Comment I think it is a good and valuable illustration of a modern high-rise apartment block in New Zealand. I recommend to narrow down the scope a little. With a scope this broad you will get very subjective reviews as what is perceived as a good illustration of a representative high-rise apartment block very much depends on the reviewers location, how modern the bulding is etc. See for instance Tower blocks and High-rise for very different examples of high-rise apartment blocks, which are also valuable. For instance this apartment block could by some users be considered an equally good ilustration. We recently added a clause warning about too broad scopes here. Suggestions for more suitable, but still relevant scopes could be High-rise apartment blocks in New Zealand or High-rise apartment blocks built 2000-. You decide. -- Slaunger21:54, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose OK, the changed scope just makes it past my "relevance for WMF" bar. However, you have another spring time shot of the same building which I think is marginally better at illustrating the subject due to a more fortunate lightning situation. Once I have added a geotag on that image (it must be identical to this one), I will let the two images compete in an MVR. -- Slaunger20:52, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose IMO the scope is too narrow. I do not see such big of a difference in architectural engineering of Residential Highrises around the world. The images displayed in Tower block look very similar to the one, which is nominated. That's why specifying New Zealand in the scope of the image does not make sense to me. Sorry.--Mbz101:21, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Just recently, in another image thread here, it was mooted that narrowing the scope WAS the way to deal with such an issue (too many images of similar scope and quality). -- Ingolfson06:12, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Yes, but the question is whether I am correct in that view, see the latest discussions. Is I have understood one of Mbz1s points is that there will always be very many photos of subjects which are very easy to photograph, so the mere quantity of images already on Commons may not be a very good indicator of relevance. -- Slaunger06:53, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
