Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Palace of Westminster from the dome on Methodist Central Hall - 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Palace of Westminster from the dome on Methodist Central Hall - 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle.jpg, featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Mar 2022 at 20:40:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Toys
Info Something a bit different. You may remember this featured picture from 2014. I created an 8x6 crop and purchased a 1000 piece jigsaw from puzzleYOU. Here's the completed puzzle. If you want to pixel-peep the puzzle and the original, then use this version which has similar resolution to the photo of the puzzle and is what was actually uploaded to puzzleYOU. The uploaded image gets a little bit cropped by the puzzle-making process. All by me. -- Colin (talk) 20:40, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
Support High resolution image of a completed jigsaw puzzle where the source image is freely licenced and available on Commons. -- Colin (talk) 20:40, 7 March 2022 (UTC)- Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:42, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Dumb question, and just one I want to raise now: This kind of puzzle cut is so standardised in basic form that it couldn't be considered a copyrighted artwork, right? Especially if it's generated randomly, I can only presume that's true, but it seems worth asking. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:46, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Adam, ha ha, only on Commons would such a question be asked. I had a look for deletion discussions and only found those concerning jigsaws that had copyright artwork. My guess is that a puzzle using this very regular (six types) of a squarish piece with random choice of tabs and blanks is functional. Each piece varies slightly not for aesthetic reason, but so that it is hard to put the wrong piece into place and reassuring when the right piece is found. There are some jigsaws (mostly older style) with artistic and representative shapes, but this grid here seems more like randomly cut laminate flooring or a dry stone dyke (assembly of random pieces whose position is determined by fit, not appearance). I suspect this is a question that is inadvisable to pursue on a Commons noticeboard as you'll just get "someone on the internet" speculating from a position of ignorance and zero case law, and might result in some admin deleting all the jigsaw puzzles from Commons. -- Colin (talk) 14:18, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Fair point. Support Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:39, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Fair point.
- Adam, ha ha, only on Commons would such a question be asked. I had a look for deletion discussions and only found those concerning jigsaws that had copyright artwork. My guess is that a puzzle using this very regular (six types) of a squarish piece with random choice of tabs and blanks is functional. Each piece varies slightly not for aesthetic reason, but so that it is hard to put the wrong piece into place and reassuring when the right piece is found. There are some jigsaws (mostly older style) with artistic and representative shapes, but this grid here seems more like randomly cut laminate flooring or a dry stone dyke (assembly of random pieces whose position is determined by fit, not appearance). I suspect this is a question that is inadvisable to pursue on a Commons noticeboard as you'll just get "someone on the internet" speculating from a position of ignorance and zero case law, and might result in some admin deleting all the jigsaw puzzles from Commons. -- Colin (talk) 14:18, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support --GRDN711 (talk) 23:33, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Nice to see something a bit different. Cmao20 (talk) 01:03, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 04:10, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support refreshingly different --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:22, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support--Lmbuga (talk) 13:36, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 15:16, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support --Startus (talk) 16:17, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support Ha ha! Seems a little vain but ... you did complete the puzzle, which probably resulted in some confounding moments ("I took this picture ... I should be able to figure out where this &%$&!# piece goes!").
Actually though, I've thought there's a little fundraising potential for the Foundation in using our FPs this way. Hold on to this thought ... Daniel Case (talk) 19:34, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
- Feel free to use my restorations, as long as the Media Viewer sense of crediting people doesn't get used there too. It's been 8 years since the coding team were made aware that Media Viewer strips credit for any creator after the first, and it still hasn't been fixed - but at least it could theoretically be fixed, unlike a printed box. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:42, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:30, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:17, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
- Support as per Cmao20 and M. Falbisoner. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:25, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 03:43, 13 March 2022 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Toys
