Oppose Have to agree with Rastaman. This is actually not even a scope but a copy of an unfortunately named category (adjusted Lycaon (talk) 14:46, 15 September 2009 (UTC)). Lycaon (talk) 21:26, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm pretty sad you don't consider that door as important as the tousands of mushrooms and insects promoted. The exemple of "Narrow scope" in the rules is about something else : this very precise scope seems to me to have the importance of the third exemple of "suitable scopes" in the rules : "A location of more than local interest, like Château Frontenac" --Romanceor[parlons-en]01:52, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's a matter of words, but not only. Of course, San Marco Basilica in Venice is an main building that deserves a scope. And I agree, your image is beautiful. But in the present case, the scope is worded: "Category:San Marco (Venice) - Facade doors - 01 - Mosaics". That's a link, not a scope. For buildings, criteria precise: When appropriate, the building scope can be divided in a "XXX (exterior)" scope and a "XXX (interior)" scope, so an acceptable scope would be "St. Mark's Basilica (Venice) (exterior)" - too wide for this image. About content: there are thousands of mushrooms and insects promoted, but there are also thousands of articles about mushrooms and insects in the various wikipedias (and much more not illustrated yet and needing a photo). San Alipio portal is not even mentioned in the article about the basilica in :it:w, :fr:w, :en:w, :de:w. (which personally, I regret). Moreover, the description could be more complete (criterion 4. "Is fully described on the image page.") and mention that the represented scene is "la translation du corps de Saint Marc" and that it is located in the "tympan" (in French) of the portal. --Myrabella (talk) 06:42, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".
Support Thanks for your complements. The new scope is more precise than usally for buildings, but it seems OK to me on the model of living species, for which "sub-scopes may be proposed to illustrate a specific aspect", if "these show different and significant aspects of the species." It's the case here: this portal contents the only original mosaic to be found on the facade. In the category, File:BSM IMG 3878.JPG displays more architectural elements and File:Venice - St. Mark's Basilica – Lunetta 02.jpg focuses more on the mosaic itself, but the nominated image is a good balance between the two options, it is of high quality and it is well documented now. --Myrabella (talk) 23:51, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
