Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Diagram of the Federal Government and American Union

Diagram of the Federal Government and American Union (1862)
Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2011 at 08:48:52 (UTC)
 * Reason:A very informative, high quality diagram. Used well in three articles, thrown in a fourth.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Federal government of the United States, Organization, History of the United States (1849–1865)
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Diagrams, drawings, and maps/Diagrams
 * Creator:N. Mendal Shafer


 * Support as nominator --  S ven M anguard  Wha?  08:48, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Now that there's an edit, I'll go on the record as supporting either version.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  09:14, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Support (prefer edit) Lots of interesting information is contained within this image if one takes the time to examine it. JJ Harrison (talk) 11:11, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Support Agree with JJ Harrison. Interesting history.  Pine (was GreenPine)  talk 20:45, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose New York is missing Long Island and Massachusetts is missing Cape Cod.  upstate NYer  03:53, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm just kidding - support this is a very informative diagram; would be cool to see a rendition of it representing today's borders and data. Definitely worthy.  upstate NYer  03:54, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Prefer Edit 1.  upstate NYer  02:43, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Support Edit 1 Defiantly. I've also uploaded a restored version, see edit 1, that has most of the dust removed and damage/scratches repaired. Fallschirmjäger &#9993; 20:17, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Support Edit 1 Very valuable image, high quality. Very good work on the restoration by Fallschirmjäger.  Jujutacular  talk 17:39, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Support Edit 1 Per above. Stare at it long enough and it reminds me of the circulatory system, with power flowing in the arteries and allegiance back in the veins. HereToHelp (talk to me) 00:55, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Query Thanks a ton for the restoration. Do you think it would be a good idea to fix the printing errors in the lines to the left and right of the House of Representatives, where it looks like too much ink was applied? I can think of arguments for and against such a change.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  01:51, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * If it was an original printing error, then it shouldn't be fixed. JJ Harrison (talk) 08:06, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem. I can understand about the lines but when I was cleaning it up, it was fairly obvious to me what was dust etc compared to printing errors, although those lines don't look great I think I agree with JJ on this. But it does look a bit out of place, considering everything else is mostly all-right. Fallschirmjäger</b></i> <b style="color:#3CB371">&#9993;</b> 09:56, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I have a question here, if it is possible that the improved version (eventually) can be uploaded as a new version of the first file. It seems to me User:Fallschirmjäger took the file I downloaded, which was a TIFF of 219.4mb, which he retouched some more. This gives me some credits for discovering this diagram (which I believed to be one of the first organizational charts of mankind ever drawn), solves the problem of multiple copies of practically the same images, and gives the file back it's more simple name. -- Mdd (talk) 23:45, 16 August 2011 (UTC) P.S. I just noticed I didn't link to the exact source at the library of congress, which I just corrected.
 * I can upload over the same filename as your upload if you wish, I just didn't want to overwrite the untouched original file as is the normal way of doing things. But then we would have two identical files, to be fair the name of the file isn't really a problem, plus it does link to your original upload. Any thoughts on this anyone? <i style="text-shadow:grey 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em;"><b style="color:#4D5D53">Fallschirm</b><b style="color:#2E8B57">jäger</b><b style="color:#701"></b></i> <b style="color:#3CB371">&#9993;</b> 15:49, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes I would like you to upload over the first file. I have no problem that you overwrite that file. Also this leaves the history of this image on Wikipedia (which started in 2008) simple. And this avoids problems in the futher that there are multiple copies. You made some good improvements to that file, for which I am very grateful. And I am very grateful for this nomination. -- Mdd (talk) 17:49, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
 * A restored image shouldn't overwrite an unrestored one. This is because you should link between the two on the image page, which lets the viewer see what modifications have occurred easily. JJ Harrison (talk) 06:34, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * In this case the unrestored image is at the library of congress a TIFF file of 219.4mb. -- Mdd (talk) 22:28, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Support Very interesting and good EV. SMasters (talk) 04:59, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 20:40, 19 August 2011 (UTC)