Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/WW2 Allied Axis

WW2 Allied Axis

 * Blue = Western allies
 * Red = Soviets & communists
 * Black = Axis including Vichy French
 * Grey = Neutral

This image is pleasing to the eye, informative and compliments the pages Axis Powers and Allies of World War II nicely. It adds information that is hard to understand in text form. This image was created by Astrokey44.


 * Nominate and support. - Zepheus 22:49, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support Very informative. Good idea for an animation. Spizzma 23:08, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment This was nominated and not promoted in May 2006 (see failed nom). --  PageantUpdater  •  talk  |  contribs  |  esperanza  23:30, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: darn. - Zepheus 23:55, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I had made a month by month version based on the comments at the last nomination, which has more detail such as different colors for colonies, and less saturated colors overall, which I was intending to renominate but there are problems viewing the thumbnail. --Astrokey 44 00:23, 23 June 2006 (UTC)


 * neutral to both. First one is the same as last time.
 * The second one is just too long, and I think speeding it up would make it worse. It takes nearly 2 and a half minutes to get through. Maybe every third fram would be better, but I am not sure. And it seems to work fine for me in all sizes.
 * 01/1940 has a large black line on the bottom.
 * A list of each frame (as on the first one) would also be neccessary.
 * Rename USSR & communists to Eastern Allies (sure some countries, ie Ausralia and China, are in the East too, but are typically included with WEstern Allies in everyhting I read/see.
 * As stated on its (commons) Talk page, Italy is neutral until June of 1940.
 * I wonder about adding Pacific Axis and European Axis, but this may make it just too complicated, it is getting bad already.

Overal, both are very useful and informative, but with serious flaws, although version 2 is the beter of the pair.say1988 03:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * 01/1940 is the frame that it stops at on the 800px wide version for me - it gets to that and it goes back to the start - I dont see a black line there though, but a transparency (ie the grey grid) at the bottom, this must be related to why you see a black line but Im not sure what is causing it. I can change Italy, if you think of any other things which should be changed could you note here or at the commons talk page as it takes alot of time to put together and I the file is too large to save as separate layers so I have to open them all and do it in one go. --Astrokey 44 03:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Animated image not a good vehicle for this information. Mildly confusing to try to keep track of each change on each frame, especially as the format precludes the user from navigating between frames: a two and a half minute wait? The innumerable dots on the map, though they are accurate depictions of islands, are also distracting. Interesting, but poor conveyance. –ArmadniGeneral (talk • contribs) 06:19, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Some of the dots change color such as in the pacific though that is fairly hard to see because of the size. Do you think the separate files should go on commons? The animation could be an overview which has a template below it that links all the files - that way you could navigate between them. They take up about 50kb each so thats 3.5mb overall. --Astrokey 44 06:44, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Oppose, same reasons as last time. Animated gif just isn't the best medium for this information. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 06:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Can AVI files be uploaded here? I saved it as that and you can move between it a little better in a quicktime or whatever viewer --Astrokey 44 07:14, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * What we really need is a flash interface, so that users can move at their own speed. It might also make sense to break the images out into a series, and then link from each to the next in a standardized way, so people can click through and see the progress of the war over time. You can also create one image that places several maps side by side, to view progress that way. As for video, wikimedia only takes free codecs, which means ogg theora.  Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 07:20, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * What about open-source GPL codecs like x264? 69.116.150.174 16:13, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * ive put them up as separate maps now linked by a template, so you can click on any one you want. --Astrokey 44 11:54, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Support. Same reasons as last time. Very illustrative. This is definitely featured picture material. Mikeo 16:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Support - I still support this excellent picture. --Xtreambar 20:28, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment As I suggested during the last nomination, a smooth transition between the images is necessary. It is difficult to catch the subtle changes as the map progresses because they occur instantly. A fade effect between shots would make this image nearly perfect and earn my endorsement. mcshadypl 20:07, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose for the same reasons as last time. I just don't think an animated GIF is the right way to convey this information. User-controlled Flash movie would be far better.  howch e  ng   {chat} 06:51, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This is just not a fruitful way to display this information.  It's great that these maps have been so well-researched, but I think that a series of static maps would serve better in any article.  If you're looking to develop a more "creative" format to portray the war, I suggest looking at this for broad inspiration.--Pharos 22:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Raven4x4x 07:28, 1 July 2006 (UTC)