Commons:Valued image candidates/Paris Notre-Dame Southeast View 01.JPG

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

Paris Notre-Dame Southeast View 01.JPG

undecided
Image
Nominated by Uoaei1 (talk) on 2015-12-01 12:31 (UTC)
Scope Nominated as the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Notre-Dame de Paris from the Pont de l'Archevêché
Used in

Global usage

de:Notre-Dame de Paris
Review
(criteria)
  •  Comment I would like to raise three points:
  • The scope "... from the Pont de l'Archevêché" is too narrow - what about images taken a few metres away from the Quai de la Tournelle. I think that an appropriate scope would be "... from the South/South East".
  • I have found some other images that are competitors to this image:
I suggest therefore that these three images go into a MVR run-off. Does anybopdy want me to organise such an MVR (which will include getting the other two images into a VI-ready state (Geolocation, descriptions etc). Please note that we currently have no VIs of Notre Dame from the South or the South-East
Martinvl (talk) 21:03, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Thanks for your efforts, I would welcome such a competition. I have chosen the scope as it is directly related to a category, but I would support to change it to "from southeast". I would not include views from south, such as the 2nd image you found, and would handle them separately. --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:42, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to MVR Martinvl (talk) 10:09, 3 December 2015 (UTC) Scores:[reply]

1. Notre Dame dalla Senna crop.jpg: 0
2. Notre-Dame Seine Pont.jpg: 0
3. Paris Notre-Dame Southeast View 01.JPG: 0 <--
4. Notre-Dame de Paris, South view 20140131 1.jpg: 0
5. Paris Notre-Dame South View 01.JPG: 0
=>
File:Notre Dame dalla Senna crop.jpg: Undecided.
File:Notre-Dame Seine Pont.jpg: Undecided.
File:Paris Notre-Dame Southeast View 01.JPG: Undecided. <--
File:Notre-Dame de Paris, South view 20140131 1.jpg: Undecided.
File:Paris Notre-Dame South View 01.JPG: Undecided.
--DeFacto (talk). 22:22, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]