Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Chess pieces

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Chess pieces[edit]

Original
Reason
sharp, crisp, clear, encyclopedic, adds value to articles it appears in
Proposed caption
From left, a white king, black rook and queen, white pawn, black knight, and white bishop
Articles this image appears in
chess, rules of chess
Creator
Alan Light
  • Support as nominator Brendan44 02:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose too small, jpeg artifacts. Debivort 02:19, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. There just isn't anything special about this picture, to my eyes. Sorry. Unschool 02:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, A tiny picture with jpeg artifacts... Nice. 8thstar 06:00, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I like the idea, but it's too small, tilted, and they're fairly cheap plastic chess pieces rather than anything particularly appealing. --jjron 08:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reluctant Oppose - it's a really good idea, but sadly the pic fails some of the criteria - it's too small, has lots of JPG artifacts and it doesn't really look that impressive. As mentioned above, if it could be re-taken at higher quality and with some nicer pieces on show, I'd support. E7T4A7 —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 13:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Tilted - Adrian Pingstone 13:44, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose with a better camera it would be brilliant --Childzy ¤ Talk 14:48, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment how on earth would the illustration of Chess and Rules of chess be improved by "nicer" chess pieces? Debivort 16:07, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • It wouldn't but better pieces would help the picture "illustrate the subject in a compelling way" per criterion #3 ~ Veledan • | T | 19:52, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Maybe something like this . (Please note the image is not nominated).--Mbz1 20:26, 20 August 2007 (UTC)Mbz1[reply]
        • I'm struggling to pick out what piece is what, but I'm not sure this is a checkmate. Assuming the piece on the far left is a queen, the next on the left is a rook or a bishop and the piece to the right of the king is a pawn; then there are at least two spots the king can move. Assuming the piece is a rook, then the king can move one square right (directly in front of the pawn) or diagonally down and right (one square away from the pawn. If the piece is a bishop, then the king can either move one square straight down, or down and left. But anyway with ergards to the composition I would actually prefer a game in progress with more piece (and less ornate ones at that!) --Fir0002 22:14, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
          • What is really strange that such prominent and very busy contributer as fir0002 loosing his time to change the description on the my checkmate image, (which is not nominated and not in an article), for the second time already. So I guess I need to explain what I meant with this composition:
            The picture shows only a small part of the board, which was made in purpose to force the viewers to think about what is there behind the scene, which makes it a checkmate.fir0002, if you have an extra time to spare on my images, you would do much better by opposing few of my images, which I nominated on Commons instead of changing description on that one.--Mbz1 04:09, 23 August 2007 (UTC)Mbz1[reply]
            • fir0002, Please relax. Such an old and sick man as you are really should not worry so much. The image is not nominated and is not even in any article. It is just a snapshot to show "better pieces". That's it. You could submit a deletion request for this image as well as for all other images that I uploaded to Wikipedia and I'm gladly support it. Just do not worry, please. OK?--Mbz1 22:34, 20 August 2007 (UTC)Mbz1[reply]
              • You're quite right, and the biased voting and perversion of COM:FPC and en:FPC are not doing my old age much good either. Please stop being so reactionary over the comments on your photos Mbz1, I was just saying that it's not a checkmate and hence you'd probably be better to change the image description page. However given the fact you still haven't bothered to fix the spelling on your images from San Francisco Zoo (San Ftancisco ZOO) perhaps I'd better make the changes for you? --Fir0002 06:33, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
                  • I'm sorry but that's not what Wikipedia is for Mbz1. Photos are not there for people to "think about what is behind the scenes" - they are there to illustrate a point. This image does not illustrate a checkmate. If I didn't know what a checkmate was, could this image help me to learn? --Fir0002 08:02, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
                    • On a bit of a side note, there are literaly trillions of trillions possablities about what might be behind the scenes. I'm just saying that that is a lot of pondering. ;) -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 18:20, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
                    • Take it easy, guys. Even if you don't agree about that particular image, it's not really relevant to what this page is about, right? It's a beautiful day outside (at least, it is where I am). Get some fresh air for an hour or two, and see whether this still seems like it's worth arguing about. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 18:16, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
                      • You are absolutely right,Hit bull, win steak. Thank you.--Mbz1 00:58, 24 August 2007 (UTC)Mbz1[reply]
  • Oppose Should really be arranged on the board in a way that might be seen in a chess game, not just clustered together off the squares. I'd use the now-traditional chess piece shapes, but it would be nice if they were somewhat more luxury versions - marble, or stained wood, say. Adam Cuerden talk 03:14, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The pieces are far too cluttered together. Maybe spread out a bit and with a removed background. If using a chess board, I agree that it should be making use of a typical chess spread. I will say, though, that I like the use of the traditional pieces rather than "luxury models" as suggested above. No offense to that user. ;) --Midnightdreary 18:11, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Considering that chess pieces are readily avaliable, any featured picture of them needs to be technically flawless. This isn't. Also, if we're going for nicer pieces, I'd like those clear glass/frosted sets with fairly traditional shapes rahter than the whale thing in the above picture. If the image is going to be used in an article, the pieces within should be easily recognizable just on the basis of the text of the article. vlad§inger tlk 21:53, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 11:02, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/Chess_pieces&oldid=1138495814"