User talk:Ondřej Žváček

•  Support This is a nice balanced composition and a valuable picture. I think File:Potala Palace 05-2007.jpg gives a more detailed view of the palace, but it fails to show the situation of the palace wrt the city. Plus, the picture in itself is less interesting (composition not so good). --Eusebius (talk) 13:01, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Support Looks OK to me, criteria met. The other image in the category doesn't display all the nine. --Myrabella (talk) 07:06, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support Unique picture of that major Ethiopian river in Commons, and nice, documented and geotagged image. --Myrabella (talk) 09:50, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

•  Question Why is this picture specific to this river? For me it is like the clouds example in COM:VISC#How_to_choose_your_scope. --Eusebius (talk) 13:08, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It shows the river in its typical surroundings. On the left there you can see the Tikhonkaya hill, which is one of the symbols of Birobidzhan and the Jewish Autonomous Oblast. I believe it is a very similar case as with this Valued Image or this Valued Image.--Ondřej Žváček (talk) 18:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree with the comparison, the landscape and the appearance of the river looks far more "specific" in the Tekeze case, and the Arse VI shows nautical activity which constitute the main interest of the river (I think there are a few declined river scopes as well, quite similar to this one, if you want to have a look). But it is a very subjective impression. I feel that if the river is not visually distinctive enough, maybe a map is more appropriate. I don't have a strong enough opinion to vote on this single candidate, though. --Eusebius (talk) 18:56, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I see no difference between the Tekeze case and this one. Why do you please think the landscape and the appearance of the river in the Tekeze case looks far more "specific"? If it is because the Tekeze River flows through (for an European) exciting landscape and the Bira River does not (it may be exciting landscape for an African though), that should not matter here I think. And yes, a map may be more appropriate. But there is no such map on Commons so far I know.--Ondřej Žváček (talk) 19:18, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're probably right, that's why I told it was pretty subjective and I wouldn't vote. --Eusebius (talk) 19:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment @Ondřej Žváček: you could add notes on the file naming the hill and the town on the opposite bank to characterize this view a bit more. --Myrabella (talk) 11:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done with respect to the hill. Please note the town is on both banks of the river. The photo is actually taken from a bridge connecting both parts of the town separated by the river.--Ondřej Žváček (talk) 17:03, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Nevertheless, I would recommend to add a second note on the file, something like "Birobidzhan (left bank)" (or right bank, if it is the case :-). Until I read some documentation, I didn't know whether Birobidzhan was a town, a district of a region, so I think that such a note would add valuable information for users as ignorant as me. By the way, I notice that Birobidzhan is the only town mentioned along the course of the river in cs:Bira and ru:Бира (река). I deduce from that that the nominated image is rare and could be considered as valuable, but would gain to be slighty more documented. --Myrabella (talk) 13:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, done.--Ondřej Žváček (talk) 18:12, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support OK to me, now. --Myrabella (talk) 07:16, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support Excellent! PS a moderate crop would make it even better. --MattiPaavola (talk) 23:03, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
•  Request Please add the scientific name in the description on the image page.--Myrabella (talk) 04:15, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, done.--Ondřej Žváček (talk) 17:57, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

•  Comment Scope formatted according to the guidelines. I also think that a crop would be more adapted for a VI. --Eusebius (talk) 22:14, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose as not yet eligible for VI status. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it cannot at present become a valued image since it currently fails valued image criterion 5 (should be geocoded, but is not). "All images are expected to be geocoded unless it would not be appropriate to do so". I have not reviewed the nomination against all the criteria, but if you are able to fix this issue and would like me to re-evaluate the image please leave me a message on my talk page. --Rastaman3000 (talk) - Visit my new user-page! 18:23, 2 August 2010 (UTC) - fixed. --Rastaman3000 (talk) - Visit my new user-page! 14:45, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

•  Comment Now geocoded. Thank you for the reminder. Ondřej Žváček (talk) 20:32, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
•  Info This image IMO benefits from perspective correction. I've applied it; if you don't like it, you may revert. --Ikar.us (talk) 21:20, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support anyway. --Ikar.us (talk) 21:20, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
•  Question The spelling Bardějov in the cs: description isn't used in cs:Bardejov? --Ikar.us (talk) 21:32, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info This spelling is sometimes used in Czech as it corresponds to the actual pronunciation of the name of the city in Czech. For example see here or here. Ondřej Žváček (talk) 15:49, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support With a bit darkened air would be even better. --Mile (talk) 17:54, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Support all criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:53, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support - Best in scope. Flávio "Maddox" ^go! 15:47, 4 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Interesting subject! Just to mention again ;) since there are interior photos the scope name here should be Shushi Cathedral (exterior). It also seems to me that this photo is somehow better ;) --MrPanyGoff 15:14, 1 April 2011 (UTC) I would also like to know how is actually the temple called because Here the name Ghazanchetsots Cathedral is chosen.--MrPanyGoff 15:26, 1 April 2011 (UTC)  Comment:Category changed as you have suggested. Yes, the other picture is very good and I like it too. Still think this picture is more suitable though - it shows the cathedral in greater detail and it is better described (and geocoded). Also, the surroundings of the cathedral on the other picture are not actual (they have changed - please compare the two pictures to see it). So far I know the cathedral is called Cathedral of Christ the Savior or Ghazanchetsots Cathedral or Shushi Cathedral (and perhaps also Shusha Cathedral). Not sure what does the name in Armenian only (Ghazanchetsots Cathedral) mean as I do not speak Armenian.--Ondřej Žváček (talk) 08:57, 2 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Support - Well, it seems that Shushi is OK as a name and finally I decide to support this photo. Bear in mind that the perspective distortion can be easily reduced to more proper level.--MrPanyGoff 16:40, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment - I have corrected the perspective. Jovian Eye _talk 23:47, 3 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Good ;) --MrPanyGoff 05:53, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Support. Best in its category for now. Interestingly, this structure was in my plans for nominations for the next two weeks.--MrPanyGoff 21:36, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

•  Comment See the syntax of the scope that I have changed.
•  Support Scope very rich, but all crietria met. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 20:09, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:02, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

•  SupportBest in scope. I do share your humble opinion--Jebulon (talk) 17:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support I agree with this promotion but ay a problem. The vote can not be closed automatically ...
•  Comment the technical problem has been resolved --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:22, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Support all criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:46, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:14, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:45, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

•  Comment May we have a specific scope for the summit of a mountain?--Jebulon (talk) 23:21, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support I think it's a good idea. This leaves the possibility of a label for an image to the summit viewed from a distance.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:17, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support I also agree with both the idea of a sub-scope for the summit, and the specific nomination of this image for this scope. cmadler (talk) 18:47, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support Best in scope, meets all criteria. cmadler (talk) 19:21, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Agrees. For building it is useful to add (exterior). --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:37, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Support Yes, it is the best in the scope for now.--MrPanyGoff 10:44, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support I think so (The images must be placed at the bottom of the list) --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:30, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

 Support I agree.--Jebulon (talk) 12:36, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

•  Info Heading fixed.  Support --Ikar.us (talk) 11:32, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]