Info created, uploaded, nominated by Al2 --Al2 14:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Support --Al2 14:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
Comment Very nice (again). May I suggest dumping the numbers? IMO the years are enough to identify the models and/or refer to them. Lycaon 14:33, 14 November 2007 (UTC)- Support ack Lycaon. However, even with numbers I like it. --Thermos 14:53, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Info The idea of numbers is to put other information, such as country of origin, model name, inventor, etc, which could be included in a separate table. --Al2 14:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment That wasn't obvious to me. However, your resoning is sound. Therefore, leave the numbers and discard my former comment in this respect. --Thermos 15:37, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Support Acarpentier 14:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Support overwhelming --libertad0 ॐ 15:48, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment I'm so close to supporting, but there are a couple issues... First, the spokes on the sixth bike (back wheel) are messed up. On top they're too clumped together. The sixth bike is also missing a chain. Overall, the level of detail is inconsistent. The last bike is very detailed (I know, I opened it in Inkscape ;) ), however the bikes on top aren't. Rocket000 18:57, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, and checking out your other versions - the dates don't match. Like this one say the second bike is from 1885, not 1830. Rocket000 19:03, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
- Support Thanks for fixing those things. Great job! Rocket000 11:57, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
Oppose
- Support Great, now that it's fixed I support /Daniel78 19:29, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Support--Beyond silence 08:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Info I have uploaded a new version. I corrected the issue with the chain drives in bicycle 5 and 6. I removed shades and highlights in bicycle 7 so it is less detailed. The idea of this diagram is not detail, due to its rendering size, but the way bicycle evolved. Anyway, I think old bicycle were less sophisticated that new ones! Regarding the image with a different year, I think it is a cache problem with the PNG image because I had corrected that before, and when you download the SVG archive it does have the correct year—1930. --Al2 12:29, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Support Excellent work. Only thing missing are the new hybrid bikes. Calibas 22:55, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
- Support --Böhringer 12:51, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose for now -- The coloured bases spoil the illustration, better put them below the wheels. Also, the image should have a much better balance with one more bike - Alvesgaspar 16:36, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment In my view, the missing bicycle stands for future inventions.--Al2 17:23, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
- Support --Rollopack 07:14, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Support Merlijn 11:58, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
result: 11 supports, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Benh 21:52, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
