Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Washbasins of the restrooms in Crowne Plaza Vientiane.jpg

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:Washbasins of the restrooms in Crowne Plaza Vientiane.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2018 at 00:56:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Washbasins of the restrooms in Crowne Plaza Vientiane
  • Before uploading it, I wondered if I should change the frame and cut both sides to make this picture more symmetrical. Finally I decided to keep these elements because of the reflections in the mirror. It's symmetrical but more creative like this -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:20, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't understand this argument. This picture could easily illustrate an encyclopedic article about the hotel. But moreover, Commons is not an encyclopedia. Do you think your FP photo of construction workers seen through a large pipe is of more obvious encyclopedic value than this? I would think the contrary. But it is an excellent work of art, and that's the main point. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:26, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Really, can someone explain to me the redeeming qualities of this ordinary photograph in terms of visual elements, or context? Other than being a photograph of a restroom, what does it say? How is it that this represents anything of photographic value? Where is the aesthetics? The basic foundation of a photograph and photographic subjects have to do with their intrinsic qualities such a form, shape, color, texture, perspective, rythm, balance, etc., etc., and if we rise above the visual qualities, then we start exploring context and subjective values, like representation of a drama, event, condition, situation, etc. So I really would like to know what are those qualities here? The emperor has no clothes... --Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:22, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you think so, no-one will convince you otherwise. But for the hell of it: It's a beautiful motif, perfectly captured, so the form is satisfyingly restful, with the one exception that can't be helped being the electric hand dryer on the wall. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:54, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  CommentIkan Kekek I rarely oppose photographs here, and when I do, I expose the reason for my oppose. My ratio support vs oppose must be 100-1, and that is easy to verify. My opposes also are somewhat impulsive but always based on photographic criteria, and in this rare occasion I get a revenge review and a lesson on my shotcomings as a photographer from Basile. I try to stay within the scope of Commons and base my decision on the scope, but also I always go to my bottom line question, and that is if all else fails as far as the scope is concerned, whether the image in question has at least a decorative value that would make someone, somewhere download the photograph and print it just because it is a pretty photograph and display it somewhere. Would I download, print and frame this photograph of whatever it is, mirrors? walls? sinks? Patterns? Whatever it is of, no, and I wonder if anyone would. Would you? --Tomascastelazo (talk) 16:41, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • You may have thought I was picking on you. Not so. A bunch of people make the same argument about a photo not being encyclopedic, and that's what I don't understand at Commons FPC. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:10, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
« Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project. » written on top of this current page Featured picture candidate policy (point number 7). Even though, this picture has an indisputable encyclopedic value, as Ikan notices. It could be used in great articles such as Sink for example, Crowne Plaza, Luxury resorts, Wide-angle lens, etc. Thus I don't find this review constructive. But because several nominations of Tomascastelazo failed recently due to my reasoned contributions (1) (2) (3), I assume this impulsive comment is rather an instinctive reaction induced by these small annoyances. Not clever, but "1 time out of 100" is definitely better than always :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:53, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Basile Morin really, get a life, or at least get over this…. I will reply to this post just for sport… and I start by quoting from the Project Scope, which is above whatever else may be declared in sub pages.
The Aim of Wikimedia Commons is:
The aim of Wikimedia Commons is to provide a media file repository:
• that makes available public domain and freely-licensed educational media content to all, and
• that acts as a common repository for the various projects of the Wikimedia Foundation.
The expression "educational" is to be understood according to its broad meaning of "providing knowledge; instructional or informative". (So, where is the beef here? What is the argument for this providing knowledge; instructional or informative?)
And further down the page is
Uploaded files are within scope only if they comply with all of the following conditions. Every file:
• Must be a media file.
• Must be of an allowable free file format.
• Must be freely licensed or public domain.
• Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose.
• Must not contain only excluded educational content.
Perhaps it would be good for you to take a look…
Your assertion that your image has an “undisputable encyclopedic value” is nonsense, starting by the fact that I, as a member of this community, do not find it so. So your argument is disputable by at least one honest oppose. Your argument is like a trump-like demagoguery when he says things like “everyone knows this or that” in order to boost his arguments (or yours) and gives absolutely no evidence of his assertions.
I differ with you about the Crown Plaza article being great. Another Trumpism. It is just a technical article that has absolutely no transcendent qualities, educational or otherwise. Kind of a promotional brochure. Luxury resorts? Well, I think that there are much much better examples of photographs that capture the essence of luxury. I really doubt that this photograph depicts luxury, come on man, who are you kidding? One cannot even tell they are sinks!
Wide angle photography, again, if this were an expression of the possibilities of wide angle photography, we are really screwed… This is a master example of wide angle photography by a real photographer [[1]].
Now, you say in another trump-like style about the great sink article… to begin with, if this were a photograph of a sink, well, I would expect a photograph of a sink, not a story about a sink being hidden there somewhere. The sinks occupy perhaps 3-5% of the image area, and taken in such an angle that it is really hard to tell what they are. Much worse that that bird picture being too small in its environment. This photograph is basically of walls, perspective, rhythm, and a cut off hand dryier, but sinks? I just don´t see them. And the picture as an example of graphic qualities is just not there. If this is the best we can offer in those elements, again, we are in visual misery. This is and educational photograph of a sink [[2]]. How does this photograph aligns with the aim of Commons as far as being educational in any way is really beyond my capacity to reason, maybe I am just dumb.
It is funny how you zoom in on one oppose of mine and your opposes on several of my photographs, but fail to account for the many supports that I have given you when credit is due, so I don´t understand your trump-like tantrum. You can oppose my photographs anytime, for whatever reason you like, founded or unfounded, for revenge or for pleasure or for the pleasure of revenge...
If your photograph is featured, which looks like it will, we´ll see how many votes it gets at the Picture of the Year. That will be a very interesting metric. I bet you it will easily make it to the bottom 30.
And BTW, I suggest that you spend more time on your photography as opposed to playing psychologist ;)
Have a nice weekend!
--Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:10, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:58, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment - I don't mind removing the reflection of the camera (in fact, I appreciate it), but since it's noticeably missing, my attention was drawn to its absence. That's when I saw that the reflection of your tripod legs is still visible below the middle sink. May be a little more challenging to remove neatly, but, to me at least, it is distracting given the missing camera. Would support otherwise. — Rhododendrites talk |  21:11, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik(talk) 07:40, 11 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture#Laos
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Washbasins_of_the_restrooms_in_Crowne_Plaza_Vientiane.jpg&oldid=310640944"