Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/File:Han Civilisation.png

Map of Han Dynasty

 * Reason:For one, doesn't meet size requirements. Additionally, quality is not up to par: text isn't smooth (look like they were copy+pasted from a photocopy or something, if that were possible), text is really small, and in my opinion, the colors are not good for a map (way to dark; hard to read the text in many areas).
 * Previous nomination/s:Featured picture candidates/Han foreign relations 2 CE, creator and nominator informed
 * Nominator:  upstate NYer 


 * Delist and do not replace &mdash;  upstate NYer  01:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * "Please leave a note on the talk pages of the original creator/uploader and/or FPC nominator to let them know the delisting is being debated." Thanks. Makeemlighter (talk) 03:49, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Thanks for the reminder. :)  upstate NYer  22:14, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Move for Speedy Delist Historical inaccuracy, I have three textbooks in front of me and all of them concur that the Han Dynasty does not stretch that far west. There might be some claims to that area, but it impossible to hold, and the Han avoided it. Also, image poorly done. Nezzadar   [SPEAK]  03:51, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment, if inaccurate the most important place to go to is the articles.  No need to speedy from FP but getting proper information into articles is more important.  If this is representing territorial claim that's but instead should be noted.  For many older civilizations there is an unclear line between ambition and actuality. gren グレン 05:16, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 *  Tentative keep / delist  I probably won't be on again before this is over but if it is accurate then I definitely think it is worthy to be an FP since it seems to be well done and of high quality, if it is inaccurate then it definitely shouldn't be used since EV is definitely the most important factor on uploads outside of commons. Cat-five - talk 06:14, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Update It seems that the maps cannot agree on the true westward limits of the dynasty, textbooks, being more conservative, show it being slightly less than this, while the internet maps show more. This is because it is debatable as to how big of an impact the Great Wall had. By the way, where is the Great Wall in this image? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nezzadar (talk • contribs) 18:53, 12 November 2009
 * Delist in the spirit of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Featured_picture_candidates#Maps_as_Featured_Picture_Candidates (specifically, the non-adherence to WikiProject Maps/Conventions (not only are the colors poorly chosen, per UpstateNYer, but they are inconsistent with Wikipedia conventions for maps of this type.) Spikebrennan (talk) 16:59, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep pending further arguments and evidence. This is a difficult delist nomination to consider, because several issues are mixed up with one another. The graphics are of a design that could just as well have been intended for printing or possibly a TV program, somewhere between National Geographic and Discovery Channel. Basing a historical schematic on a physical map is certainly impressive, while arguments about the best EV I'm sure will go both ways. The copies we received of this and its sister images (File:Qin empire 210 BCE.png File:Ming foreign relations 1580.jpg or see User:Yeu Ninje/Maps; one further map by the same author is found here ) are of a resolution that is insufficient for FP, but it seems highly likely to me that larger versions exist. On the other hand, I couldn't find any evidence in Yeu's communications of why he might have withheld the larger versions. It is possible that Yue is actually closer to the subject matter than some of the textbooks that have been cited above - he seems to have dealt with these matters at a university; however, his main focus is on History of banking in China, an article he started and is the main contributor to. Now, you know and I know that we can make these images any colour we want, which is much easier than delisting and renominating, so I would much prefer that if it were to remain the main complaint. Nobody has mentioned so far the fact that the image is densely referenced, something that is very rare even in FPs. It cites four books as its sources. If someone wants to bring forward more authoritative sources, you'll probably have to thrash it out among Chinese history experts. I doubt the usual FPC suspects have the expertise to settle this content debate.  Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 00:48, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delist. Small, the colours aren't great, and having the licensing in the image is just awful (as much as I dislike people ignoring licensing requirements). There is simply no way this would pass a nomination tomorrow. If it is kept it is just another example of a double standard being applied. Mostlyharmless (talk) 11:37, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think "would pass nomination tomorrow" has been the criterion we've generally used. I think the consensus criterion is more along the lines of "seriously fallen behind". As for the colors, those are easy to fix (like I said above). Nobody has actually said what colors would be required, so the legitimacy of those comments has to be called into question. Meanwhile, WikiProject Maps/Conventions is not even an official WP guideline. Instead, it's mostly an entirely unreferenced essay written by Yug, and some of the edit summaries added by others who went about copyediting his writings do not inspire confidence (e.g. "cleaning. i dont even know what that last sentence is supposed to mean"). On top of that, this map type isn't even listed there, so whether any of the remarks apply to it is seriously questionable - you'd have to pretend it's actually trying to be a map of one of those other types. If the original essay is OR, I don't know what that latter leap would be... Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 12:03, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Replace and delist or keep. Oppose delisting without replacement. Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 18:17, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delist - poor colors, tiny text, not the best map Wikipedia has to offer. Renata (talk) 21:35, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delist, per Nezzadar, and the nomination statement. If the map is factually inaccurate, its encyclopedic value is severely lessened. –blurpeace (talk) 22:49, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * No evidence has been presented to establish that the secondary literature presented by Nezzadar trumps the primary literature used by the creator of the image. Nezzadar hasn't even named his "textbooks", whereas the creator has:
 * Tan Qixiang (ed.), Zhongguo lishi ditu (中国历史地图集; 1982)
 * Science and Civilisation, Vol. IV, (1954)
 * Generals of the South (1992)
 * Cambridge History of China, vol. 1, (1986)
 * Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 13:14, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

--Caspian blue 01:23, 11 December 2009 (UTC)