Open main menu
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to Commons:Valued image candidates/candidate list.
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11
This talk page is automatically archived by ArchiveBot. Any sections older than 60 days are automatically archived. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Scope format for works of artEdit

Closing and archiving not properly done by the botEdit

Hi, I discover today that some VIC were not properly closed and archived by the bot. Commons:Valued image candidates/Vincenzo Laviosa - Franklin D. Roosevelt - Google Art Project.jpg was closed on June 23rd, but the file never got the tag, and I never got a message on my talk page. Several images are in the same situation. Any idea why, and how to fix that? Regards, Yann (talk) 09:49, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi Yann! Could you share some other nomination pages of images in this situation? I would like to check if the nomination pages share something in Common that may cause this problem. Regards, Ivanhercaz (talk) 09:55, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
@Ivanhercaz: I've just found that File:Old Rectory, St Mary's, Walton 3.jpg wasn't handled properly either. Also on 23rd June. Rodhullandemu (talk) 21:34, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Changes in {{Vicl}} templateEdit

Hi everyone,

I made a change in the {{Vicl}} template that makes possible to use it without the need to specify the signature as third parameter. I made it without asking opinions and presenting it in the sandbox before to publish in the current template because it doesn't break the current behaviour. It is still possible to use the template in the old way.

I encourage you to check the thread in the talk page of the template.

Regards, Ivanhercaz (talk) 10:38, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Ah, I forget to announce that you can use this template with the alias {{VIC-result}} too. I created it in 2017 before to know the existence of an older template to close nominations. Now it is a redirection. Regards, Ivanhercaz (talk) 10:40, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Military ship in different ports or citiesEdit

Hi everyone,

I am thinking about the possibility to nominate three photos of the same ship, the Relámpago (P43). In the category there are photographs of the ship in three different ports: one in Arrecife, another in Las Palmas de Gran Canaria and one more in Cartagena.

Do you think there would be fine to nominate one photograph of the ship in each city or port? Something like Relámpago (P43) in Arrecife. Another good examples are the Sagres (ship, 1937) and the Volcan de Tindaya (ship, 2003).

What do you think about it?

Regards, Ivanhercaz (talk) 20:52, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Due the days before answers I would like to mention some users that I always see very active in the managements of VI. @Archaeodontosaurus, Ikan Kekek, DeFacto, Yann: and anyone interested, could you help me to clarify the question made above?
Regards, Ivanhercaz (talk) 18:39, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
@Ivanhercaz: although I can imagine photographs of some particular ships in various locations being valuable (think grand ocean liners in the waters off the world's greatest cities, for example), I'm not sure that there is a need for a scope for each location that this ship has been photographed in. Is there a notable link between this ship and the various locations it is in in the photos you are thinking of? -- DeFacto (talk). 20:09, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
There is no problem in principle; as there will be two pole in the scope it is necessary that one and the other can be well described by the image. No problem for the boat but it will be necessary to pay particular attention to the port which also must be well recognizable. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:07, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
@DeFacto, Archaeodontosaurus: Thanks to both! After thinking a lot about it I think that for the cases in which the scope would be "X ship in Y port" it would be necessary to have a clear image of the port and the ship. I would check photographs of these categories, I mean "ships in". About the notable links in the photos I shared in this thread I think:
  • For the P43 Relampago I think there are photographs for two scopes, one for the ship itself and another one, the RELAMPAGO 3690.JPG, for the scope P43 Relampago (ship, 2012) in the Naval Base of Las Palmas de Gran Canaria; this one because it is very clear the naval base with the city in the background.
  • For the Sagres I have thought about it. It is a training ship and probably there are photographs in several ports, but the first I need before to think about possible scopes is to review the files and categorize them according to the port in which the is.
  • Volcan de Tindaya may be interesting too, but at least at the moment I haven't seen photographs for a scope like the ones mentioned. I hope to have the opportunity to take photographs of this ship soon.
Again, thank both for your comments!
Regards, Ivanhercaz (talk) 11:18, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
@Ivanhercaz: We really need to go back to the underlying rationale behind Valued Images. VIs are designed to illustrate Wikipedia articles so are you trying to illustrate the port the ship? If it is both, then what is the significance of the ship at that port? In most cases, I do not see any value in having the same ship at three different ports, though there might be a case for an illustration of the ship lying at anchor at a port where it cannot get alongside the quay and another where it is at the quay-side. Finally, there is also a case for the ship being at a port immediately prior to a significant event (for example prior to going into battle).
There is also scope for having a scope for "Cruise line at Venice", but not one for every cruise liner that visits Venice (and of course equivalent scopes for naval vessels). In this case you would be illustrating how cruise liners dominate the Venetian skyline and the emphasis will be on Venice, not the actual cruise liner. Martinvl (talk) 17:21, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
Return to the project page "Valued image candidates/candidate list".