Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bay Area Rapid Transit system map

Bay Area Rapid Transit system map

 * Reason:A very high quality map which imo is one of the best metro maps on Wikipedia. Even better than FP File:Madrid-metro-map.png I think.
 * Articles this image appears in:Bay Area Rapid Transit, List of Bay Area Rapid Transit stations
 * Creator:CountZ


 * Support as nominator --— Chris!  c t 18:16, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Support - highly illustrative --Thanks, Hadseys 20:46, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose: Why is the coast-line so "jigsaw puzzle" like? Apparently this is a version of this map, which I think is superior in terms of the actual geography of the place.  Plus, the original has more detail in the lines of the metro.  Compare, for example, the yellow line branching to the upper right.  I'm sorry, but I think too much has been lost between these two versions.  Just pointing out another example, the line shown to Richmond and the Richmond destination look very different on the original.  Which is more accurate?   Mae din \talk 11:49, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, this map is showing the simplified version of the metro system, which of course does not necessarily follow the actual geography. I personally think that a high quality metro map is supposed to illustrate the system clearly, not the geography. If you like to see the actual geography from a simple metro map, you are asking too much IMO.— Chris!  c t 20:04, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Support. Illustrates the system clearly and attractively. Mostlyharmless (talk) 03:44, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Support This is clearer than some of the actual BART maps I've run across!  Sophus Bie  (talk) 09:58, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Support. As the creator, how can I not support my creation?  With that said, I prefer my map of the entire Bay Area transit network. CountZ (talk) 16:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, I didn't know that File:Sf-new-map-present1.gif exists. That is a great one showing the entire transit system in SF Bay Area.— Chris!  c t 01:26, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I also have a map of the VTA system that I uploaded that's smaller size, if you're looking for something stylish. CountZ (talk) 22:36, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose Much prefer the map of the entire area that's linked above. The one Maedin links to is better as well. Makeemlighter (talk) 06:14, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose Not the best, given the image pointed by Countz. Would support that one instead.Ksempac (talk) 13:19, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * To Both: Based on the current FP criteria, the map of the entire area will fail for sure because of criteria 5 "Adds value to an article". Its enormous size prevents it from being used in articles. I think this image already fulfilled the criteria nicely.
 * To Makeemlighter: I am not convince that the one Maedin linked is better.— Chris!  c t 18:19, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Disagree. I'd rather nominate File:Sf-new-map-present1.gif (or any of my other maps, for that matter), if for no other reason than the regional map is clearer and provides more useful information.  I've already cropped and shrunk the regional map to a more reasonable size.  CountZ (talk) 03:43, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose File:Bart-map.svg communicates more clearly. BTW, there are at least two things screwy with the sourcing info. The page with sourcing info seems to have been blanket deleted by Majorly without checking what links to it (but possibly there was never any info there in the first place; regardless, fixing and/or commenting on links would seem to be a no-brainer). Furthermore, the image description was copy-pasted from that other image, File:Bart-map.svg. It's difficult to see how the nominated image is "based on" File:Caltrain map.svg. In conclusion, neither image provides any sources, but at least File:Bart-map.svg and File:Caltrain map.svg comprise a matching set, whereas this image stands out as a low-contrast, tiny-icons ugly duckling in a case where, in contrast to more complex metro and tram systems elsewhere, showing a proportional map actually adds value. Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 11:59, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Not sure exactly why you think File:Bart-map.svg is more clear. To me, it isn't. Also I am quite surprised to see that you oppose base entirely on the incorrect info on the image page. New user may not necessarily know how to upload images and will certainly make mistakes. In any case, I fix it up. And I stand by my opinion that this is better and this is not a "low-contrast, tiny-icons ugly duckling" as you have described.— Chris!  c t 00:51, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I am likewise quite surprised to see that you comment on my evaluation without apparently having read it, since I believe I commented extensively on the reasons for opposing. To make things easier for you in future, I've now put the relevant passages in bold. Thank you. Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 08:57, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

MER-C 11:23, 30 April 2009 (UTC)