Commons:Valued image candidates/Devi Jagadambi Temple, Khajuraho Group of Monuments, World Heritage Site (124)

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

Devi Jagadambi Temple, Khajuraho Group of Monuments, World Heritage Site (124)

promoted to Valued image set: Sculptures of Devi Jagadambi Temple, Khajuraho
Images
Description

Sculptures of Devi Jagadambi Temple, Khajuraho Group of Monuments, World Heritage Site (124).

Nominated by Rajenver (talk) on 2012-03-25 13:00 (UTC)
Scope Nominated as the most valued set of images on Wikimedia Commons within the scope:
Sculptures of Devi Jagadambi Temple, Khajuraho Group of Monuments
Review
(criteria)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very interesting topic. The scope should be: Devi Jagadambi Temple, Khajuraho. The number of photos should be reduced. Please, put the camera location on all image files. --MrPanyGoff 15:34, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Actually, I would prefer the set scope to be: „Sculptures of Devi Jagadambi Temple, Khajuraho” because we have excellent photo to be nominated for single image in VI project in the scope: „Devi Jagadambi Temple, Khajuraho”.--MrPanyGoff 15:41, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The scope is better now but really no need of this: „World Heritage Site (124)”. I think it should be removed here and from other nominations also. Don't change the title of the nomination page, we can only fix the scope name. I put the geotag of the Devi Jagadambi Temple on the first image, you can copy it on the other photos. I also put a geotag of the Lakshman Temple on the first image of its nomination.--MrPanyGoff 14:21, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Since we cannot show all the sculptures in a single set, I think we only should present the idea, the style, the philosophy... So we need no more than ten images. For now I suggest removing these photos: here, here, here and here.--MrPanyGoff 14:35, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Now the scope is well formulated. The reduced number of the photos is also good though I would like more of them to be removed. --MrPanyGoff 17:37, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- MrPanyGoff 18:46, 30 March 2012 (UTC)