Oppose I cannot see how this bus shelter is a valuable scope. Charlesjsharp (talk)
Comment This is not a bus shelter but a traditional wooden shelter on the Nossen - Most railway line (connecting Saxony and Bohemia) from 1873. --August Geyler (talk) 19:01, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It doesn't look like much. Is there anything other than the Rechenberg sign that makes its appearance distinctive, compared to other similar wooden shelters? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:19, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you for asking, Ikan. Special about this kind of shelters is just that they where typical for rail infrastructure in Saxony in the early days. But the one in Rechenberg is not special to the others, beside the fact that most others did not survive. Today, it is the only exemplar of this kind on this railway line. In general I don't understand the point of your and Charlesjsharp's review. The scope is not "Classic railway shelters in Europe" but "Public transport shelter at Rechenberg halt". I simply thought the nominated image shows the shelter at Rechenberg at best. Your question surprised me because we are promoting hundreds of images of ordinary cars as VI every month. And nobody is asking: What makes this Audi A3 special compared to all other 600.000 produced same Audi A3 vehicles? --August Geyler (talk) 09:42, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment We have scopes for every type of car (usually two), but not for cars in specific locations or in special livery - exceptions for race cars, special museums etc. So the scope has to be for a specific type of shelter and the image has to be the best in the scope, irrespective of railway line. But only if the shelter is distinctive in some way. The scope defines a generic field or category within which the image is the most valuable example. The scope must be broad enough to be realistically useful to somebody who wishes to search the VI repository. Here is what the guidelines say about structures: Not any church is worth a Valued Image scope. Cathedral scopes are OK, but for other churches there should be a good reason, like being a pilgrimage place, being really famous, being architecturally exceptional... Christian architecture is taken as an example, but the same general rule applies to religious buildings of any religion. As you may guess, my opinion is that we are ignoring this guideline and allowing too many scopes of ordinary structures and pieces of them, like a doorway. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:03, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment At this line it is the only one. As this small buildings where constructed in the early days of rail transport, they usually where constructed separately by every line / railway company. Due to their wooden nature, they had to be rebuild from time to time. I don't know any exact same surviving shelter. On normal gauge railways, like in Rechenberg, they are extremely rare. A few similar but smaller or differently shaped shelters have survived or been rebuild on some narrow gauge railways in Saxony. I try to give an overview (only one normal gauge example I could find):
Cossmannsdorf at Weißeritztalbahn
Seifersdorf at Weißeritztalbahn
Hartmannmühle at Müglitztalbahn (normal gauge)
Johnsdorf at Zittauer Schmalspurbahn
Weißes Roß at Lößnitzgrundbahn
They are all shaped differentially, referring to local architecture traditions and special needs of the specific railway line. Most of them are classified as cultural heritage monuments. --August Geyler (talk) 21:34, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
