Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/MAV I

MAV I, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Mar 2019 at 04:51:37 (UTC)

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

•  Info I'm cleaning up several images made by the photographers of Museum of Veterinary Anatomy FMVZ USP, we already have some similar featured photos from the same GLAM project as:
• File:Avestruz alta.jpg
• File:Skull of crocodile (Crocodylidae).jpg
• File:Suíno alta.jpg
• ...

I selected the ones that do not have major faults, and as there are around 60 very good images, with a very high educational value, I decided to spare the set in more than one to be analysed, edited by Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton - uploaded by Joalpe and Sturm - nominated by Rodrigo.Argenton -- Thank you for your time.-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 04:51, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

•  Support -- -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 04:51, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --Paris 16 (talk) 05:57, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:39, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Support --XRay ^talk 07:14, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose At least not this one. Blown highlights, chromatic aberrations, the quality is not at FP level. But there are too many ones to inspect all of them in detail.  Question Is it a set ? I don't imagine Llez (or any other good photographer) nominating all their stock of potential photos in a single nomination like that. That's too much work for the reviewer(s) in my opinion. Regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:56, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose as a set, as per Basile above. These should be nominated individually. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:54, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Basile -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:01, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per above, I don't see that any of the 4 options for a set (described here) are met in this case. --Poco² 12:03, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
•  Oppose I can't see this as a set per Commons FPC definitions, it's more of a collection. --Cart (talk) 13:17, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

You need to decide...

Here the problem was that the images are "similar", the first answer was: "feel free to make a group nomination next time for similar photos", so I did.

@Basile Morin, George Chernilevsky, and W.carter: because of this discussion I decided to group all of they together, and yes, is an effort to see all, I can choose a smaller amount to be analysed, but first you need to choose, it's to nominate one by one, or is to nominate in a set?

This image: File:Superfície não orientável - Bordo trifólio.jpg is not featured because it's too similar to this File:Superfície - bordo trifólio.jpg, that do not have any characteristics in common

Thank you. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 16:44, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

Please do not display any other files on the nomination since the FPC Bot will read them as "Alternatives" and this will mess up the nom, we can all open the files to have a look at them. I have fixed the coding for you. --Cart (talk) 17:24, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

•  Comment What goes into a set is probably a bit subjective. It varies and depends on your view of the items. I can understand that the mathematical forms look totally different to a mathematician, while they look very similar to me. These skeletons of animals of different species form a very large and diverse group. In the past I've only seen such photos nominated separately. Groups of skeletons of animals related to each other might be an alternative. (Birds, bovines, reptiles, carnivores, etc) In a set, I want to be able to see a connection between the photos as well as some things that can be valuable to compare. --Cart (talk) 17:49, 17 March 2019 (UTC)

•  Oppose Aside from faults with certain specific images, this does not constitute a set under my understanding of the criteria. A set can either show different aspects of the same subject or it can show different subjects; in the latter case, it must be an exhaustive list of all instances of a category, not a sampling. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:28, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

 I withdraw my nomination -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 04:58, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 17:40, 18 March 2019 (UTC)