Comment "Category" shouldn't be visible (see how others avoid showing the word by looking at any other nomination on this page in edit mode), and "new" is not part of the scope, as this might still be a valued image in 30 years. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:47, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Isn't it premature to nominate it? The building has just been completed and this is the first image of it on Commons. Presumably many others will follow, at which point choosing a VI would make more sense. While this is an important perspective, the view from the Danube side with the main entrance would be more representative. --ELEKHHT03:50, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The image is currently the only one of this building which we have in the commons, usable and used in an article. Of course, it is possible that there will be still better photos at some time. But here, in my opinion, we do not have to judge what may come, but what currently is. -- Spurzem (talk) 09:44, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You realise that this would mean that if you are first to take an image of something, no matter how bad the image, is becoming 'Valued' even if a week later none values it? Doesn't that self-undermine the value of the 'Valued' title? --ELEKHHT09:58, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This isn't about a bad picture. The picture is good and perhaps we will have to wait a long time to get a better one from the same perspective. So how long do you want to wait – ten, twenty, fifty or even more years before you think you will find the really most valuable photo? -- Spurzem (talk) 13:54, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Agree with Spurzem and Ikan that we can only evaluate an image for VI based on whatever is uploaded to Commons at the time of nomination. As long as the image meets the 6 criteria per COM:VIRC, it can be VI, even as the only image. Per Ikan, MVR will take care of the future if a better one is uploaded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GRDN711 (talk • contribs)
