Comment Very nice photo of one of my favorite mosques. However, it is possible to capture the beautiful courtyard, fountains and the large minaret in the same image. In my opinion, it would be much more illustrative. On the other hand, no such image yet.--Ankara (talk) 14:41, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support The point of valued images is to point out the best we currently have. Obviously, if an image such Ankara suggests comes up, we should do an Most Valued Review, and (likely) replace this. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:54, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I strictly oppose to this statement (not to this nomination). The point of VI is notbest of a bad bunch. Criterion 3 requires that the subject is illustrated well. --Ikar.us (talk) 19:21, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You two are referring to two different criteria. Crit. 3 does require that the subject is illustrated well (which can be discussed here I guess), in an absolute manner, and crit. 1 says that the image must be the "most valuable" of its kind (in a relative manner), and for this one it is true that we only consider our existing collection. I think what Adam says is that we cannot say in a review that "it is descriptive enough, but a better picture could be taken so we don't promote it". But it can still be argued that the picture does not illustrate the subject well enough to be promoted. --Eusebius (talk) 20:02, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
