Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Danzon dancers.jpg

File:Danzon dancers.jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2011 at 14:37:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded, nominated by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 14:37, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support Danzon dancers [[1]] i León, Guanajuato, México -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 14:37, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Poor educational value...Why only the feet? --Citron (talk) 11:56, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment To label something as "poor educational value" presuposes knowledge of the subject. If that is the case, please state the reasons so that your judgement adds value to the community. Danzon is a cultural phenomena where music, dancing technique and clothing are important elements. People do not do Danzon in Nikes, sandals or barefoot. So this is a detail of a cultural element in places you probably have not visited. The fact that one may not be aware of cultural elements of another society does not invalidate their educational value. In fact, isn´t that one of the objectives of an encyclopaedic effort? To bring into this place images of places or customs unknown to us? Isn´t it a bit ridiculous to categorically invalidate the educational value of something simply because one does not know the subject? --Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:46, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think I was not clear enough. As you say, it's "a detail of a cultural element", you show only the feet while "music, dancing technique and clothing are important". Why you not show it? When I talk about educational value, it's that you show bad your subject. I know very well the danzon and here, I see only ordinary feet...--Citron (talk) 19:35, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at this detail, stricktly from my bourgeois eyes, I can perceive so many social characteristics... but that is just me... And if I were to show more, then it would not be a detail, would it? I did not know that two tone shoes, baggy pants, etc., were so ordinary in... France? --Tomascastelazo (talk) 20:36, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do not play with words, you understand very well what I mean. Your photo does not say enough to deserve the FP label.--Citron (talk) 09:21, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The image not deserving FP status, expressed as your opinion, is valid to you; your appreciation of it, from whatever point of analysis evidently does not make it worthy of the status. However, your opinion, as respectful as it may be, does not constitute a universal judgement or value. Opinions are colored and limited by our experiences, therefore, always suspect. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 16:08, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

IMO, you're annoying. --Citron (talk) 19:32, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

LOL!!! Some people are annoying, some are french, some know about photography, some don´t, some speak french, some speak english, some speak russian... --Tomascastelazo (talk) 21:38, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Why not ? Let's keep our minds open !--Jebulon (talk) 16:28, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It would be beneficial to see also the posture of those dancers...unless you like shoes. --Yikrazuul (talk) 17:59, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Citron (talk) 18:14, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing is sharp in higher resolution --Llez (talk) 21:01, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Llez, but also per Jebulon. W.S. 06:59, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Tomascastelazo (talk) 13:26, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]