Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Vagão desajeitado.webm

File:Vagão desajeitado.webm edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2017 at 16:26:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
Info all by Rodrigo.Argenton. Observation, it's a 4K video, be aware of that when you try to see it in full resolution. -- -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton^m 16:26, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton^m 16:26, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I like it - something different --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 21:31, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting material and good idea, however, IMHO this matematical problem could be better illustrated (it's not clear to me). The Clay animation look rather abrupt movements and little use of the video resource (this could easily be a gif). Also, The authorship of the object in the description is not cited. --The Photographer 23:06, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- "IMHO this matematical problem could be better illustrated " could you prove that? GIF??? A GIF with 3,456 × 2,304 pixels??? GIF?? Jesus... Again mathematical object, copyright can not be applied.

And in it description have a complete mathematical explanation, with graphics, draws... something unique, and rare to see around here. This is just a personal and vague attack, not a valuable and thinkable opinion.-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton^m 21:09, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Rodrigo.Argenton: I suspect what he meant is that the 'poster' is not attributed where it is used in the description. - Revent^talk 02:09, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per The Photographer. Daniel Case (talk) 06:07, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Daniel Case each part? Do you agree with all that bs that was exposed? -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton^m 21:09, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Rodrigo.Argenton: What I was seconding was a) the video doesn't really tell us what this problem is; without that Ikan's opinion below is going to be a more common reaction than you hope and b) the description says you are the author ... are you? Did you do all the filming? It seems that most of the videos in this series are ones other people made that you uploaded. CC-BY still requires proper attribution. Daniel Case (talk) 02:56, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"It seems that most of the videos in this series are ones other people made that you uploaded." what the heck???

I'm dedicating more than 8 hours per day as a volunteer, I had to learn about cinematography to accomplish this tasks, I'm a former OTRS volunteer, I give workshops about free license, and you are saying that I'm not the one doing this??????? If you want I can send you the more the one hundred photos that I took to made this video with my name in the metadata. Or, the photo of my tripod, in the camera that I requested via grant, with my cellphone:

This was super offensive, and you don't know how much. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton^m 05:43, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Rodrigo.Argenton: OK, Rodrigo, I'm glad you clarified that. This is the first time in that series (and I should remind that I've promoted a number of the other videos to QI status) that I understood clearly how they were made. But the other objection, in which cart now joins so eloquently, still stands. Daniel Case (talk) 17:47, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Joalpe (talk) 12:32, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Not interesting in my opinion, sorry. My reaction is "So what? A wooden model bus is jerkily traveling back and forth along a curvy line for no apparent reason." -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:28, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ikan Kekek this is a mathematical puzzle solution, I can make a bet with you that you will take sometime to figure out that you have to come back many times to accomplish it.

"Wikimedia bellows to education" puff, Wikimedia bellows to machine wars and landscape. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton^m 05:43, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm telling you what my reaction is as a viewer. I agree with cart's points below. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:24, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose While the video has obviously taken a great deal of time and effort to make and it is fun to watch that little woody thing finding its way along the track (and it is technically well done since I first thought the wood-thing had some electrical connection to the "rail" in the same way an electric train runs), it is also hard to understand the purpose of the film without some initial explanation. It would have been better to start with showing the equations for this problem in some way and then continue on to the graphical solution that the "track" provides so that the viewer can make the connection between a numerical vs a geometrical solution. Most viewers are not familiar with how you can solve complicated equations in a highly visual geometrical way. The educational part of this project is to help getting people understand things. I think this can be improved on. --cart-Talk 13:10, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton^m 19:40, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]