Wikipedia:Valued picture candidates/Territorial change of China

Territorial change of China

Original - Territories occupied by different dynasties and modern political states throughout the history of China.

Reason: I think this is a good EV picture
Articles this image appears in: History of China, China, Ancient history
Creator: Pojanji
Time Requirement: Y Been in History of China for a month [1]
Image Page Traffic Statistics: March 2009

Support as nominator --—Chris! _ct 22:52, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would suggest trying this at FPC. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 02:30, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Apparently not. But I would have voted for it. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 02:55, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this deserved to be a FP, imo. But the FP regulars are a bit picky, though. That's why I try VP first.—Chris! _ct 18:51, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I noticed that there were concerns regarding its factual accuracy during the FPC; have these been addressed? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:56, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think the factual concern is referring to the purposed caption, not the image. As far as I know, this image is pretty accurate.—Chris! _ct 21:19, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the concern was regarding this description used for the Featured picture nomination, "China was under dynastic rule from the Xia Dynasty (2070 - 1600 BCE) until the collapse the Qing Dynasty and the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1912." The image appears to be accurate. VX!^talk 05:03, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support, ON THE CONDITION that the dates are accurate. Have they been verified? It seems a smidge fast, and there are some funny little dots on the coastline, but it's certainly a great educational tool. J Milburn (talk) 19:41, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the quality can definitely be improved upon, but this is a great image as far as educational value is concerned.—Chris! _ct 03:29, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More reviews, please. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 06:21, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support - The quality could be improved upon, but it's highly encyclopedic and informative, so I'm willing to overlook the minor issues. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 13:34, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 15:01, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]