Commons:Valued image candidates/Francisco Franco 1930.jpg

Francisco Franco 1930.jpg

**promoted**
Image
Nominated by	Chamarasca (talk) on 2016-11-13 11:24 (UTC)
Scope	Nominated as the most valued image on Commons within the scope: Francisco Franco in the 1930s
Used in	Global usage
Reason	A good quality photograph of General Franco. I think it is also a psychological portrait of the dictator, very useful to illustrate many articles in Wikimedia projects. I found the image thanks to User:Aracali, who located the website where the photograph was available. The whole merit is theirs. -- Chamarasca (talk)
Review (criteria)	Comment Must connect the scope to the category that contains the image to Must connect the scope to the category or gallery that contains the image --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:25, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply] In this way? The image is in Category:Francisco Franco in the 1930s, than is inside the wider Category:Francisco Franco.--Chamarasca (talk) 16:32, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply] @Archaeodontosaurus: Please see File:Juan Carlos I of Spain 2007.jpg as a counter-example to your comments — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinvl (talk • contribs) 22:40, 13 November 2016‎ (UTC)[reply] ~~Support~~ This is a good image of the dictator at the time when he came to power. In my view it meets all the criteria for a VI. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martinvl (talk • contribs) 22:40, 13 November 2016‎ (UTC)[reply] Comment For the historical figure it is useful to give the year of the photography in the scope. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:20, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply] I have changed the scope to include only one decade. But I really think this is the better image of Franco we have in Commons; at any age.--Chamarasca (talk) 10:53, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply] Comment @Archaeodontosaurus and Chamarasca: I agree with Chamarasca that a siongle decade is sufficent, otherwise do we really want 77 VI's of Franco? Martinvl (talk) 11:13, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply] Support In my view the six criteria for a VI are met and the revised scope is appropriate. Martinvl (talk) 11:13, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply] Support Good now --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:09, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply] `Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:06, 17 November 2016 (UTC)`[reply]