Info A photograph of the actual removal of skin and fat during a medical procedure known as abdominoplasty. It comprehensively illustrates the delicate nature of the surgery. -- Paravis
Comment Geocoding only when relevant ... "Exceptions include: studio and other non-place-related shots ..." (this would be an operating room, no need for geocode). I'd re-support this, but I'm the nominator. -- Paravis (talk) 21:01, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Image licensing has been approved by admin. Please check Terms of Use, article 10/11 for licensing information. My apologies, I'm just learning my way around. Paravis (talk) 18:59, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment {{OTRS|2009062410069953}}
Commentabout geocoding: Obviously this needs no coordinates, but geocoding also requires that a statement is put in the description as to why there is no need for geocoding (e.g. studio shot, privacy reasons, protected species, etc.). I will support when this is addressed. Lycaon (talk) 22:44, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Please read 'Comment about geocoding' above. I contacted the author more than 10 days ago, but no reaction was forthcoming. This can alway be resubmitted at a later stage. Lycaon (talk) 05:49, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Info I've added "coarse location data" based on Dr Schwartz's address, as well as the main reason why it is not fully geocoded: we don't have the exact location (we could pinpoint the address mentionned on Dr Schwartz's website but I'm not certain it is the place where operations take place). This is reasonably covered by the "unknown location" exception to geocoding. As a result, the file description looks really dumb now. --Eusebius (talk) 06:58, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is why I opposed the geocoding requirement when this was being set up: This insistence on geocoding, useles from an encyclopedic point of view, but infringing on the privacy of the individuals involved, is abhorent. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:05, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Geocoding would add zero encyclopedic merit here. If it serves absolutely no purpose, we should not require it. The point of geocoding is to allow people to go to a place and see where something happened, or to try and take a similar picture. For example, geocoding is used to help populate Google maps. Give one encyclopedic or any other use of geocoding in this case, and if you cannot, then geocoding should not be required. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:16, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't actually deal with my objecions to your insistence on geocoding. We are looking for the best image in the scope this is clearly that. Geocoding might offer a tiny benefit, but not enough that its failure to appear would keep this from being the most valuable image in its scope. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:10, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Adam, what prevent this candidate from being promoted is your comments. The six criteria have been addressed and it has three supports, so unless you want to oppose... --Eusebius (talk) 18:23, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Info The geocoding requirement for VI says:
5. Is geocoded, when relevant. All images are expected to be geocoded unless it would not be appropriate to do so. Exceptions include: studio and other non-place-related shots, unknown locations, illustrations, diagrams, charts and maps, situations where the publishing of a location might be prejudicial (for example, privacy concerns, endangered species). Where an exact location needs to be avoided, some coarse location data (e.g., regional) should normally be provided in the description field.
So how can anyone oppose to this nomination because of lacking geocoding? This clearly is a non-place-related shot, plus its location is unknown, plus possibly there could also be privacy issues. -- H005 (talk) 20:12, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support The new category added by T. Wills removes my reason to oppose, though the talk-page suggestion is of course unworkable: no casual user of commons has ever heard of a talk page!. That page is for , well, talk. Not for additional information. Lycaon (talk) 21:36, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Info The geocoding requirement for VI says: 
