Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Paris Metro map.gif

Paris Metro map

Paris metro network pictured at a geographically accurate scale.

Edit 1: white background.

Reason: It's clean: without the names of the stations, the interconnectedness of the network is easier to see, and the map isn't too cluttered. Also, this map doesn't have the artificially-parallel lines that the standard RATP-distributed one does, making it (purportedly) geographically accurate.
Articles this image appears in: Paris Métro, List of stations of the Paris Métro
Creator: User:Metropolitan
Nominator: Spebudmak

Support — Spebudmak 03:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- ...although I realize it's hard to see much in the thumbnail view. Spebudmak 03:50, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose May I have the honour of screaming "SVG!!!" for the first time? Also is it geo-referenced? If it is it should be treated like a map with scales and other things that you would find on a map. --antilived^{T | C | G} 04:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree with you completely on these technical issues; perhaps they could be addressed by someone who knows how to make SVG images. What do you think of the aesthetics, though? Spebudmak 04:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - IMHO the contrast is low and a white background would be better than the current grey background. The lines should be thicker and the station dots should be larger. --antilived^{T | C | G} 04:56, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Q So does this also exist with names? ~ trialsanderrors 04:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
oppose grey background looks muddy, and almost completely uninformative as a thumbnail. Debivort 04:56, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Made an edit, replaced background with white. (I hope I didn't miss any spots with my bucket-tool.) Spebudmak 08:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Bucket fill is not optimal, since the antialiasing of the image is geared towards a grey bg. Recoloring, another reason to use SVG. -> Oppose both. --Dschwen 09:30, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unfortunately, this isn't very appealing, graphically. Informative, yes, very good for the article, but no "wow" factor to make it an FP. --Janke | Talk 09:31, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, although aesthetically very well done (obviously a lot of work in this one!) I would only support a metro map (of any city) if it had the station names and other information found on the official map. As a metro map on wikipedia, this is not ecyclopaedically useful except for showing that the metro covers a lot of ground. Witty lama 10:19, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think you could fit all the station names on here -- look at the high density of stations in the centre! (note that only the central one-quarter of the image is actually "Paris"). It's a tradeoff between geographical accuracy and getting all the station names on. Maybe you could fit the names of the transfer stations but that's all. Spebudmak 17:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppos Even after clicking on it, it's almost impossible to see which lines are RER and which are metro. No station names, no geographic names of any kind. Not very informative, not very visually pleasing, and it's not even an .svg. Stevage 02:56, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The RATP map does not differentiate between Metro and RER lines either (the line thicknesses are the same).Spebudmak 17:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Do you need a microscope to read the "RER" designation? Stevage 02:12, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Come again? Are you viewing the image at full resolution? I think it's very easy to read the "M"'s and "RER"'s. Spebudmak 22:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose with the leaps and bounds we've undergone in diagram awesomeness you'd need a clear SVG with an image map, probably. gren グレン 08:47, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -Nelro 15:21, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 08:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]