Review
(criteria) |
 Oppose It looks good, but since it's not really comprehensible without the text, I'm not quite sure if it's valuable enough. It seems to try too hard for easy internationalisation, at the cost of clarity: it would probably be better if text was added to the image, and it was nominated as a Valued image set with multiple language versions. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:16, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
- I won't do that, sorry, I'm really convinced it is more valuable as it is now. Besides, image description is part of the value and part of the criteria: we don't print animal names on the pictures themselves... --Eusebius (talk) 21:23, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 Info Please also note that this choice is consistent with most of the previously promoted labelled diagrams:           --Eusebius (talk) 06:01, 22 April 2009 (UTC) Support Internationalisation is important. I think it is good for the scope. Yann (talk) 21:28, 22 April 2009 (UTC)- Support I think it is good too. →Diti the penguin — 13:23, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
Result: 2 support, 1 oppose =>
promoted. Eusebius (talk) 16:23, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
|
