Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates/Fabyan Windmill
- Reason
- This picture is valuable because it shows the entire windmill. The people at the base give some perspective to it's size.
- Articles this image appears in
- Fabyan Windmill
Geneva, Illinois - Creator
- Jauerback
- Support as nominator --Jauerbackdude?/dude. 16:05, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose It is in fact obscured by some trees, a small secondary building in front, and a tiny bit by a branch top center (which is less of a concern). Personally I'm more partial to Image:Fabyan Windmill-3.JPG this one. Fletcher (talk) 22:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose As per above. The fact that the image is slightly obscured decreases its EV. I suggest the alternative, rather. Elucidate (light up) 17:18, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- Support - IMO the trees and building in front add to the EV by showing the windmill's surroundings in addition to the windmill. In addition, I agree with Jauerback that the people in front do add EV by showing the size, unlike the other pictures on the article page. Intothewoods29 (talk) 23:31, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
- The people at the base do add more value, as they give an idea of the windmill's relative size. I prefer the alternative, but I suspect a closer crop would be better (for the alternative). A clear shot of the windmill without any obstructions would have the most value for me, particlarly if there were people at the base, to illustrate the size. Elucidate (light up) 10:54, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- Comment. I originally thought, 'why not front on' but actually think it works better at an angle. This is perhaps a bit too side on (maybe about 45° would work better - you seem to have a few of these, so wouldn't have one like that would you, though that big tree we can see at left might be in the way?). However I also think it is tilted to the right. No, VPs don't have to be technically perfect like FPs do, but when it comes to things that can be easily fixed like a simple small rotation, there's no reason not to do so. And if you know how to do so, cloning out that centre twig would be good, at least the bottom section where it bumps into the windmill sails (was going to do it myself, but the filesize was too big for me). --jjron (talk) 14:55, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose per Fletcher's comments. The alternative mentioned is better. A photo of a windmill should clearly show its blades, which this one really doesn't. The other one does tho. ~ ωαdεstεr16«talkstalk» 04:42, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
- Comment I appreciate the feedback -- everything makes sense. It didn't occur to me about the branch being in the way. I took a few more the other day in the snow. I may upload those later. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 19:05, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
- Here's an alternative, but it's not in any articles, so it wouldn't qualify. However, I definitely plan on going back in the summer to get a better shot still. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 16:52, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- Personally, I like the alternate. it might need to be cropped a bit because of the windmill blade on the left side. :) Intothewoods29 (talk) 21:41, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
- Here's an alternative, but it's not in any articles, so it wouldn't qualify. However, I definitely plan on going back in the summer to get a better shot still. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 16:52, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
No consensus --Intothewoods29 (talk) 21:40, 14 January 2009 (UTC)