Commons:Valued image candidates/Mourning in Shanghai (1).jpg/Archive of previous reviews

•  Comment - WQL, thanks for the nomination, but you can't support your own nomination on Valued image candidates, only on Featured picture candidates. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:59, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
•  Comment - Also, your scope is malformed. Is there a Commons category you can link to? We can't consider whether this photo is best in its scope if we have no way of knowing where to find other photos in its scope. Look at any other nomination on this page in edit mode to see how scopes are created on VIC. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:02, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  • @Ikan Kekek: Sorry I had mistaken the idea on COM:VISC, and I corrected it just now. Best regards, WQL (talk) 06:38, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

• The format still isn't quite right. Look a little more at the way it's done in other nominations. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:07, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

•  Comment - It's a useful image, and you now have the right format for a VI scope. It doesn't actually show the attack, though, so I'm thinking maybe the scope should be "mourning for victims of 2018 Shanghai knife attack". User:Archaeodontosaurus, what do you think about the scope? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:22, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Comment This is an unusual situation, but the image seems very important to me. It is very emblematic of the resent of the population, the proposal of Ikan Kekek is right, without it being necessary to change the name of the category.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:46, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

•  Comment - Right. I think it's an important image, too. My suggestion is for the scope to look like this: [[:Category:2018 Shanghai knife attack|Mourning for victims of 2018 Shanghai knife attack]] (without the nowiki). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:12, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

•  Question WQL, are you following discussion here? I would hate for this photo's time to elapse without a decision. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:05, 29 May 2019 (UTC)

• @Ikan Kekek: No, he hasn't been on since May 24--BoothSift 02:48, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

• I'm wondering if it would be OK for one of us to change the scope and approve the nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:50, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Result: 0 support, 0 oppose =>
undecided. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:06, 31 May 2019 (UTC)