Review
(criteria) |
 Oppose The scope is too broad, and you have actually two different scopes. How are children reading a book more representative of poverty in Nepal than, say, a photograph of a homeless man, or of a houshold? Skimel (talk) 17:38, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Skimel: I think you didn't check the reason, this picture showing affect of Poverty in Education in Nepal. this is not a picture of homeless people, its a picture of some poor children reading used books in their home. Can you suggest me better scope for this? Nirmal Dulal (talk) 04:21, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Archaeodontosaurus: - If you think The scope is too broad then Can you suggest better scope for this? I can correct it. - Nirmal Dulal (talk) 06:09, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment The images of this type are very difficult to label for VI. The specificity of the scope is a real problem. There are many images of this type in COMMNONS distributed in several categories. Why is this one more emblematic than the others? For my part I do not believe that we can label it but the discussion is open to other points of view and ideas. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:35, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Done I made little change in scope. - Nirmal Dulal (talk) 07:21, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- You can oppose but if you look picture carefully, (ie. Check thair dresses) you can see the poverty. - Nirmal Dulal (talk) 04:19, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- The younger girl's dress is dirty, but maybe she played in the dirt. It's not obvious to me. I lived in Malaysia in the mid 1970s, when it was an upper-tier developing country. Most of my neighbors were poor, but if you get my meaning, that was normal poverty, and therefore, not notable. And I used lots of used textbooks in public school here in New York, not because my family was poor (they were middle-income) but because the school system was shortchanged in funding. There's a lot of hidden poverty. Most musicians in New York are poor, but many of us own suits or formal dresses as professional clothing, so how would you be able to tell by looking at us that we're poor? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:52, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- this sign is called Shatkona in Nepal. if you look carefully, you can see the book written in Nepali Language.- Nirmal Dulal (talk) 10:23, 23 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Then maybe a good scope would be "Nepalese children reading books in Nepalese" ? Skimel (talk) 09:34, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done - Thanks Skimel for suggestion, I made changes in scope. - Nirmal Dulal (talk) 09:41, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - With so many people voting and commenting and with such a major change in scope, it's important to follow the standard procedure to inform everyone of the scope change. If you go into edit mode, I think you will see instructions above your screen telling you how to do it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:47, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry for not following procedure, Now I followed that. Thanks Ikan Kekek for informing. - Nirmal Dulal (talk) 11:19, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
----
 Scope changed from Affect of poverty in Education in Nepal to Nepalese children reading books in Nepali. --Nirmal Dulal (talk) 11:19, 24 October 2018 (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 - Thanks for going through the procedure. I think File:Grade 3 at Shree Sahara Bal Primary School, Pokhara, Nepal. (10698962134).jpg is the clearest example of a child reading a Nepali-language book. I'm not sure what we want to do with the scope of this photo now, because the difference is that these children are not in a school uniform and not at school, and they are sharing a book (not necessarily both reading, as the younger one at the moment seems to be looking at the Shatkona, which her sister is pointing at). I think this is a useful photo, but I'm not sure what the best scope would be. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:09, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment It is an emotional image, but it can not be the emblem of education in Nepal. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:20, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment @Nirmal Dulal: Quote from Commons:Valued images: "Valued images, on the other hand, are those that are the most valuable of their kind for use in an online context, within other Wikimedia projects". Can you suggest which specific Wikipedia articles/projects would benefit from these photographs and align the scope with those [potential] articles/projects? Martinvl (talk) 17:44, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Martinvl: - Please look here for use of this file on other other Wikimedia projects. - Nirmal Dulal (talk) 06:46, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Done- @Yann: added, thanks - Nirmal Dulal (talk) 04:56, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Support OK now. Yann (talk) 08:53, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]- Support per Yann, the new scope is OK. Skimel (talk) 09:46, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Support - support after changes in scope -Nabin K. Sapkota (talk) 04:35, 27 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I would remind everyone that when a scope is changed, opposing votes from before are still in force. And I can confirm that I still oppose, because (a) it's unclear the children are actually reading at the moment: instead, the older sister is pointing to the Shatkona and the others are looking at that symbol, which is not quite the same as reading; (b) there is another photo, albeit showing one child reading a book in Nepali, that I consider better in scope. Not every worthwhile photo has a suitable VI scope. I think this one doesn't. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:38, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
.jpg){kind=link}
