Info created by, uploaded by User:Lucag - nominated by Tomas Castelazo
Comment I have navigated through Lucag gallery and I am not only impressed, but very, very pleased. This is talent. Wipipedia is in fact very fortunate to have his generous contributions.
This is definitely not the best he has aesthetically-wise, but is it a very well taken photograph with relevant encyclopaedic value, that brings to us today the enduring glory of the Roman Empire.
Comment Lucag - Well, I took the time to REALLY look at your work and it is very, very good work. No other intention on my part except to acknowledge the quality of it and congratulate you on it. Embarrased? Don't be! Proud, yes! --Tomascastelazo18:43, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Nice picture but not exceptional. A square or even vertical framing would be much better and would improve the definition or the triumph arch by rendering it bigger as for now the level of details on it is not excellent. Btw, I don't like the file name classifying the image through it's author. Sting23:46, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've never thought that my name was annoying on my pictures! About Image I agree: It's not exceptional, it don't worth FP. I uploaded it only because I didn't find on Commons this arch depicted in his context, so the framing is OK for me. --LucaG19:44, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Don't misunderstand me : it's not because I don't think a picture is not FP worth that it's not a valuable one. This photograph is valuable because it depicts well the subject and thanks to you for having uploaded it, simply it's good (well over the average) but not spectacular.Sting23:05, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The quality is nothing special, but I don't like the composition. If you were going to center it, it might as well be a vertical, frame filling composition. -- Ram-Man23:15, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]