Info Geocoding is not relevant in this case. Quote from rules: "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 ..." It's relevant to know, that this was taken at an autumn morning in middle Europe (in Weimar, Germany). Lipedia (talk) 19:42, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment You could at least do an effort, even de EXIF information is missing. A valued image should be valuable on all accounts. :-(. Lycaon (talk) 20:05, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Metafile is a must be, but more in QI and FP. VI isn't case, even cell phones can be here, so no problem. Geocode, well, good to see, but wouldn't mind in this case. Mile (talk) 23:10, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Request For animal topics (this clearly is a subscope (web) of a certain family of spiders), the scope has to be formatted according to the guidelines. The current scope is not a scope but an vernacular (and not even unique) description. IMO this nomination cannot be closed without fixing this. Moreover geo-referencing for non-studio animal scopes is 'always' relevant. If you took the photo yourself, it is not at all difficult to do a bit of effort with e.g. Google Earth, to obtain a reliable geo-location. So far only criteria 3, 4 and 6 are fulfilled! Lycaon (talk) 12:19, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
