Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bantu expansion

Bantu expansion
Self-nomination. I think this diagram is brilliant through its simplicity and significantly adds to the Bantu article (It probably should be in Bantu languages or even in Bantu expansion, but that's irrelevant here). I don't see too much maps, diagrams and illustrations nominated here, so I thought I'd give it a try &mdash; I want to know what it takes to create something of Featured quality... &mdash; mark &#9998; 14:04, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Nominate and support.  &mdash; mark &#9998; 14:04, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I think you've done a good job at clearly illustrating the topic, but it's just that the picture doens't strike me as being fascinating or simply fantastic. Enochlau 20:43, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. A clear illustration, but hardly worthy of feature illustration status. Denni &#9775; 23:38, 2005 Jan 7 (UTC)
 * Support.Very good Illustration, and absolutely damn fine picture. This is an encyclopedia project, not a fancy art show. Just because its not fancy-pants doesn't mean it isn't great for what it is.--ZayZayEM 03:43, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Good illustration, but not really feature-quality. Oppose. Neutralitytalk 05:02, Jan 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Not really feature-quality. Also its not very precise, as someone who hasn't read the article I don't know things like where the language originated - a dot with a label would be handy. Also the arrow technique only vaguely shows how far each phase spread. Does the phase spreading end at the tip of the arrow or where? Not bad, and if I were to read the article I'm sure I'd be able to find out these things, but the diagram should be able to tell me. --Fir0002 07:31, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Can it be precise? I don't think such a diagram could ever really be much more precise. Its not like the language had rigid clear borders as to where it stopped spreading and never ever spread any further in that "wave".--ZayZayEM 07:07, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * The vagueness is indeed unavoidable &mdash; the data is vague too (we are talking here about historical developments that can never be traced exactly). But the point about marking the original location is well taken; I'm going to place a dot in Nigeria.
 * Neutral. FPC seems to be pretty hostile towards diagrams at the moment, so I purposely lean towards support. I think you've done an excellent job here, but the subject isn't too gripping (and I work in linguistics a little). However, it would be worth making a text free version available on Wikipedia:Commons (along with your other diagrams, which are all of a similar high quality) -- Solipsist 21:10, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. It's nice, but not quite FPC material. The diagram may be an excellent illustration in the context of the article, but it doesn't really stand on its own. - Jpo 23:52, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose - It adds well to the article, but it's not that really just stunning on it's own. It's good, but it needs context. -SocratesJedi | Talk 22:48, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Not promoted +2/-6/1 BrokenSegue 20:16, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)