Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Mexico states evolution

Mexico states evolution

 * Reason:Self-nom; after the success and good reception of my last two nominations, I decided to throw this one up. The individual frames will eventually be at Territorial evolution of Mexico once I get that article done. The color of the United States changes to a paler gray to kind of move it to the background and cause it to be ignored; it still needs to be there, unless I make the map jerk around, but I wanted to make it kind of forgotten, since it's not involved in the changes anymore. --Golbez 10:50, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Articles this image appears in:Political divisions of Mexico
 * Creator:User:Golbez
 * Nominator: Golbez


 * Support &mdash; Golbez 10:50, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Support &mdash; Great work! Ancjr 10:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Support -Superb- Nelro 14:52, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong support great image, which obviously took a lot of work to compile. Ahadland 17:31, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - voters may wish to take a look at the concerns raised on the image talk page. I remain neutral. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 18:07, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Neutral for now - The time scale is cluttered and the year labels are too small - Alvesgaspar 19:05, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
 * They are identical in size two my other two recently featured images... --Golbez 01:02, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * SupportLooks good and easy to watch. LostCity42 17:46, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose The only problem i have with this image is a possible NPOV issue with the wording. I'm refering when it says: "united states recieves mexican cesion". I think it would be more apropiate to just say something like: ceeded to the US, because of X treaty or whatever. The way it's currently writen almost sound like it was a gift where there was actually a war. if that is changed i will change to strong support. (The image itself it's f-ing GREAT by the way. I hope you keep doing stuff like these on interesting/encyclopedic topics. Keep it up!!) Nnfolz 08:10, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I share your concern over this, I wasn't quite sure how to word it in so few letters - especially because the area didn't have a single name, except "Mexican Cession", and we can't say "United States obtains/gets/conquers Mexican Cession" because neither quite fits. I can try to fit "Mexico cedes Alta California, Nuevo Mexico to United States", how would that work? (Except it also included the disputed Texan land... hrm). Maybe do what I did for the constitution, have "Mexican Cession" in large text, then explain the specifics in smaller text? Like "United States receives Alta California, Nuevo Mexico, and disputed land with Texas following Mexican-American War"? And thank you very much for the kind words :) --Golbez 08:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Something like what you did with the constituton i belive will be ok. I think the example you gave will work just fine. Wonder when we will se the next in this series of pics.Nnfolz 23:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * If you mean the next version of this, tonight. If you mean the next country, I dunno - I tried doing Brazil and Argentina but lack of English sources has hampered my progress. Next will probably be Indonesia. --Golbez 01:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I meant next country. ;-)Nnfolz 05:04, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I support the wording given by Golbez above similar to the way the new constitution is done. The inclusion of a mention of the war makes it clear it wasn't just a friendly gift, but it incorporates the common English name for it, Mexican Cession. These really are great, and as a member of WikiProject Indonesia, I'm looking forward to that one. Rigadoun (talk) 18:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I've uploaded a new version with new wording for the Mexican Cession, and an error fixed (Aquascalientes was split from Zacatecas, not Jalisco). --Golbez 12:16, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Full support now Nnfolz 04:46, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

--KFP (talk | contribs) 15:29, 27 March 2007 (UTC)