Commons:Valued image candidates/Mammal heart model 02- FMVZ USP-04.jpg/Archive of previous reviews

•  Comment - Horadrim, if you want more than one of these heart models to be promoted to VI, you need to differentiate their scopes. Right now, I'm confused about what you want us to do, because the normal procedure is to pick one photo in a category as best in scope, yet you've nominated two photos in scopes that are not clearly differentiated. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:18, 7 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment - Ikan Kekek, I performed the scope upgrade. -- Horadrim (talk) 16:12, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment - This looks better. I believe the time for voting on this expired and it needs to be resubmitted, though. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:51, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment the scope is overly complicated, imho. Why not simply "mammal heart, didactic model? --El Grafo (talk) 15:28, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello El Grafo, I updated the scope, it's ok now? -- Horadrim (talk) 19:30, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

@Horadrim: sorry, I saw this too late: If you re-nominate with that scope and give me a ping, I'll support. --El Grafo (talk) 08:33, 3 March 2017 (UTC)