Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Thamarai-Namam

Thamarai Namam

 * Reason:This is the religious symbol of Ayyavazhi, a South Indian Dharmic belief system. This Image, I feel, the best, and of highest-resolution among all the similar Ayyavazhi symbol images uploaded here in Wikimedia. It was also used in a large number of articles and forming the conceptual centre of many Ayyavazhi articles; It looks good too. So i feel better to nominate it to FPC.
 * Articles this image appears in:Ayyavazhi series. (In Infobox)
 * Creator:Vaikunda Raja


 * Support as nominator --Vaikunda Raja (talk) 16:37, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - as noted at the Graphic Lab entry, this really should be an SVG. Maybe with the greater exposure it gets here there'll be someone able to fix the problem that GL have come up against, namely that the central rose is made of 8571 separate paths that need to be combined/merged and smoothed before it will render properly upon export. Any takers? —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 18:11, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Lovely, and very encyclopedic. Durova Charge! 18:12, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: Wouldn't this work well as an SVG? Also, would it be possible to show an image of this symbol in use to help provide context? Are there large paintings of this in places of worship? Is it worn in jewellery? J Milburn (talk) 21:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I don't understand "to show an image of this symbol in use to help provide context?" Can you please reword the contents?. And there are paintings of this in worship centers; and was also worn in jewellary. And for the SVG issue, I tried but failed.- Vaikunda Raja (talk) 00:07, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Part of the problem, I believe, is vectorizing it, the actual making of the file. However, with so many paths, rendering also becomes an issue. Can we use gradients and such to come up with something simpler?--HereToHelp (talk to me) 01:39, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * What I was meaning was that I don't know what context the symbol would be used in- I was trying to understand the significance by seeing a picture of it in use. For instance, if File:Christian cross.svg was the candidate, you could show me File:Normandy cemetery.jpg to provide some context. J Milburn (talk) 17:23, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: Yes, I understand; Following are some images which could be examples as you told


 * On building structures
 * At Nizhal Thangal of Attoor, File:Thiru Nizhal Thangal of Attoor.jpg
 * At Nizhal Thangal of Nelli-ninra Vilai, File:Nelli Nintra Vilai Thangal.png
 * At Swamithope Pathi, religious head quarters, (flagmast) File:Flag mast of Swamithoppe.jpg


 * On wall painting from worship centers
 * Painting from a road-side wall at a worship center near Kanyakumari, File:Madhavapuram Ayyavazhi lotus.JPG
 * Painting from a Nizhal Thangal (worship center) at Nagercoil, File:Ayyavazhi lotus painting1.JPG
 * Painting from the same Nizhal Thangal File:Ayyavazhi lotus 3.JPG
 * Another painting from the same Nizhal Thangal File:Ayyavazhi Lotus Namam Painting 2.JPG
 * Light illumination of the symbol from a Nizhal Thangal near Thiruvattar, File:Ayyavazhi Light lotus.JPG


 * From Akilathirattu (Holy book) Cover


 * The Image from the cover of a DDP version of Akilam; File:DPV Ayyavazhi lotus.JPG (In the same image, notice the building (Detchanathu Dwaraka Pathi - an important worship center) below the main lotus - the symbol is sculptured over the top of the structure.


 * Support &mdash; Jake   Wartenberg  00:25, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose IMO does not meet criterion 3 --Muhammad (talk) 04:07, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose - IMO religious symbols, like national flags or polytical party emblems, should not be featured. There is too much involved beyond the picture itself. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:05, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Support, original is best I disagree with Alvesgaspar, though I can understand his views. However, this design is quite complex, and thus I think it no less featureable than any other highly significant piece of religious art. Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday (talk) 07:53, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Question- is the circle with the many points part of the emblem? Spikebrennan (talk) 14:12, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * No, The emblem includes only the Lotus and the Namam(White flame shape). - Vaikunda Raja (talk) 15:32, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Then for the sake of encyclopedic value, why should it be part of the nominated image? Spikebrennan (talk) 23:34, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, But I feel, it depends upon how much priority we give for the image 'as a emblem' in relation to 'as a religious art'. The more we consider it a emblem the more the designs in the background be omitted. Myself like to prefer it a religious art rather than something like a logo, though it is the 'symbol of Ayyavazhi'. And on using it as a symbol (not logo) where ever multi-color prints and paintings are made people use to draw something like light rays etc in the background around the image(lotus and Namam).


 * And if needed we shall remove the long green line which distracts the attention when it is viewed as a 'logo'. I like to know the views of other users too - Vaikunda Raja (talk) 06:16, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

It's pretty clear to me that this image is currently used in Wikipedia as an emblem, not as religious art-- for me, the distinction is that this image was created _for Wikipedia_. In contrast, the architectural motifs that are shown in the images that you cite above can also be seen as religious art (the architectural motifs weren't created for wikipedia). In my view, since the image is to be used as an emblem (representing Ayyavazhi) rather than as a photograph or reproduction of a specific, tangible work of religious art, the encyclopedic value would be highest if the image were limited to the features that are commonly recognized as part of the religious symbol-- see image to right:. Spikebrennan (talk) 14:32, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose Firstly, this should be svg. Secondly, while I appreciate the idea of art vs. emblem, I think the green spikes go too far. (The black and white goes to far the other way.) Cutting it off in a clean circle would draw focus to the important parts of the image, especially because they will be larger in thumbnail.--HereToHelp (talk to me) 01:17, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Is this Image [Alt 2] Ok? The distractions were removed and the resolution too was increased. - Vaikunda Raja (talk) 06:18, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Alt2I would prefer SVG, but the new image is very large nonetheless.--HereToHelp (talk to me) 23:19, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Comment on the alternates please. MER-C 06:28, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Alt2. This satsifies my concerns.  The so-called "Alt-1" was posted by me to illustrate a point and is not intended as a nomination.  Spikebrennan (talk) 13:28, 10 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Support ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 20:56, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Alt2 Vaikunda Raja (talk) 08:37, 16 March 2009 (UTC) (I support this too; But am not sure whether I shall vote here or not as I also supported the previous version as a nominator.)
 * Suport Beautiful work The Talking Sock talk contribs 22:41, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Support    Sophus Bie  (talk) 02:37, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

This does not constitute an endorsement of the Ayyavazhi religion. MER-C 10:31, 21 March 2009 (UTC)