Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Rookery Building light court
Rookery Building light court[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2013 at 20:45:43 (UTC)
- Reason
- This caught my eye as particularly enlightening.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Rookery Building
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
- Creator
- Velvet
- Support as nominator --TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 21:55, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
- Comment - I believe this image has been on the article for only 2 days. Sanyambahga (talk) 07:13, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- You are correct. I should have said that this image caught my eye when I was checking up on recent changes to pages that I watch. I check a lot of pages twice a week. This got swapped in for another image. Should we put this nom on hold for a week or a month or something.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 07:49, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- I got overly excited seeing such a good picture of such an integral part of this building. What part of WP:WIAFP outlines the required tenure of the image?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 07:53, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- See the recommendation at WP:FP?, which was meant to prevent exactly the same thing from happening. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:47, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
- I just re-read that and finally saw the rule. "It is preferable to wait a reasonable period of time (at least 7 days) after the image is added to the article before nominating it, though this may be ignored in obvious cases". One might make the case that such a clean picture is so far superior to the previous version (File:The Rookery Building court (Chicago, IL).jpg) with random pedestrians in the picture as to be an obvious case. Someone might want to crop out the black stairs from the prior picture, but the entire prior picture needed to be replaced. However, I am more than willing to put this on hold if that is desired.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 05:49, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
- I'd hold, just in case. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
- I just re-read that and finally saw the rule. "It is preferable to wait a reasonable period of time (at least 7 days) after the image is added to the article before nominating it, though this may be ignored in obvious cases". One might make the case that such a clean picture is so far superior to the previous version (File:The Rookery Building court (Chicago, IL).jpg) with random pedestrians in the picture as to be an obvious case. Someone might want to crop out the black stairs from the prior picture, but the entire prior picture needed to be replaced. However, I am more than willing to put this on hold if that is desired.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 05:49, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
- See the recommendation at WP:FP?, which was meant to prevent exactly the same thing from happening. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:47, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
- Suspended--TonyTheTiger (T/C/WP:FOUR/WP:CHICAGO/WP:WAWARD) 02:50, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
- De-suspended Image still in the article. Armbrust The Homunculus 20:46, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
- Comment This is a nicely executed image with EV, but the front-on composition seems inferior to angled views such as File:Chicago rookery hall entree.jpg in depicting the overall appearance of the room. Also, it is possible to ask the building's staff to temporarily remove the warning sign from the stairs? - it detracts from the image. Nick-D (talk) 23:57, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- I am just nominating this on behalf of WP:CHICAGO. There are no retakes.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:17, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 21:32, 4 September 2013 (UTC)