Oppose The non-existence of the category (crit. 6) doesn't help finding out what we are talking about, so I'm just unable to review properly. Also, please add links in the scope only when the target exists. --Eusebius (talk) 20:31, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Oh yes, I remember, it's the continuation of a discussion opened in a previous review for another image. Suq Aftimos is the western part of the Muristan, which is an area in the Christian Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem. The Muristan has been divided in two parts in the past, a German eastern part (with the Lutheran Church of the Redeemer) and a Greek western one, consisting of a bazaar, Suq Aftimos (see en:Muristan for more details). In the nominated image, we can read "Suq Aftimos" on the street plate. Berthold's opinion would be useful here. --Myrabella (talk) 23:56, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Now I would tend to add "narrow scope" as a reason for my initial opposition. I also find a bit strange that the previous MVR candidates should suddently be deemed unworthy of consideration. An explanation, at least, would be nice. --Eusebius (talk) 09:09, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the feedback. Iv'e removed the link to the non-existent category. The previous nominations were not re-opened because they haven't been changed since the last nomination. Do you believe I should open a MVR again? Anyway, I don't think the scope is too narrow. Plus, this claim was already discussed in the previous nomination, here. Sorry for not linking to it. --Rastaman3000 (talk) - Visit my new user-page! 17:16, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Candidate still not properly categorized... The solution was not to hide the non-existent category, it was to create it! --Eusebius (talk) 17:38, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Opposition removed. --Eusebius (talk) 18:38, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support I', wondering why there are so few people on the street. The Exifdata say the time was 8:44 but at the shadow you can see it was much later. Perhaps the camera was put on UTC? Than it would be 11:44 local time. Additionally there are a lot of technical problems. But it shows the curios portal, the shops and the street restaurants, you can read the sign on the portal the Israeli flag shows where you are. I'm not completly satisfied, it is not the most valued photograph one can make but it is the most valued in Commons. So ok for now. --Berthold Werner (talk) 08:07, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I've chacked the camera, the time is indeed UTC --Rastaman3000 (talk) - Visit my new user-page! 18:14, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Scores:
1. Suq Aftimos.JPG: +0 (current VI within same scope) <--
2. Jerusalem Muristan BW 1.jpg: +0
=>
File:Suq Aftimos.JPG: Undecided.
File:Jerusalem Muristan BW 1.jpg: Undecided.
--MrPanyGoff 21:18, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
|