. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:06, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Je sais bien, c'est même moi qui en ai corrigé la version française, de la légende !!!
 Avant que j'intervienne, elle était "homme politique allemande"... Or y'a pas à dire, c'est une femme, et bien jolie !--Jebulon (talk) 16:28, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Scores:
1. Manuela Schwesig 2.jpg: +2
2. Manuela Schwesig.jpg: -1 (current VI within same scope) <--
=>
File:Manuela Schwesig 2.jpg: Promoted.
File:Manuela Schwesig.jpg: Declined and demoted to VI-former. <--
--Halavar (talk) 23:33, 24 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
|
