Commons:Valued image candidates/Kaymakchalan-Serbian-Chapel.JPG

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

Sv. Petar na Kajmakčalan.jpg

undecided
Image
Nominated by Mile (talk) on 2011-01-12 12:51 (UTC)
Scope Nominated as the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
St. Elijah Paraklesis (Kajmakčalan)
Used in Global usage
Reason Depicting great atmosphere (ambient) of Kajmakčalan peak (2521 m), peak covered with bones, trenches and bullets where biggest figthing in Macedonian front in 1st WW occured. -- Mile (talk)
Review
(criteria)
  •  Comment I'm not sure if this fulfills the rules for scopes as written in Commons:Valued_image_scope#Buildings --Berthold Werner (talk) 07:18, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question For which paragraph you arent sure ?--Mile (talk) 11:07, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment 3. Not any church is worth a Valued Image scope. Cathedral scopes are OK, but for other churches there should be a good reason, like being a pilgrimage place, being really famous, being architecturally exceptional... --Berthold Werner (talk) 11:46, 13 January 2011 (UTC) ** Info Great, i knew what will be problem. OK, let me beggin...OK this is not church, its chappel comemorating fallen soliders, some 10.000 Serbs and French. In all with Bolgarians and Germans, number is around 20.000. This mountain was bloodbath in 1WW, and sacrifice made here was huge importance for ending 1WW sooner, with its 2521 meters was for sure among highest battlegrounds in war too. And YES, this is site of pilgrimage, as stated in Wikipedia EN "Today there is a small church on the peak of Prophet Ilia where the skulls of dead Serbian soldiers are stored, and it is regarded as a cultural site and a tourist attraction." Otherwise, picture is on 12 sites in 7 Wikipedias, not by me. Because of its history i prefer ambience of picture. Personal attack removed. What or whose criteria is relevant or universal ? God's probably. Take that in aspect, regards. --Mile (talk) 13:54, 13 January 2011 (UTC))[reply]
Result: 0 support, 0 oppose =>
undecided. George Chernilevsky talk 18:02, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
[reply]