User talk:Slaunger/Archives/2021/9

Valued Images

I also posted this message on MichaelMaggs' talk page.

I'm writing because of your early involvement with the Valued Images forum. Archaeodontosaurus appears to be the moderator. If not, he is the dominate figure.

I began participating in this forum 6 months ago. I read the rules and thought I understood the intent. Over time I've had some disagreements over intent with Archaeodontosaurus. But, there seems to be no place to go to get the intent of Valued Images judged, so he becomes the final arbiter. This would be okay if it were his group but I think it has broader significance. This first exchange I'm listing is our latest disagreement and it made me wonder again about the intent.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Valued_image_candidates/Cactus_flower_--_Epiphyllum_hookeri.jpg

These following two are recent and also raise the question of intent, but in different contexts.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Valued_image_candidates/Daisy_Fleabane_--_Erigeron_philadelphicus_2.jpg

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Valued_image_candidates/Battelstein%27s_--_Houston.jpg

I'm quite ambivalent about this last one. This building is on the U.S. National Register of Historic places. I'm an old man now but when a boy this was the most elegant and widely known department store in Houston, Texas. It's certainly a low quality image however it's an accurate representation of the building. So, is the goal to approve good quality images or the best representations of the subject?

I suggest a committee be formed to decide whether a particular image is within the purpose/goal/objective/intent of the Valued Image forum.

The committee would not decide whether an image itself is to be accepted as best, but in the case of a disagreement, whether it falls within the purpose/intent of the forum.

Thank you for your time. -- Jim Evans ([[User talk:Jim Evans|

Valued Image Promoted

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
MS Fram.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Info MS Fram on its maiden voyage to Greenland in the summer of 2007 (with one of my favorite icebergs in the background to set the arctic scene for which this ship is built). -- Slaunger (talk) 21:12, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

•  Support OK for me --Eusebius (talk) 12:20, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support--oskila (talk) 16:18, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Result: 2 support
=> Promoted. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:22, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

•  Oppose in favor of the other photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:59, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
•  Support The boat is very well described --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:38, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
MS Fram.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Info MS Fram on its maiden voyage to Greenland in the summer of 2007 (with one of my favorite icebergs in the background to set the arctic scene for which this ship is built). -- Slaunger (talk) 21:12, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

•  Support OK for me --Eusebius (talk) 12:20, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
•  Support--oskila (talk) 16:18, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Result: 2 support
=> Promoted. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:22, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

•  Oppose in favor of the other photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:59, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
•  Support The boat is very well described --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:38, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 18 September 2021 (UTC)