Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ghostscript Tiger.svg

File:Ghostscript Tiger.svg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2018 at 18:19:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Ghostscript Tiger.svg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ghostscript Tiger.svg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Computer-generated
•  Info created by Ghostscript authors - uploaded by Ysangkok - nominated by Habitator terrae -- Habitator terrae 🌍 18:19, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
•  Support -- Habitator terrae 🌍 18:19, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
•  Comment COM:SCOPE? Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Nice, but this is rather a user page image. Have a look to such promoted images (computer-generated) -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:07, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

This is in scope, because it is a very important example picture of PostScript, see de:PostScript#Verbreitung --Habitator terrae 🌍 11:20, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

•  Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:35, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
•  Oppose Ordinary clip art, nothing special -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:02, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
•  Comment This file, in EPS file format, was one of the most interesting examples packed with many (all?) Ghostscript distributions in the 1990s. It was really impressive to see the PS code rendered as a tiger picture ;–). On my old Quadra 840AV this took quite some seconds. Good old times! ;–) … Today, of course, there is nothing special anymore about this graphics. IMHO it is of historical interest only — really nice for an article about Ghostscript or PostScript or the history of computer graphics. I do not know: Do we “feature” such images of almost purely historical value? If yes, this is a good candidate. --Aristeas (talk) 19:31, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

•  Comment - Historic photos can be featured, but if they aren't considered good enough for FP, they can be nominated at COM:VIC. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:31, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
•  Comment Well, at the moment all of this is not apparent to the reader – the file description page would need to provide a bit more in-depth information. Feels kind of weird to use SVG for a historic Postscript example, btw. --El Grafo (talk) 09:07, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:45, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
•  Oppose Common and easy to do --Photographer 19:30, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:06, 12 December 2018 (UTC)