Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates/March-2010

Please cut and paste new entries to the bottom of this page, creating a new monthly archive (by closing date) when necessary.

For promoted entries, add {{VPCresult|Promoted|File:FILENAME.JPG}} to the bottom of the entry, replacing FILENAME.JPG with the file that was promoted.
For entries not promoted, add {{VPCresult|Not promoted| }} to the bottom of the entry.
Do NOT put any other information inside the template. It should be copied and pasted exactly, and only the first one should have FILENAME.JPG replaced with the actual filename.

	Archives
2009:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2010:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December

Purge page cache if nominations haven't updated.

Battle at Lanka, Ramayana by Sahibdin (1649-1653)

Reason: Rather strange image as it is a depiction of the great climax war of the Hindu epic Ramayana (there are only 2 Hindu epics) by a Muslim artist Sahibdin from the Mewar school of Rajput painting. It is high resolution. Also a FP at commons and Turkish encyclopedia, but a failed FPC here as it got only 4 supports, including the nominator.
Articles this image appears in: Ramayana, Sahibdin
Creator: Sahibdin

Support as nominator --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 12:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Elekhh (talk) 19:23, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. --JN 466 21:41, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. --Sabri76'^message 08:37, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request speedy close: This discussion is now irrelevant as this image is a FP now (nomination started on 8 March). --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 04:17, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --Elekhh (talk) 04:40, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong resolution of singularities

Reason: Only image in the article in which it is used. Most of the images in Internet tend to have only the resolution of singularities but not the rest of the process to make the excetional divisor simple normal crossings.
Articles this image appears in: resolution of singularities
Creator: Franklin, ZooFari and Slashme

Support as nominator -- franklin 21:10, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I find the labelling somewhat space inefficient. Have you tried with double row labels? I also wonder if it wouldn't be more advantageous to have the four images separate, so that there is a flexibility to layout these in a horizontal row or array as well. Elekhh (talk) 23:00, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted :No support in 2 months --Elekhh (talk) 04:42, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Château de Chenonceau

Reason: Good composition providing overview of the ensemble and its relationship to the river, good technicals, and strong in making the viewer want to know more.
Articles this image appears in: Château de Chenonceau, Catherine de' Medici's building projects, French Renaissance architecture
Creator: Wladyslaw

Support as nominator --Elekhh (talk) 05:32, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree with Elekhh...--Sabri76'^message 19:53, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
~~Abstain~~ - Is not that I don´t agree with the nominating reason, but this picture should be a featured image nominee instead of valued picture (also in commons). - ☩Damërung ☩. -- 23:33, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: It has been and it failed becouse of the framing. Elekhh (talk) 00:30, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  Then Support. - ☩Damërung ☩. -- 18:55, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive image. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 17:32, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the angle of the shot. Sophus Bie ^(talk) 08:58, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Schloss Chenonceau.JPG --Bradjamesbrown (talk) 20:47, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Peace Candle

Reason: Again, I'm new to this, but trying this out. I think this one is an encyclopedic entry and I think it's of more educational value that my other nomination. I also think the photo has a pretty good sense of scale, thanks to the flagpole and the people at the base.
Articles this image appears in: Peace Candle
Creator: Hunter Kahn

Support as nominator --— Hun ter Ka hn 01:26, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: File:Easton peace candle lit at night.jpg by Hunter Kahn does not seem to have trees in it (though it is dark and thus may have trees), so is it possible to picture the candle without the trees? --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 12:17, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I might be able to get another picture of it from the other side without trees, before the city takes it down (which is supposed to be within the next few days). I had kind of thought the trees gave it some scale, but I guess not? — Hun ter Ka hn 16:35, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It supposed to be till 2014, right? --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:38, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, it goes up every holiday season, usually around November, then it's taken down in January or February. Then the next year, it goes up again. The current candle is supposed to last until 2014, then they'll probably have to build a new one, but it's not up all year long, only around the holiday season. Maybe I should try to make that clearer in the article. In any event, the Peace Candle is still up and will be for about a week, I think, so I'll see if I can get another shot... — Hun ter Ka hn 17:15, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. I missed that. Please add that fact in the lead. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 04:32, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- Hey, sorry for the delay in response, but I wasn't able to get another picture of it before it was taken down. By the time I got to it, they had a huge crane sitting next to it for a few days, waiting to take it down. :( On the plus side, I got some photos of them actually disassembling it, which I can add to the article later. But as far as this photo is concerned, this is the only one I can manage until the next Christmas season. — Hun ter Ka hn 14:37, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please add them to the article. They seem encyclopedic and educational. Umm... may be possible VPCs. :) --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:10, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

- lol. I will add them either tonight, or tomorrow at the latest. — Hun ter Ka hn 16:13, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --Elekhh (talk) 02:18, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Columbus Zoo Front Gate

**Original** - The front gate for the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium.

Reason: An image of the recently redesigned front gate for the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium, the number one zoo in America.
Articles this image appears in: Columbus Zoo and Aquarium
Creator: Adolphus79

Support as nominator --Adolphus79 (talk) 17:34, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Very representative. - ☩Damërung ☩. -- 21:39, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose original. Too many issues: poor lighting, composition abiguous (40%+ asphalt, 30%+ sky), not horizontal. Elekhh (talk) 22:31, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
An image's encyclopedic value is given priority over its artistic value. EV is more important than appearence for VPC. - ☩Damërung ☩. -- 23:52, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Does it really has such high EV? What does it tell the reader other than that the Zoo has a desolate entrance gateway area? Elekhh (talk) 00:05, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I think the EV is that it's the front gate of the number one zoo in America, and a regionally very well known sight. Also, I went and took the picture due to a request for it during Columbus Zoo and Aquarium's GA review (check the talk page of the article). Yes, the weather was a little dreary that day, but otherwise there would have been long lines of people in the way of a quality image of the gate itself. As for the sky and asphault, could I just upload a cropped version, and maybe try to play with the colors a little? - Adolphus79 (talk) 20:59, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Technical manipulation is generally discouraged: the image should present the subject as acurately as possible. But it should be rotated counter-clockwise to bring it to horizontal position. That will improve the quality. Croping will be difficult because it will lead to loss of important detail, like the human scale on the right. I would attempt however croping off the white bit on the bottom which is most distracting. If you think the crop is not clearly better you can upload it with different file name and propose it as Alt. Elekhh (talk) 21:11, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - OK... rotated 0.5 degrees, top & bottom cropped slightly & very minor gamma fix (just to try to brighten it up a little)... didn't want to ovrewrite the original, in case it was too much of a change... - Adolphus79 (talk) 21:25, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        I think Alt is much better and that it was worth the effort. Changed my previous vote for original only. I stay neutral on Alt however, as I don't have enough background knowledge on the topic to judge its EV. Elekhh (talk) 22:28, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The significance of the subject does not mean the image has encyclopedic value. TBO, the gate does not represent the zoo as well as an aerial photograph of the entire zoo would. --Zoo Fari 23:57, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --Elekhh (talk) 10:31, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

	Archives
2009:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2010:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December