Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:St Etheldreda's Church Interior, London, UK - Diliff.jpg

File:St Etheldreda's Church Interior, London, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2015 at 10:57:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:St Etheldreda's Church Interior, London, UK - Diliff.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:St Etheldreda's Church Interior, London, UK - Diliff.jpg

• St Etheldreda's Church Interior Set
• 
  The interior of St Etheldreda's Church looking east to the altar
• 
  The interior of St Etheldreda's Church looking west to the organ and entrance

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
•  Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff. This will be a complicated nomination. I want to replace an existing FP (my previous Featured Picture of the interior) with these two images as a set. So it is a delist and replace nomination, replacing one image with two images! -- Diliff (talk) 10:57, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
•  Support -- Diliff (talk) 10:57, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment. Jebulon, the first image is a re-shoot of the image that you had previously commented on, and said that the 'benches' were not straight. Well, I took the photo again and they have the same tilts. I'm sure it's the way they are in reality. ;-) I don't think I could make the same 'mistake' twice. Diliff (talk) 11:10, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Really great, Diliff, congratulations! --Tremonist (talk) 15:23, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment I tend to oppose, because the proportions between the two pictures look really different, it is disturbing for a set. Any comment ?--Jebulon (talk) 16:54, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm not really sure what you mean. The first image was not taken at the same time as the second, but they have a similar angle of view. The second one is not quite as wide as the first, horizontally, but apart from that they are equivalent views from opposite ends of the church. They are symmetrical on the vertical axis, with the horizon at the same point. Do you think they have to be perfectly symmetrical with each other? The chosen framing depends on the composition. What works for one photo won't always work for the other. If the second image was wider like the first, it would show half of the stained glass windows, and that is something that was criticised in the previous nomination (someone suggested that the windows be cropped out). As they say, damned if you do, damned if you don't! ;-) Diliff (talk) 17:42, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
•  Support -- Pofka (talk) 17:19, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
•  Support as a set. --Laitche (talk) 18:27, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
•  Support especially for the first...also I don't understand the reason of 2 pics...--LivioAndronico ^(talk) 19:28, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
  • The reason for two pics is that they show opposite ends of the church for a more complete understanding of the space. I also took a 360x180 panorama of it but as we can't display them properly in Commons yet (although there is some news that it will be available very soon), this is the best choice for now. Diliff (talk) 21:35, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

• It becomes complicated. I block the tourists in Rome .... if I ask their to move,they kill me .....--LivioAndronico ^(talk) 21:54, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

• Anyway the panorama is great!--LivioAndronico ^(talk) 21:55, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Not sure what you mean about the tourists, I didn't say anything about them! Although actually there were some visitors here in the church too. I didn't ask them to move, I just waited patiently until they left. :-) Diliff (talk) 22:03, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

•  Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:02, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
•  Question No idea how to handle sets here? Do we already settled this matter? Jee 12:44, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Jee, I'm not sure, but there was a lot of discussion on how we agreed they could be submitted now so I thought we had a process. And I remember seeing some sets nominated and featured a few months ago, but I can't recall what they were now. I suppose they just need to be treated as individual images. Ideally we should have a template that identifies it as part of the set though, rather than being only a featured picture. Diliff (talk) 12:45, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
    • I checked one nom as Laitche mentioned it in his set nom. I didn't see any picture included in chronological gallery. all four images are added in subject gallery. Nowhere the word "set" is mentioned. I don't think people have an understanding of the fp system. It not just about getting a {{Assessments}} on their works. All the galleries and categories need to be properly maintained. Two days ago, I just check the current chronological gallery. It was not updated even though day 17 was passed after June. :( Jee 14:28, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
      • And this one also has passed as a set. --Laitche (talk) 14:43, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
        • It is also not in chronological gallery. BTW, I'm no way against sets. But we need a formal procedure and need to mentioned in Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished for uniformity. Jee 14:56, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
          • Why don't we add "featured=s" to {{Assessments}} and say in this page that sets must need "Manual procedure", meanwhile bot adapt the sets. --Laitche (talk) 15:16, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
            • May be KTC can help as he is now co-in-charge of the fpc bot. Jee 15:47, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
              • That's a good idea, KTC please... --Laitche (talk) 16:20, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:48, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 15:03, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings