Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Chornaya Rechka (Saint Petersburg Metro)

Chornaya Rechka (Saint Petersburg Metro)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 Feb 2013 at 08:40:27 (UTC)

Original – Chornaya Rechka station of Saint Petersburg Metro

Reason: High quality and high EV
Articles in which this image appears: Saint Petersburg Metro, Chornaya Rechka (Saint Petersburg Metro)
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
Creator: Florstein

Support as nominator --Tomer T (talk) 08:40, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment/Question I'm not sure if it is an issue, but I'm sure I've read other objections based on this - The main article Chornaya Rechka is only one sentence long. Is that an issue with regards to an FP? gazhiley 13:04, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- On the other hand, it is also the main photograph for Saint Petersburg Metro. And there were images in the past that passed although their main article was a stub. Tomer T (talk) 13:42, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- A picture is a worth a thousand words. Going by that, if the article is small, surely the picture is more valuable? --Muhammad(talk) 14:15, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - A little cliche'd Muhammad, but I take your point... I'll weak support for now, as I'm personally not convinced that the EV is very high, considering the subject doesn't appear notable enough to have more than a sentence or two about it... gazhiley 14:56, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think EV is sufficient based on the use in Saint Petersburg Metro. It gives a good sense, apparently representative, of the style of the whole system, and how different it is architecturally from the Moscow system. Still making up my mind about the photo itself. I feel a little like it can't quite make up its mind between being street photography (for which one would want the young woman whose face is most prominent to be a bit more sharply in focus) and architectural photography. Weak support for now. Chick Bowen 01:24, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- EV is the easy criteria to meet: Does this illustrate the subject? Whether the subject is notable is handled by a different department - AfD. Rmhermen (talk) 18:29, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Am I right in thinking that this photograph is slightly tilted? Nick-D (talk) 00:00, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- About half a degree. Chick Bowen 01:10, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support very questionable EV. It's a nice enough image but encyclopedic value can't really be judged when there's nothing in the encyclopedia to value it with/against. Cat-five t c ---- 06:55, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The EV is extremely high for Chornaya Rechka (Saint Petersburg Metro), which is the station the picture is of, you disagree? — raeky t 15:25, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - I think he's making a similar point to me - ie yes this is fine for a picture of the metro station, but if the station article itself is no more than a single line of text, then this picture doesn't say a lot EV wise because there isn't much to say... If that makes sense?! gazhiley 16:38, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - We're not here to judge article quality or length, if the article meets WP:N, then that's all the consideration we should give it. Stubs are equally valid to have a FP the same as a FP article is. — raeky t 16:40, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 08:43, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]