Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/2004 election maps.PNG
The top right image failed to gain consensus on FPC a while back. This new image helps to clear up some of the issues people had, by comparing the standard image with other maps; the result is informative, thought-provoking, and just a tad striking. (I would prefer if people unfamiliar with the meaning of the top left image didn't vote, considering the image's target audience, but it's entirely your choice.) Credits are complex, so I recommend you see the image's page. Illustrates Red state vs. blue state divide. - Deltabeignet 01:40, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
- Nominate and support. - Deltabeignet 01:40, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose - It's not used in any article and although I supported it the first time around I think we need to wait more time between nominations. Also, there is too much white space for my liking. BrokenSegue 02:57, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
- It may have been a little too soon (although I maintain it is NOT my fault that it was removed from Red state vs. blue state divide.) On the other question, what would you prefer I do with the white space? Deltabeignet 18:36, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Personally I liked the original from before without the group. In the past (I think) we have promoted a group of pictures supporting one another (the smoke trails). Instead of a group picture (which ended up lowering the final resolution. Promoting two together would be nice. Perhaps if we explained the meaning of the original to the brits and aussies they'd be more likely to support it. This link is Broken 19:33, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- FYI, the image was reuploaded to the Wikimedia Commons, compressed, and the file extention was lower cased by me. The new location of the image is at Image:United_States_2004_election_maps.png. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 02:03, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Personally I liked the original from before without the group. In the past (I think) we have promoted a group of pictures supporting one another (the smoke trails). Instead of a group picture (which ended up lowering the final resolution. Promoting two together would be nice. Perhaps if we explained the meaning of the original to the brits and aussies they'd be more likely to support it. This link is Broken 19:33, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- It may have been a little too soon (although I maintain it is NOT my fault that it was removed from Red state vs. blue state divide.) On the other question, what would you prefer I do with the white space? Deltabeignet 18:36, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Support. Neutralitytalk 02:08, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
- Support Combining all three maps provides an interesting outlook on the results. Circeus 18:00, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
- Comment unless this is added to an article it can't be promoted This link is Broken 06:24, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- I've re-added it to Red state vs. blue state divide. Deltabeignet 02:36, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose. Even if this image was used in an article or not listed for deletion, I find it just plain boring. -Lommer | talk 22:38, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Oppose. --Silversmith Hewwo 09:13, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Comment this picture is currently listed at Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion#May_24, listed by the original uploader (and the guy who is supporting this nomination). Zscout370 (Sound Off) 22:52, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Not promoted +3 / -3 -- Solipsist 07:35, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
