Commons:Valued image candidates/QantasLink Fokker 100 VH-NHY regional jet at Kalgoorlie-Boulder Airport on 04 Aug 2019.jpg/Archive of previous reviews
Comment I doubt that particular airport is clearly recognizable from the photo. Unless it is, the location is irrelevant to the scope, as scopes have to have visible criteria. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:14, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I see. Yes, I agree, that it would be hard to identify the airport from this photo even for people who visited it. I have changed the scope from
Fokker 100 at Kalgoorlie-Boulder Airportto more relevant. --LexKurochkin (talk) 17:50, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
- Comment It's a good picture, but please link it to an adequate category in which the image is listed. I would help you to do it, but I don't know anything about aircrafts. Maybe one of our experts can help. --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:15, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Thank you for the hint, but before changing scope I had done already a little investigation. The proposed scope is based on Commons:Valued image candidates/China Eastern Airlines A330-300 B-6097 SVO 2011-6-17.png and Commons:Valued image candidates/Air Canada Boeing 767-300ER C-FPCA GRU 2012-4-8.png precedents. Both cases have rather similar categorization, quite usual for aircraft photos: "particular aircraft by its registration ID", "type at some airport" and some others dependent on circumstances. My photo is categorized in similar manner. Both cases are not directly listed in the scope category. Aircrafts, as far as I can see it from good cases of categorization (QIs and VIs), usually categorized in very narrow category for particular aircraft, and it is quite usually contains only one file and too specific for VI scope. The mentioned precedents show that parent or even grand-parent category of "airline + aircraft type" is used for VI scope. --LexKurochkin (talk) 19:22, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
