Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Tatev Monastery 2

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2020 at 14:45:29 (UTC)

Original – Tatev monastery and surroundings

Reason: Detailed view of Tatev monastery and its surroundings. Sidenote: first nom [1] showed more of the surroundings but it was less detailed and a slightly stretched photo.
Articles in which this image appears: Tatev Monastery
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Others
Creator: Diego Delso

Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 14:45, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 16:31, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - DreamSparrow ^Chat 09:47, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - good, representative, high-quality image of a notable subject. Shame about the scaffolding, temporary roof and other building site debris, but it's an accurate depiction of the site as it stood at the time, and much higher-quality than alternatives that don't have this. TSP (talk) 11:51, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The infobox image, though not of this quality, is more encyclopaedic. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:47, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I agree with Charles. The scaffolding and such is likely removed now, and temporary additions to an ancient structure, with no discussion of the work being done (at least, not next to the image - if this was moved to the renovations section...), just doesn't seem to work. A pity, as the quality is excellent, but the EV is wanting because of that. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 7.3% of all FPs} 20:56, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it should be completed now, I think it's this: "The reconstruction of the Church of Surb Astvatsatsin to its original appearance was incorporated in the first stage of the Tatev monastic complex restoration. Work began in August 2016 and finished in October 2018." TSP (talk) 21:07, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Adam, do you think placing the image in the revival and restoration section (with an updated caption) gives it sufficient EV? There is a mention of the cable car station as well (in top left corner). Bammesk (talk) 03:20, 15 July 2020 (UTC) . . . . . By the way, Charles didn't say any of what you said. He gave no hints at all. The words "more encyclopedic", on their own, without context, leave the reader sitting and guessing. His comments too often border on WP:IDONTLIKEIT, examples [2], [3]. So often that I think it's disruptive. The instructions on top of this page call for "specific rationale". Just about all participants intuitively comment with some level of specificity. See Sca's comment here for example: "artsy composition", he is very clear.[reply]

I did consider suggesting this move; but decided it wouldn't make it better. Putting it in that section would suggest it's a picture of the scaffolding; and, as a picture of the scaffolding, it isn't great, because the vast majority of the image is not devoted to the scaffolding or indeed the cable car. TSP (talk) 11:57, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, let's leave it where it is. I agree the scaffolding isn't ideal, but this is the sharpest clearest image we have, and the scaffolding isn't totally out of context given the renovation section of the article. Bammesk (talk) 01:49, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. I agree with the criticism above. It may be the sharpest image, but sharpness isn't everything we need to consider. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:34, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:48, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]