Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Panorama of Uppsala castle gardens spring 2009.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Panorama of Uppsala castle gardens spring 2009.jpg, not featured
[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2009 at 20:31:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created by Peipei - uploaded by Peipei - nominated by Peipei -- Peipei (talk) 20:31, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Support -- Peipei (talk) 20:31, 19 October 2009 (UTC)- Support Plrk (talk) 18:35, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Neutral. Quality issues : sharpness somewhat low, visible chromatic abberation. But, as a mitigating reason, it does have a wow factor. --MAURILBERT (discuter) 15:28, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- Even us humans would have a hard time counting that as a vote, could you perhaps just leave us with one to choose from (it is either support, neutral, or oppose). (At the moment our hard working bot will count that as two votes, and if it is sensible, discount both :-) Thanks --Tony Wills (talk) 20:13, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- The bot could in the future be improved to detect the ambiguity and clearly mark it or notify the voter, however currently it will just blindly count them both and it would be up to the reviewer to resolve the issue. /Daniel78 (talk) 21:52, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- (sigh), ok, let's be binary (or ternary, in that case). I guess striking out the confusing part of my statement wouldn't have helped either, because the bot doesn't see if a vote template is between <s> and </s> tags... --MAURILBERT (discuter) 16:01, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- Striking out would work fine, the bot ignores everything inside <s> tags. /Daniel78 (talk) 16:30, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- (sigh), ok, let's be binary (or ternary, in that case). I guess striking out the confusing part of my statement wouldn't have helped either, because the bot doesn't see if a vote template is between <s> and </s> tags... --MAURILBERT (discuter) 16:01, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
- The bot could in the future be improved to detect the ambiguity and clearly mark it or notify the voter, however currently it will just blindly count them both and it would be up to the reviewer to resolve the issue. /Daniel78 (talk) 21:52, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
- Even us humans would have a hard time counting that as a vote, could you perhaps just leave us with one to choose from (it is either support, neutral, or oppose). (At the moment our hard working bot will count that as two votes, and if it is sensible, discount both :-) Thanks --Tony Wills (talk) 20:13, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Not sharp enough. Maedin\talk 11:38, 23 October 2009 (UTC)- Oppose I don't think the composition is exceptional --S23678 (talk) 01:22, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
