Comment Surely the scope should be "Alexandra Georgievna of Russia"? The word "best" is redundant because, by definition, a VI is the best within the scope. Also, the words "in photographs" is redundant - VIs do not normally differentiate between photographs and paintings. May I suggest that the scope be changed to just "Alexandra Georgievna of Russia"?
Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".
Comment The scope having been modified after the votes, the votes are canceled. Personally I think that the initial scope was better chosen because there are painted portaits and that I point now poses a problem.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:49, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support I have reviewed this image against all six VI criteria. In my view, it satisfies all the criteria apart from Criteria 5 (geocoding). Since this is a studio portrait, criteria 5 is redundant, so I am happy to support its nomination as a VI. Martinvl (talk) 13:05, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".
Comment@Ras67: I believe that Archaeodontosaurus's assertion that the word "photograph" must appear is wrong, so until we can sort this out, I suggest that you revert your last set of changes. Martinvl (talk) 21:18, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
