I think there is a slight misunderstanding about the purpose of MVR. We must choose, for the same scope, the best image, within the framework of an image that has already been labeled. Here it is. But you have proposed a 3rd image that has no link with the scope. That's what surprised me. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:36, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't understand, because the file is in the linked category, Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Altscheid, and the words "Altscheid Wegekreuz" are in its filename. What do you mean by it having no link with the scope? Is it the same wayside cross or not? I guess not, but in that case, since it's also a wayside cross and apparently in Altscheid, there is either a problem with the clarity of the scope or File:Altscheid Wegekreuz 1694.jpg is in the wrong category. I suppose there are actually at least two wayside crosses in Altscheid? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:45, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If you read the descriptions carefully and follow the links, you may find out that there are four wayside crosses in Altscheid. All of them are officially listed as historical monuments and thus each of them deserves a scope, although they are in the same category. --Palauenc05 (talk) 19:16, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Question - Do we know the years of construction of all 4 wayside crosses in Altscheid? If so, that should be the distinguishing factor in the scope. But I think the point should be clarified. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:56, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
What do you think, does the bracket (1801) in the above scope mean? As I said before, read the links and you can answer your question yourself about the other three. --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:25, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
