Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Men's size 10 Sandals.jpg

Sandals for men

 * Reason:Good quality and EV. We have too few FP of human lifestyle and culture.
 * Articles this image appears in:Sandal, Bata Shoes
 * Creator:Muhammad Mahdi Karim


 * Support as nominator --Muhammad (talk) 16:42, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Support why not?  Zoo Fari  17:18, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Question Are there any copyright issues we need to look out for? Shoemaker's Holiday Over 210 FCs served
 * IIRC shoe designs don't have much in the way of copyright protection. The logo could be a different matter. Noodle snacks (talk) 00:01, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the logo would fall under de minis or something. --Muhammad (talk) 00:20, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Right. Sorry, but we do need to think these through. Unless someone comes up with a counterpoint, I'm happy to support, but the issue needs raised. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 210 FCs served 00:25, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Copyright on clothing is kinda messy. In so far as the sandals are useful articles they are not protected by copyright. Highly ornate sandles might be but these ones probably not since their more decorative features cannont be said to exist independently from what makes them a useful article.©Geni 00:46, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * They're a brand name, not sure commercial use of this image would be legal. — raeky ( talk 04:21, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This image was featured under similar circumstances --Muhammad (talk) 08:31, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Brand name isn't significant. The test is 1)are they a useful article (yes) and 2)Do they have decorative features that exist independent of what makes them a useful article? (very probably not). Thus not a copyvio.©Geni 09:22, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, size ten under which scale? Noodle snacks (talk) 05:14, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Indian scale? I bought them in India--Muhammad (talk) 08:31, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * My guess is that they use the UK scale. Most of the shoes here have four different sizes written on the label. Noodle snacks (talk) 09:53, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I measured the sandal's length with a ruler, came up to app 11.5 inches. According to this, that comes to a size 13.5 UK, 14 US and 13.5 Australia. --Muhammad (talk) 18:02, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd agree with NS. The shoes I'm currently wearing, if I remember correctly are 9.5 and I just measured them at 30cm. The lengths on that site may be incorrect, but I'd say more likely they're using 'internal' lengths or basically the length of the foot they're designed for, not the length of the shoe itself (although if we believe that site there's no such thing as men's size 9 or 9.5 in Aust or UK, which is news to me...). --jjron (talk) 06:54, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'd be inclined to trust this site more than the other one - it works for my shoes anyway and gives size 10.5 or 11 (UK) for a foot as long as those sandals - so probably about size 10 UK for a foot that fits in comfortably. Time3000 (talk) 09:38, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * comment should probably be renamed to something less generic.©Geni 00:46, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 02:25, 4 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Support Should possibly run it through a deletion to be on the safe side though. Noodle snacks (talk) 09:52, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. There are no copyright issues with this- see this Commons policy page. J Milburn (talk) 22:52, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Support then. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 210 FCs served 00:01, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Support - Nice picture. I think we have very few pictures in this category --Natrajdr (talk) 09:28, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose - nothing special and the image has low EV.--Avala (talk) 14:44, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Support A good quality studio shot with decent lighting of a subject that (judging by the article) doesn't have many good photos. I'd say that was special and had good EV.  Time3000 (talk) 15:01, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 00:37, 11 October 2009 (UTC)