Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".
Very interesting remains. I've read the article Anjar and I think it's very amazing to have a roman-like city (decumanus) made by an umeyyad khalif... Even I don't choose this picture as best in scope. Many thanks for making me discover such an old history, I'm fan ! --Jebulon (talk) 22:37, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's a very nice site indeed and I had a great time there (beautiful weather, no other tourists!). This picture might be the most aesthetic in the series I've uploaded/nominated (more convenient position wrt the sun), but I agree that it is perhaps not the best suited for VI. --Eusebius (talk) 06:11, 25 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".
Support I prefer this one. I don't like the colours of the first. The third one may give a better overview, but it looks somewhat "unstructured" --Berthold Werner (talk) 09:33, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think this one is the most complete of the three. I have a general view of the ruins, and I may see a part of the background (mountains with snow). So I understand what is shown. But I disagree with the scope. "ruins of Umayyad city of Anjar" could be better, because it seems to exist a modern city of Anjar. --Jebulon (talk) 15:03, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I share your opinion about the candidates (although on this one the palace can also be seen behind the columns), and what you say about the scope is true. I would tend to name the scope and the category simply "Umayyad city of Anjar"? --Eusebius (talk) 15:22, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".
Support This more global view may give a better idea of the importance and state of the site. Per Jebulon, the most valuable image in the new scope, to me. --Myrabella (talk) 13:47, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Info Not geocoded: Studio shot prepared as publicity for the 2008 IMF Spring Meeting. Exact location where the photograph was taken is not certain. See [1] for original context. Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:22, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It was easy enough to find a conference schedule and use geolocator. The conference was entirely at the IMF headquarters at Washington D.C., so the tag's accurate to within rounding error. Fixed! Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:03, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. I think both are very good. We should setup an MVR. (for the record, that one is a publicity shot; not at the meeting itself, so, while we can trust the IMF to get copyright status correct, there's no way to geocode. But it can be considered a studio shot.) Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:59, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks. OK to me now. This picture was taken six years ago, but it is quite relevant for a VI as Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala is now Managing Director of the World Bank (December 2007-present :-)—note the image background and the event. --Myrabella (talk) 15:28, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Info - One of the most emblematic glass skyscrapers in Chicago and in the world. I looked for other pictures of this building in Commons and found none. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:13, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazingly, no other image in Commons of this building which was voted "Favorite Building" by the readers of The Chicago Tribune in 1995, according to the en:WP article. I was only able to find the big house number! OK to me. --Myrabella (talk) 14:44, 8 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Info I've found an image in en:WP that could be a good competitor because it shows the details of the base of the building, which is architecturally intersting too. It needs to be uploaded + corections of tilt and perspective. No time just now, but give me a couple of days—I intend to set up a MVR. --Myrabella (talk) 08:12, 10 May 2010 (UTC).[reply]
Reason:
This vineyard of bourgogne is one of the most famous in the world. This picture shows the buildings, the nature of the ground and the situation of a great part of the vineyard in the landscape of Burgundy. The photograph is not so bad. It's the best in the scope, I think. -- Jebulon (talk)
Now I see that plants and ground are best visible on this image. So I'm Neutral and wait for the priorities of other reviewers. --Ikar.us (talk) 23:45, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Please, read carefully the reasons for nominating : on the other picture I don't see the buildings were the wine is made, I don't understand the geographical situation of the vineyard, I see a path but not the ground... And on this picture, I can see a great part of the enclosure, which is the wall in the background. Behind the wall, it's another vineyard, and not Clos-Vougeot (or Clos de Vougeot). Respectfully, I think that this MVR is not relevant...--Jebulon (talk) 22:14, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Is really wine made in the buildings? But not "the" vine. In w: we learn that the vineyard is split among 80 owners. --Ikar.us (talk) 22:03, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Question What is its subject? I don't see the page used on any Pedia entry so I could not distinguish what is trying to be shown. The house? The vines (since it is labelled as a vineyard)? Both? France in general? It is hard to determine "Must illustrate its subject well." without some clarification. By the way, there seem to be many pictures in the category with some of a higher quality. Ottava Rima (talk) 14:39, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support I took the liberty of amending the scope typo but let's wait for the nominator's confirmation. I was hesitating: in fact my favorite has long been File:Chateau du clos de Vougeot 2.JPG because there the building is less prominent and we can better see the undulating ground (and I prefer vineyards in autumn but it's a personal fancy). However the enclosure wall is more visible in the nominated image—it's an important feature—, and this one is of higher technical quality. --Myrabella (talk) 08:19, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree with the scope amendment. The difference between 'clos-de-vougeot', 'Clos Vougeot', 'clos-vougeot' and 'Clos-Vougeot' (or Clos-de-Vougeot') is very subtle. But for the vineyard, as I understand, the best spelling seems to needing a dash. Next summer, I'll go to visit this location another time, and I'll ask local people for you. I'll try to take other views too. By the way, thanks everybody for this interesting review. For Ikar.us: yes, the win is made here. 80 owners, for 50 Hektaren. ---Jebulon (talk) 22:22, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reason:
Clos means hedged terrain. This image shows the enclosing wall, the castle, vineyards and tourism. -- Ikar.us (talk)
more relevant than the other one for a MVR. But I have to have a look in high resolution for understanding that it is here a vineyard... I think that the cultivation of vineyard (essential subject here) is more visible (stakes...) on the first picture.--Jebulon (talk) 22:25, 9 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks to this review, I've learned at least some basics about French wine. According to my insights, Clos de Vougeot is one of the most louche high-rank appellations... --Ikar.us (talk) 14:04, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The appellation system is only based on the location and its natural ressources (soil and climate), not considering what the winemaker makes of it. This is anyway suspicious, especially if the appellation isn't a en:monopole (wine). And Clos vougeot has 80 owners.
The regional distribution, as in File:Vignobles cotes de nuits-fr.svg and neighbour regions, shows a stripe structure, with lowest "regional" ranks in the most eastern stripe, with lowest elevation, while "Grand Cru" locations are small spots in the western, upper parts of the slopes. The only exception is the big blob of Clos Vougeot, which stretches all over from highest to lowest parts, altogether designated "Grand Cru". It's likely that this is a result of historic conditions rather than of exceptional natural conditions.
Combining both facts, some people conclude that there are at least some participants who own only a small parcel in the lower part of Clos Vougeot, and who don't have excellent wine making abilities, and thus sell inferior wine with a "Grand Cru" appellation.
Reason:
Here we have good view of vines and buildings. -- Ikar.us (talk)
Bad name of the file, very bad quality... But the biggest problem is that the vineyard in foreground is NOT Clos Vougeot, which is only behind the enclosure you see. It's very confusing IMO ! --Jebulon (talk) 17:13, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I will nominate it in the MVR then. But I thought this one and the other nominated picture showed better that this city is now essentially reducted to a single ruined avenue (whose length has something to do with the fame of the site). --Eusebius (talk) 07:44, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support To me the most valuable image for the scope IMO: the colonnade is well depicted, furthermore with a piece a building beside the columns and personally, I like its composition and light. --Myrabella (talk) 08:14, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please note that the scope is about the Apamea site, not purely about the colonnade itself. To me this view illustrates the topic well, showing its main feature and a bit more. Would you have a better choice among the available images about this site? --Myrabella (talk) 12:49, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You emphasized the colonnade yourself here, and in the other candidate, where you even state that parts of the comlumns are visible, bad in bad light. Priorities are difficult to understand, as well as the site. Need to read more about it. --Ikar.us (talk) 13:26, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The colonnade is the main feature of the site; my remark on the second candidate was because I know how to recognize the Corinthian order thanks to the capital of a column (and not because of its base). PS : the word "depicted" above was perhaps clumsy; I could have said "evoked". --Myrabella (talk) 17:28, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There is no currently active town of Apamea. Lacking a drawing of the intact ancient city, the ruin photo can represent it. --Ikar.us (talk) 23:10, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
