Commons:Valued image candidates/2017 Kościół św. Antoniego w Lasówce 3.jpg

2017 Kościół św. Antoniego w Lasówce 3.jpg

promoted

Image
Nominated by	Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2017-08-18 20:50 (UTC)
Scope	Nominated as the most valued image on Commons within the scope: Saint Anthony of Padua church in Lasówka, exposure from N
Used in	Global usage
Review (criteria)	Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 19 August 2017 (UTC) I prefer Commons:Valued_image_candidates/2017_Kościół_św._Antoniego_w_Lasówce_4.jpg  — Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 22:11, 19 August 2017 (UTC) Johannes, if you think another photo is better in scope, you should oppose, not be neutral. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:29, 20 August 2017 (UTC) Commons:Valued_image_candidates/2017_Kościół_św._Antoniego_w_Lasówce_4.jpg is most valuable in this scope. (see: According to Commons:Valued_image_criteria Point 2)Johannes Kalliauer  Comment @JoKalliauer: It's good to have read the rules but you have to read them all. The scopes are different. Find another argument. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:05, 21 August 2017 (UTC)  Support - This is correct, and I should have caught this before. Best in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:43, 21 August 2017 (UTC)  Comment @Archaeodontosaurus and Ikan Kekek: exposure from N is a too narrow scope in my opinion to make any sense  — Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 17:43, 21 August 2017 (UTC) Why? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:02, 21 August 2017 (UTC) @JoKalliauer: For butterflies it takes two images to describe them completely for the buildings it is usual to present them from several angles giving the orientation of the view. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:27, 22 August 2017 (UTC) @Ikan Kekek: It is unlikely that anyone would want to use that phrase as the basis of an image search. — Commons:Valued_image_scope#Not_too_narrow...  — Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 20:49, 23 August 2017 (UTC) I don't think that's the point, really. The point is, does this building merit having several (or at least more than one) views from different angles that come up when a VI of the building is searched for? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:58, 24 August 2017 (UTC) @Archaeodontosaurus: With this argument we would have to nominate every pic that shows any residential building (f.e. File:Wohnhaus_Walterstraße_31_(Langenlois)_03.jpg), if the photo fulfills the quality-criteria (sharpness, lighting).  — Johannes Kalliauer - Talk | Contributions 20:49, 23 August 2017 (UTC) @JoKalliauer: The example is very well chosen. This building does not look remarkable but it is (the Austrian services have classified it in their database) in this case this image is eligible in VI. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:58, 24 August 2017 (UTC) Result: 2 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 25 August 2017 (UTC)