Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Monopoly board
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Monopoly Board
I'm nominating this image primarily to "upgrade" the existing FP
- Support Self Nom. --Fir0002 07:56, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
- Support apart from the green lighting, I actually prefer the existing one in some ways. The tilted board is more engaging, and the uncluttered middle makes it easier to read the word MONOPOLY. They appear to be different versions of the game though (OIC the old one is German). I'm curious that both pics put jail closest to the viewer. The new pic is also slightly less encyclopaedic in that the "free parking" money in the middle is not actually in the rules - it's a widely played home variation. I like the dice on the new version, and tecnhically speaking, it's a better photo. I wonder where the bank is, though :) Incidentally, what version of the game is it? My one at home had very different colours for the money (500s were orange, 100s were red...), and the Community Chest and Chance cards were pale red and blue (respectively?). Ok, I've talked myself into it. :) Stevage 10:17, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- Whoops! You're probably right about the free parking. We always play like that :-). I don't know the exact version, but that set was bought probably only 4 months ago. --Fir0002 10:58, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
- Neutral. Nice photo, Fir. That's the Australian edition, I assume... the colors of the various bills are the same as in the U.S. edition, but the street names are different. My suggestions for improvement would be to rotate the board slightly (the nearly square left edge makes the composition somewhat static); to eliminate the 'free parking' money from the center of the board (though it's a common variation to play that way, it isn't part of the official rules); and to arrange the money, property cards, etc a bit less rigidly to better simulate an actual game in progress. (Maybe you could play an actual game with a few friends or family members, without telling them you intend to photograph it, and stop partway through the game to take a photo.) That would lend the image a more authentic look, I think. All that aside, I don't think I could support any version of a photo such as this one... I'm afraid nothing about an in-progress board game says "FP" to me. In the end that's why I didn't end up taking a similar photo myself. I'm not opposing, though, since it's clear there's a desire to have such a photo in featured status. That said, I hope this doesn't start a trend in which we get a bunch of game-in-progress photos for various games to judge for FP status. I don't think they're nearly as informative as some would suggest, since the viewer has to know something about the game ahead of time for any such photo to have much meaning for them. Plus it's pretty much impossible for a board-game photo to have anything in the way of a "wow" factor. Now, if somebody found a photo of Albert Einstein, Eleanor Roosevelt, Jackie Robinson and Gandhi playing a spirited game of Monopoly, I might support that one. :) -- Moondigger 12:29, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- No, British version actually. This is however the most common version sold in Australia too, but there is a special Australian version with Australian locations. Re Stevage above, I think I have the same version you describe as the colours in mine are what you say, obviously they've 'updated' it with this one. This is not the deluxe version. (I don't think it would be fair for anyone to oppose because the colours in their home version are different.) --jjron 00:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
- Neutral – Good photo, and I agree with Moondigger. Rotate it a bit (and maybe put somebody in jail?). What's up with the image compression, though? It's very noticable in the red areas of the image. ♠ SG →Talk 14:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose. I was hoping for an overview photo of the board to replace the grainy image we have now on FP. They appear to be at the same angle and quality, except an English language edition compared to the German edition currently featured. If it is impossible to find a greater image of the board then it should not be featured. -- AJ24 15:11, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
- Comment. Maybe it is because it is in English but the writing seems much clearer (It is not because I know the wods already either, I use the American version). I don't like the slight tilt though. I like the large angle better though just leveling this would be an improvement. If you try another picture, here are some suggestions: remove free parking money, move the dic to white space (off the word Monopoly). Add a fourth player (just to balance the image). If you angled it I would prefer GO to be closest. I am note sure If i will support as is, but it first must be put in an article. say1988 15:20, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. I like the angle of the board in the current FP, and it feels more like a "game currently in play". I don't remember ever stacking up the bills the way you do in the photo; we always stuck them in separate piles, halfway under the board, as in the current FP; also, the name of the game is clear in the current FP. If you could replicate the current FP's scene, especially the angle, then I would support. — BRIAN0918 • 2006-07-26 18:56
- Weak Oppose. The green-ness is the only thing I don't like about the old one. --Billpg 22:58, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
- Comment. This is already a lot better than the old pic, but what about reshooting? Some people voiced valid complaints about orientation of the board and angle. A good portion of the image to top is wasted with lots of plain white bg. If you made the angle a bit steeper it would also make the board mor legible. --Dschwen 19:16, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. I think one featured picture of Monopoly is enough, the existing one is already more interesting anyway.RyGuy17 20:31, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. This picture does not add value to the article and help complete readers' understanding of an article in ways other pictures in the article do not Wikipedia:What is a featured picture? --Pedit 21:20, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- User has only 7 edits, 6 of which are on FPC --Fir0002 22:14, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
- It is irrelevant how many edits I made, also my contribution may as well be more to this page for the future as well. The essence of what I said is true according to the criteria for FPC Wikipedia:What is a featured picture? . There is a great need of a proper group of photo editors to comment on photos which appears on the front page of such a great project as wikipedia!!--Pedit 02:29, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
- User has only 7 edits, 6 of which are on FPC --Fir0002 22:14, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. I glanced at the first image, then saw the second and thought "ooh, that's quite striking" - before realising that wasn't the candidate. Sorry. Halsteadk 21:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
- oppose i personally don't like both images (the current FP and the nominated one). I don't find it that striking and exceptional--Vircabutar 07:31, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. Existing one look fine to me. sikander 21:50, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose Although the white balance is better in your image, I prefer the composition in the current FP --Newton2 12:57, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Not promoted Thygard - Talk - Contribs - Email ---- 04:32, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
