# Commons:Closed most valued reviews/2008/11

### Doppler effect

 View promotion Nominated by: Pbroks13 (talk) on 2008-10-22 05:56 (UTC) Scope: Doppler effect Used in: en:Doppler effect Support Although it is not the best illustration for the Doppler theory, it is very good for showing the interference, the result of the Doppler effect. This proves how difficult category and scope selection can be. --Foroa (talk) 06:48, 22 October 2008 (UTC) One source, no interference. Only crests and troughs of the same single wave. --Eusebius (talk) 10:55, 22 October 2008 (UTC) Wrong, Doppler= relative speeds (2) - but I will not discuss that here. (speed on the left side = medium speed + object speed, on the right side = medium speed - object speed) --Foroa (talk) 12:21, 22 October 2008 (UTC) * Oppose Comment Beautiful image and nice work, but I think this one is more self-explanatory. Setting up a MVR. --Eusebius (talk) 09:59, 22 October 2008 (UTC)  Done MVR available here. --Eusebius (talk) 10:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC)  Oppose None of them is good enough to honour the saying: "a picture is worth 1000 thousand word". In bothncases, we must know what Doppler effect is to understand the picture. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:28, 22 October 2008 (UTC)  Comment the description on the image page is part of the value of a VI candidate. --Eusebius (talk) 19:54, 22 October 2008 (UTC)  Comment It shows that with a moving object, the frequency of whatever the waves (sound, light, ect) are higher in front of the object and lower behind the object. Is the problem that it doesn't show clearly enough that it is a moving object? Pbroks13 (talk) 07:47, 24 October 2008 (UTC)  Support This one seems better. --Mr. Mario (talk) 00:38, 24 October 2008 (UTC) ```Scores: 1. Doppler effect.svg: +1 <-- 2. Doppler effect diagrammatic.svg: 0 => Image:Doppler effect.svg: Promoted. <-- Image:Doppler effect diagrammatic.svg: Declined. --Eusebius (talk) 16:33, 31 October 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
 View opposition Nominated by: Eusebius (talk) on 2008-10-22 10:00 (UTC) Scope: Doppler effect Oppose None of them is good enough to honour the saying: "a picture is worth 1000 thousand word". In bothncases, we must know what Doppler effect is to understand the picture. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:28, 22 October 2008 (UTC)  Comment the description on the image page is part of the value of a VI candidate. --Eusebius (talk) 19:53, 22 October 2008 (UTC)  Comment - Maybe it isn't easy but I'm convinced it is possible to make a less abstract depiction. Like the classic one with a train moving and whistling, and two observers (one in each side) listening to two different frequencies. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:04, 22 October 2008 (UTC)  Comment - here is a very crude sketch just to explain my idea. Should the "waves" leaving the whistle be symmetrical or not? Well, it depends on the reference frame we consider. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:26, 22 October 2008 (UTC)  Support This drawing is better to explain the Doppler effect on a single axis (the other image is in two). --Foroa (talk) 08:54, 29 October 2008 (UTC) ```Scores: 1. Doppler effect.svg: +1 2. Doppler effect diagrammatic.svg: 0 <-- => Image:Doppler effect.svg: Promoted. Image:Doppler effect diagrammatic.svg: Declined. <-- --Eusebius (talk) 16:33, 31 October 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)

### École Militaire

 View opposition Nominated by: Albertus teolog (talk) on 2008-10-17 12:24 (UTC) Scope: École Militaire Used in: en:École Militaire Scores: ```1. Paryż szkoła wojskowa.JPG: 0 <-- 2. Paryż szkoła wojskowa2.JPG: +1 => Image:Paryż szkoła wojskowa.JPG: Declined. <-- Image:Paryż szkoła wojskowa2.JPG: Promoted. --Eusebius (talk) 10:58, 2 November 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
 View promotion Nominated by: Albertus teolog (talk) on 2008-10-17 12:28 (UTC) Scope: École Militaire Used in: fr:École militaire Support - this one --Pudelek (talk) 10:05, 31 October 2008 (UTC) ```Scores: 1. Paryż szkoła wojskowa.JPG: 0 2. Paryż szkoła wojskowa2.JPG: +1 <-- => Image:Paryż szkoła wojskowa.JPG: Declined. Image:Paryż szkoła wojskowa2.JPG: Promoted. <-- --Eusebius (talk) 10:58, 2 November 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)

### Cathédrale Saint-Pierre et Saint-Paul de Nantes (interior)

 View promotion Nominated by: Eusebius (talk) on 2008-10-29 08:39 (UTC) Scope: Cathédrale Saint-Pierre et Saint-Paul de Nantes (interior) Support Better light and perspective corrected. --Berthold Werner (talk) 10:11, 29 October 2008 (UTC)  Comment But there are people unnecessarily. Albertus teolog (talk) 20:44, 29 October 2008 (UTC)  Comment But they are not distracting --Berthold Werner (talk) 10:21, 31 October 2008 (UTC)  Support --Lestat (talk) 21:12, 1 November 2008 (UTC) Scores: ```1. Cathédrale de Nantes - nef.jpg: +2 <-- 2. Cathédrale Nantes nef.JPG: -1 => Image:Cathédrale de Nantes - nef.jpg: Promoted. <-- Image:Cathédrale Nantes nef.JPG: Declined. --Eusebius (talk) 10:33, 5 November 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
 View opposition Nominated by: Eusebius (talk) on 2008-10-29 08:40 (UTC) Scope: Cathédrale Saint-Pierre et Saint-Paul de Nantes (interior) Oppose first one is better. --Lestat (talk) 21:13, 1 November 2008 (UTC) Scores: ```1. Cathédrale de Nantes - nef.jpg: +2 2. Cathédrale Nantes nef.JPG: -1 <-- => Image:Cathédrale de Nantes - nef.jpg: Promoted. Image:Cathédrale Nantes nef.JPG: Declined. <-- --Eusebius (talk) 10:33, 5 November 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)

### Théâtre Graslin, Nantes

 View opposition Nominated by: Eusebius (talk) on 2008-10-29 10:16 (UTC) Scope: Théâtre Graslin, Nantes Scores: ```1. Theatre-gralin.jpg: 0 <-- 2. Théâtre Graslin.jpg: +1 => Image:Theatre-gralin.jpg: Declined. <-- Image:Théâtre Graslin.jpg: Promoted. --Eusebius (talk) 10:35, 5 November 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
 View opposition Nominated by: MrPanyGoff (talk) on 2012-07-10 06:42 (UTC) Scope: Théâtre Graslin, Nantes (exterior) Previous reviews  Comment Again doubled VI. I open a MVR for seven days from now on (according to the rules).--MrPanyGoff 06:42, 10 July 2012 (UTC)  Support I tend to prefer this one, because I see a part of the roof, and then it gives me more informations about the building. The other one has a better technical quality but shows only the façade.--Jebulon (talk) 14:50, 10 July 2012 (UTC)  Comment I think we need more votes in this MVR. --MrPanyGoff 10:41, 24 July 2012 (UTC) ```Scores: 1. Théâtre Graslin (retouch).jpg: +1 (current VI within same scope) <-- 2. Théâtre Graslin - Place Graslin, Nantes.jpg: +3 => File:Théâtre Graslin (retouch).jpg: Declined and demoted to VI-former. <-- File:Théâtre Graslin - Place Graslin, Nantes.jpg: Promoted. --MrPanyGoff 16:35, 30 July 2012 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)

### Cathédrale Notre-Dame d'Amiens (interior)

 View opposition Nominated by: Eusebius (talk) on 2008-10-29 14:43 (UTC) Scope: Cathédrale Notre-Dame d'Amiens (interior) Scores: ```1. Amiens cathédrale21.JPG: 0 <-- 2. Cathedrale d'Amiens - nef depuis le triforium.jpg: 0 3. Nef et choeur.jpg: +1 => Image:Amiens cathédrale21.JPG: Declined. <-- Image:Cathedrale d'Amiens - nef depuis le triforium.jpg: Declined. Image:Nef et choeur.jpg: Promoted. --Eusebius (talk) 12:05, 6 November 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
 View opposition Nominated by: Eusebius (talk) on 2008-10-29 14:43 (UTC) Scope: Cathédrale Notre-Dame d'Amiens (interior) Info This one is taken from the triforium of the choir, not from the entry. --Eusebius (talk) 14:43, 29 October 2008 (UTC) ```Scores: 1. Amiens cathédrale21.JPG: 0 2. Cathedrale d'Amiens - nef depuis le triforium.jpg: 0 <-- 3. Nef et choeur.jpg: +1 => Image:Amiens cathédrale21.JPG: Declined. Image:Cathedrale d'Amiens - nef depuis le triforium.jpg: Declined. <-- Image:Nef et choeur.jpg: Promoted. --Eusebius (talk) 12:05, 6 November 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
 View promotion Nominated by: Eusebius (talk) on 2008-10-29 14:43 (UTC) Scope: Cathédrale Notre-Dame d'Amiens (interior) Support The quality is not good but a natural perspective. The majesty of the cathedral is visible from this point exactly. Albertus teolog (talk) 20:52, 29 October 2008 (UTC) ```Scores: 1. Amiens cathédrale21.JPG: 0 2. Cathedrale d'Amiens - nef depuis le triforium.jpg: 0 3. Nef et choeur.jpg: +1 <-- => Image:Amiens cathédrale21.JPG: Declined Image:Cathedrale d'Amiens - nef depuis le triforium.jpg: Declined. Image:Nef et choeur.jpg: Promoted.. <-- --Eusebius (talk) 12:06, 6 November 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)

### Malva sylvestris (Common mallow)

 View Nominated by: Alvesgaspar (talk) on 2008-10-21 23:33 (UTC) Scope: Malva sylvestris (Common mallow) Used in: Malva sylvestris Neutral Very nice picture. Best technical quality in the scope (and other criteria ok), but the flower itself does not look very good (compared to this one for instance]]. --Eusebius (talk) 20:34, 22 October 2008 (UTC)  Comment - You can't be serious about that picture (wrong name?). Also, no buds or leaves ar shown - Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:46, 22 October 2008 (UTC) I'm not saying that this picture is in competition with yours. I'm just saying that it appears to me that mallow flowers have a pretty specific, regular shape, and that the flower in your picture doesn't show this shape very well. --Eusebius (talk) 06:17, 23 October 2008 (UTC)  Oppose I think this is the most valued photograph we have of the species, but I do not think it is the best image we have for illustrating the species. For this purpose I find this old scheme is better. I will therefore open an MVR on it. --Slaunger (talk) 00:12, 30 October 2008 (UTC)  Support I prefer this over this. --Mr. Mario (talk) 03:46, 6 November 2008 (UTC)  Question More votes? Or both pictures remain undecided? --Eusebius (talk) 08:46, 9 November 2008 (UTC) ```Scores: 1. Mallow January 2008-1.jpg: 0 <-- 2. Koeh-222.jpg: 0 => Image:Mallow January 2008-1.jpg: Undecided. <-- Image:Koeh-222.jpg: Undecided. -- Mr. Mario (talk) 00:22, 14 November 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
Commons:Valued image candidates/Malva sylvestris - Köhler–s Medizinal-Pflanzen-222.jpg

### Tikal

 View Nominated by: Eusebius (talk) on 2008-10-29 14:57 (UTC) Scope: Tikal Info I'll be able to geotag it later. --Eusebius (talk) 15:05, 29 October 2008 (UTC)  Done --Eusebius (talk) 09:16, 30 October 2008 (UTC) ```Scores: 1. Belize-tikal.jpg: 0 <-- 2. Tikal Temple1 2006 08 11.JPG: +1 3. Tikal - vue panoramique du Temple IV.jpg: 0 4. Tikal9.jpg: +1 => Image:Belize-tikal.jpg: Undecided. <-- Image:Tikal Temple1 2006 08 11.JPG: Undecided. Image:Tikal - vue panoramique du Temple IV.jpg: Undecided. Image:Tikal9.jpg: Undecided. --Eusebius (talk) 14:49, 17 November 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
 View Nominated by: Eusebius (talk) on 2008-10-29 14:57 (UTC) Scope: Tikal Info I'll be able to geotag it later. --Eusebius (talk) 15:05, 29 October 2008 (UTC)  Done --Eusebius (talk) 11:30, 30 October 2008 (UTC)  Support --Pudelek (talk) 10:07, 31 October 2008 (UTC)  Question More votes? Or both pictures remain undecided? --Eusebius (talk) 08:47, 9 November 2008 (UTC) ```Scores: 1. Belize-tikal.jpg: 0 2. Tikal Temple1 2006 08 11.JPG: +1 <-- 3. Tikal - vue panoramique du Temple IV.jpg: 0 4. Tikal9.jpg: +1 => Image:Belize-tikal.jpg: Undecided. Image:Tikal Temple1 2006 08 11.JPG: Undecided. <-- Image:Tikal - vue panoramique du Temple IV.jpg: Undecided. Image:Tikal9.jpg: Undecided. --Eusebius (talk) 14:49, 17 November 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
 [[File:|160px]] View Nominated by: Eusebius (talk) on 2008-10-29 14:57 (UTC) Scope: Tikal Scores: ```1. Belize-tikal.jpg: 0 2. Tikal Temple1 2006 08 11.JPG: +1 3. Valued image candidates/Tikal - vue panoramique du Temple IV.jpg: 0 <-- 4. Tikal9.jpg: +1 => Image:Belize-tikal.jpg: Undecided. Image:Tikal Temple1 2006 08 11.JPG: Undecided. Image:Tikal - vue panoramique du Temple IV.jpg: Undecided. <-- Image:Tikal9.jpg: Undecided. --Eusebius (talk) 14:49, 17 November 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
 View Nominated by: Eusebius (talk) on 2008-10-29 14:57 (UTC) Scope: Tikal Info I'll be able to geotag it later. --Eusebius (talk) 15:05, 29 October 2008 (UTC)  Done --Eusebius (talk) 09:08, 30 October 2008 (UTC)  SupportI prefer this one. --Berthold Werner (talk) 10:25, 31 October 2008 (UTC) It show the acropolis of the city, but none of the larger temples. I guess the right thing for this scope would be a VIS, with every single temple and plaza of the site (but we don't have that). --Eusebius (talk) 12:33, 31 October 2008 (UTC)  Question More votes? Or both pictures remain undecided? --Eusebius (talk) 08:47, 9 November 2008 (UTC) ```Scores: 1. Belize-tikal.jpg: 0 2. Tikal Temple1 2006 08 11.JPG: +1 3. Tikal - vue panoramique du Temple IV.jpg: 0 4. Tikal9.jpg: +1 <-- => Image:Belize-tikal.jpg: Undecided. Image:Tikal Temple1 2006 08 11.JPG: Undecided. Image:Tikal - vue panoramique du Temple IV.jpg: Undecided. Image:Tikal9.jpg: Undecided. <-- --Eusebius (talk) 14:50, 17 November 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)

### Leontopodium alpinum (Edelweiss)

 View opposition Nominated by: Eusebius (talk) on 2008-11-08 12:23 (UTC) Scope: Leontopodium alpinum (Edelweiss) Scores: ```1. 5668 - Schynige Platte - Leontopodium alpinum.JPG: 0 <-- 2. CH Leontopodium alpinum 2.jpg: +2 => Image:5668 - Schynige Platte - Leontopodium alpinum.JPG: Declined. <-- Image:CH Leontopodium alpinum 2.jpg: Promoted. --Eusebius (talk) 14:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
 View promotion Nominated by: Eusebius (talk) on 2008-11-08 12:23 (UTC) Scope: Leontopodium alpinum (Edelweiss) Info Not geotagged, but if this appears to be the best candidate we could ask Dschwen (creator) to geotag it. --Eusebius (talk) 12:29, 8 November 2008 (UTC)  Info It is geotagged now. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:33, 9 November 2008 (UTC) Thanks! --Eusebius (talk) 07:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC)  Support - I prefer this one because the whole plant is shown -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:35, 10 November 2008 (UTC)  Support Indeed, scope would have to be inflorescence or flower otherwise. Lycaon (talk) 15:20, 13 November 2008 (UTC) ```Scores: 1. 5668 - Schynige Platte - Leontopodium alpinum.JPG: 0 2. CH Leontopodium alpinum 2.jpg: +2 <-- => Image:5668 - Schynige Platte - Leontopodium alpinum.JPG: Declined. Image:CH Leontopodium alpinum 2.jpg: Promoted. <-- --Eusebius (talk) 14:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)

### Anacridium aegyptium (Egyptian grasshopper)

 View opposition Nominated by: Alvesgaspar (talk) on 2008-11-10 23:47 (UTC) Scope: Anacridium aegyptium (Egyptian grasshopper) Comment - I think this is the best of the whole bunch in terms of encyclopaedic value -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:47, 10 November 2008 (UTC)  Comment I'm not convinced that this is the best of the bunch. At VI review resolution, this one is better, IMO, as the colours seem more life-like because no flash was used. It also shows the spiracles on the tergites a bit better. Lycaon (talk) 11:24, 11 November 2008 (UTC)  Question I prefer the other one as well. Could you geotag it, so that we can nominate it? --Eusebius (talk) 10:56, 17 November 2008 (UTC)  Done, though I still prefer this one... Alvesgaspar (talk) 14:00, 17 November 2008 (UTC) ```1. Grasshopper November 2008-3.jpg: 0 <-- 2. Acrididae grasshopper-2.jpg: +1 => Image:Grasshopper November 2008-3.jpg: Declined. <-- Image:Acrididae grasshopper-2.jpg: Promoted. --Eusebius (talk) 07:10, 27 November 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
 View promotion Nominated by: Eusebius (talk) on 2008-11-17 14:42 (UTC) Scope: Anacridium aegyptium (Egyptian grasshopper) Support Fulfills criteria. I prefer the natural light. Lycaon (talk) 07:21, 21 November 2008 (UTC) ```1. Grasshopper November 2008-3.jpg: 0 2. Acrididae grasshopper-2.jpg: +1 <-- => Image:Grasshopper November 2008-3.jpg: Declined. Image:Acrididae grasshopper-2.jpg: Promoted. <-- --Eusebius (talk) 07:10, 27 November 2008 (UTC) ``` Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)