Oppose daytime image is better. No need for night images to have VI scopes. See VI scope guideline "In general, the VI for a building scope should be a daylight picture." Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:36, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I shall resist responding to a rare insult from our most responsible and fair contributor. If we are to prefer a nighttime image, then the VI guidelines should be changed, They could not be clearer: "In general, the VI for a building scope should be a daylight picture." Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:44, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice photo, but talk about the scope. I think "at night" scopes can be perfectly fine, so since this scope might be usable, it can be perfectly reasonable to support this with a remark that it "could be useful," so I'll do that. But that said, it's not like there is special night illumination on this facade. So let's talk about the wording Charles quotes from above. "The VI for a building scope" seems to me to imply that there should generally be one VI per building. However, another reading is that the overall VI for the building would normally be a daylight picture, but there could be a separate "at night" scope. I would agree that we should have a discussion at Commons talk:Valued image scope, except that such discussions generally get nowhere, as there's a preference to work by custom at VIC, regardless of what policies and guidelines there are. But my friend Archaeodontosaurus, please be respectful. Charles has a valid point, and I don't think his point is ad hominem against either Jebulon, who took the photo, or Sebring12Hrs, who made the nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:50, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't agree with you on this. I think his arguments are generally valid, and that we've resolved things with discussions every time, but it would really be better to more clearly harmonize Commons guidelines with accepted customs on VIC. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:12, 28 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]