Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The price of coffee

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] The price of coffee

Distribution of the wealth created by coffee production: rose - taxes, transport and toll; pink - vendors; blue - roasters and merchants; yellow - planters; green - workers

Pictoric pie chart illustrating the various components of the price of coffee. This is an eloquent and high quality work by Dominique Toussaint, appearing in article Economics of coffee. Please see picture file for numbers.

• Nominate and support. - Alvesgaspar 13:36, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. I'm not sure I can support it. It lacks any references and surely the price (particularly the tax and transportation elements of cost) would vary from region to region. It simply cannot be accurate everywhere for this reason and is therefore a flawed concept. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 13:44, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Comment I agree with Diliff. Also, what is a troll (other than a large, stupid rock with diamond teeth)? I am guessing it is toll. --liquidGhoul 13:48, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Comment What do you consider rose, and what pink? | AndonicO ^{Talk | Sign Here} 14:11, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
  • The biggest slice of the pie is rose, the next one is pink (at least in my monitor...) Alvesgaspar 14:30, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. A tilted pie chart is almost always a bad way to display data, because segments at the front look larger than those at the back even if they have the same angle. Additionally, it looks as if there are two pink rose segments because of the swirls in the coffee. Stephen Turner (Talk) 14:44, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Strong support. Amazing idea. I like how the coffee is the chart. --SonicChao ^talk 15:25, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. Cute, though. Pink and rose are nearly identical to me, it lacks context (is this worldwide?), and it lacks numbers. Do we have any other pie charts (or charts at all) that are featured pictures? --Golbez 16:17, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Info. I'm trying to contact the author in order to answer the questions about the data. Alvesgaspar 16:38, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. A case where the picture is a clever illustration of a concept but not, IMO, the quality of a FP. Agree with Stephen Turner about tilt and other comments abour rose/pink confusion. Pstuart84 18:07, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. Seems gimmicky and cutesy and "clever". Not that illustrative of the actual concept. Also, the rendering seems a little dated. Reminds me of early/mid-90s 3D computer art. Also the reflection and patterns in the surface seem odd/distracting. I'm personally not fond of it aesthetically, and I also feel it doesn't meet FP requirements exactly. --Andrew c 18:44, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose It's nice, but it lacks too much (per above). Also, I thought rose and pink were the other way around. Is there a way the colors can be confirmed? | AndonicO ^{Talk | Sign Here} 21:26, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Comment. I assume the colours go round clockwise, ending with green, though that won't save this picture. Pstuart84 22:36, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support if references and a specific location are added. Not expecting it, since the nominator is not the author. –Outriggr § 03:21, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
• Support - now i know where money goes --Puma5d04 05:39, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
• Strong oppose unless this is all sourced. I do like the image, however. gren グレン 09:00, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. Interesting idea, but unencyclopedic. NauticaShades 09:40, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose Seems a bit on the amateur side. It's a good concept, but the CG can be much better. Jumping cheese ^Cont@ct 23:08, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. It's just a pie chart/coffee mug combination that isn't as well executed as it could've been. Not feature-worthy. --RandomOrca2 20:00, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose No source for the data. -Ravedave ^{(help name my baby)} 20:53, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose Nice concept, but I don't think it deserves featured picture status. Also, I agree with above comment. Maybe include a source in the caption? Krowe 11:47, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Oppose - It is almost always a bad idea to dress up a chart or graph with "chartjunk", in this case the coffe cup framing the pie chart. The coffee cup graphic itself adds no information to the pie chart but does take up space that could be used for real information/data and, as noted by Stephen Turner, manages to skew the chart. I also object to the word "wealth". The correct term is "money" or "revenue" -- "wealth" is something else. Really bad. MapMaster 15:24, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Another Tufte fan? Stephen Turner (Talk) 20:21, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
    • Yes, indeed. He's not always right, but he has some great insights. MapMaster 04:41, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose: agree with Andrew c that the surface of the coffee looks ugly and unnatural. – b_jonas 16:50, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose, this picture is better suited for the boring PowerPoint^TM slides. - Mailer Diablo 19:18, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose per MapMaster JanSuchy 21:07, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Not promoted --KFP (talk | contribs) 19:58, 30 November 2006 (UTC)