Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/International Phonetic Alphabet chart

International Phonetic Alphabet chart

Chart showing the pronunciations of the IPA.

This chart shows information on every symbol recognized by the IPA as a distinct human speech sound. This is extremely useful, well-arranged and pleasing to the eye, of high quality, and of extraordinary importance in the world of linguistics. Appears prominently in International Phonetic Alphabet. Created by User:Kwamikagami.

Nominate and support. - Dylan 19:39, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. It's very informative and uses a nice font, but I can't bring myself to support a boring black-and-white chart for FP. Sorry. Actually in some sense this is not even a "picture" since it looks like it was generated straight from a PDF or similar format. I might support this if it was spiced up with color and the layout was rearranged to take advantage of the fact that pictures don't have to be shaped like A4 pages. Redquark 22:06, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppozzzzzzzz - oops, nooded off there...--Deglr6328 00:29, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. LOL at previous comment. Its all been said. Informative sheet, but not a featured picture. It doesn't visually represent the article, its merely a useful reference for the article. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 01:08, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, It's just a black and white paper -- BWF89 01:49, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose That is just the kind of information that we do not want to be hidden in pictures - that is what the text in the articles is for. Mikeo 07:22, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Seems a bit dull to be a FP --Scot ^t 11:08, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose. It's very informative, and organizes the information in a way that explanatory text could not. However, as per Diliff, it's a useful reference for the article but is not useful on its own. bcasterline t 12:25, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose If it could be made into something an english teacher would want to laminate hang on thier wall I would support. I would say it needs to be colored up nicely and put into a wide rather than tall format. More like Image:Leaf_morphology_no_title.png. -Ravedave 17:40, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fierce, full blooded, ravenously oppose This is supposed to be a featured PICTURE Ben Payton
- Diagrams and maps have been made FPs before. bcasterline t 18:58, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - But this is neither. It's a table/chart. We'd be better off turning this into a table and several smaller images for the IPA article, possibly with this linked as a quickref sheet. Night Gyr 08:31, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this is a chart.--K.C. Tang 07:19, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this is a chart, not a picture L e idi ot 12:34, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support just to make it clear that charts and tables (such as this one) can be nominated and promoted here (we promote images here, not just pictures). Broken Segue 21:46, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I agree charts could become featured, but I don't see this as an interesting picture. If it had historical value at least it might work.say1988 03:01, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - heh, I'm actually intimately familiar with this chart. Every phonetics student ends up basically memorising it. It's actually extremely well presented and contains a lot of useful information. But as a picture, it's as boring as a newspaper. Stevage 12:49, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I highly suggest you all revisit the page and look at its contribution to the page. From my understanding, it is the basis for the page itself! There are whole sections that are used to break down each individual section within the image which shows its complexity. Even if you vote against this, I hope you will not simply say no because its just a chart; boring or otherwise.--Jonthecheet 08:16, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, it puts some IPA characters in italics, a practice best avoided. I'm also not convinced of its copyright status: while it is not identical to the official chart of the International Phonetic Association, it is awfully close to it. Perhaps close enough to it that User:Kwamikagami does not actually have the right to release it under the GFDL, I don't know. Angr (talk • contribs) 22:53, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I have no problems with the image, however its not a 'picture' and will not brighten up the front page.

Not promoted

Not promoted ~ Veledan • Talk 18:33, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]