Oppose I can see no justification for having a VI of a part of a building shown perfectly adequately in another submission. Charles (talk) 16:48, 28 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I am aware of that @Halicki: . I just don't think that applies in the examples I have opposed - gables, window close ups, statues etc. Sorry. I haven't opposed the buildings themselves though I'm not keen on VIs for every building in every town in every country. I really think it would be helpful to explain why all these Wrocław buildings are "more than local interest to justify a scope". Charles (talk) 14:37, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Halicki: I don't know Wrocław, but it seems you are suggesting two things
practically every building in a city should qualify as a VI scope
several details of each of these 'not-very-special' buildings should also qualify as a VI scope
If that is the view of other editors, then that's fine with me, it just seems you are going overboard with your VI nominations!
I think a feature like a statue should be by an identified artist or the scope should demonstrate some other justification Charles (talk) 17:40, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
