Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ten Thousand Miles of the Yangtze River

Ten Thousand Miles of the Yangtze River
Voting period ends on 20 Jul 2011 at 06:06:29 (UTC)
 * Reason:A fascinating piece of art depicting the Yangtze River during the Ming Dynasty. What this lacks in placement, it more than makes up for in size and quality. It is by far the most impressive image on that page, and one of the most impressive I've seen on Wikipedia, which is why I brought it here pretty much the moment I saw it.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Yangtze River, Scroll
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Places/Panorama
 * Creator:Contested; originally attributed to Xia Gui, Ke Jiusi is also considered a possible author.


 * Support as nominator --  S ven M anguard  Wha?  06:06, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Support. Stunning image.  Love scanning it from left to right.  I works well as shown in the article with the L-R scroll bar at 5000px.  And given rivers are long and thin, the shape of the image and scrolling along it feels like a river journey.  It's actually BETTER with a scroll bar...sort of like When I Am King.  Here is at 10000px (although works fine at half that, just like looking a it). TCO (reviews needed)  09:52, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: Interesting how they've got humans pulling the boat up the river while the mules are scampering around somewhere else.--RDBury (talk) 15:04, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Support: Quite an epic piece of work; I wish I knew Chinese to be able to read it. I feel like it would be useful to have a translation on the image page. Also, is there a way to get this featured more prominently in the article? Right now the article could really use an image trim as it is quite saturated with images, but I don't really know which to lose and which to keep. - Running On Brains (talk) 06:58, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Support Article placement needs a bit of work though. JJ Harrison (talk)


 * Which section do you want it in? Across the bottom of Geography?  (As far as the rest of the images, doing some tryptichs (little galleries of 3 below or above sections) will allow including more images.  Probably also some thoughts on which images show what.  Geography realy ought to be a longer sectionm just in content, with sections for the different major parts of the river (and then an appropriate image for each section of the river).  No way Names should be longer than Geo.  I would think the scroll image ought to also have some use in Chinese painting, perhaps in Ming Dynasty, and perhaps in some article on scrolls or scroll painting.  I did look at the Chinese painting one, but it needs layout attention as well.TCO (reviews needed)  23:53, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I just added it to the "China" section of "Scroll" itself. No layout conflicts there and the article could really use a painting and an actuall image that you...scroll.TCO (reviews needed)  00:01, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The entire page needs a rewrite, which may or may not become part of a future China collaboration of the month. (I found the image because Yangtze River came up as a possible collaboration.) There needs to be a historical perspective (i.e. this is why the river is so bloody important) and maybe an artistic perspective (i.e. this river gets drawn a lot), this would make an excellent section lead for either. TCO's addition is also good.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  01:37, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I would hesitate (me) to go messing with that page given how important it is. Also would be a little concerned if it has owners.  Thing could really use some work though.  Very important geographic feature and we do a disorganized job of covering it.  Not National Geographic level of quality.TCO (reviews needed)  05:11, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * There are Ming Dynasty and Ming Dynasty Painting as spots for the work. Do you know what date it was painted?  Is it famous itself as a work of art?  I can't read the Chinese website.  Bunch of funny writing that looks like houses and stick figures.TCO (reviews needed)  05:11, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Just be WP:BOLD. I was at least partially referring to aesthetics as much as article content. See this] for how it appears on my computer when viewed at 1920 pixels wide. JJ Harrison (talk) 08:06, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I added it to "Scroll" already boldly. For the Ming stuff, I'm ready to add it, but need a little more information to do so (it is not just about plopping it down as made sense in "Scroll".  Need to know the timing of the artwork, to really integrate it into the Ming Dynasty articles.  For the China Painting article, thing needs a lot of layout work to get this painting in.  Not gonna do it (not my article of interest). For you, if you add a little {sp} template under the Yangtze River usage, think it will take care of the left image clash.  Probably better for you to do it though.TCO (reviews needed)  08:16, 14 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Support. Superb.  Jujutacular  talk 00:32, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Support This is an outstanding image with very strong EV Nick-D (talk) 08:52, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose Though I am clearly in the minority here, I think that this image has weak EV. In Yangtze River it is hardly (not at all) discussed. It just happens to be a historical image in the history section. For me, that doesn't translate to value. In scroll, it's the same thing. Just an image of a scroll in an article about them with no discussion. For me, it adds little to both. If it were in an article about its maker, or its own article, I would have an easier time with this. Cowtowner (talk) 23:26, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * As a followup, I'd note that this image from the Xia Gui article has much greater value and even better quality. It, in my opinion, would be worthy of featured status. Cowtowner (talk) 23:35, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose Agree with Cowtowner. This isn't adding much (if anything) to either article. Makeemlighter (talk) 19:06, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose and generally agree with Cowtowner, including the suggestion about the other image.  Pine (GreenPine)  t 04:59, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The Yangtze River article is in need of a rewrite anyways. Am I reading you all correctly that this would make a better FP candidate if it were featured prominently in the rewrite? It can be done, as this is the most impressive historical or artistic representation in the article, it just isn't shown off well. As to the second image, since it was Cowtowner that 'discovered' that image, he should be the one to nominate it, I'd feel guilty doing so unless Cowtowner tells me to.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  04:49, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I prefer this work to the other picture. The longer form seems to work better for a long river and for a "scrolled" scroll in the article on scroll.  Also, I like the art better.  Then again, I swim upstream ;-) TCO (reviews needed)  05:52, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Regretful oppose for lack of EV for the articles in which it appears. I'd support if: (1) it were illustrating an article about this specific document (or, perhaps, about the creator of the document); and (2) if the image page contained an English-language translation of the text in the document.  Spikebrennan (talk) 16:31, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

--J Milburn (talk) 14:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)