Support This is not the best image of this species, but it is the best of the available images for the purpose of illustrating the species. This image is better for showing the flower but not the plant. Criterion 6 was somewhat difficult for me to look into -- Category:Plants of Greenland is one of the few "Plants of" categories that contains images and not galleries -- however, this inconsistency has nothing to do with the image or the scope stated in the nomination and I feel it is categorized as best it can be for now. With this image having the whites so blown, consideration might be given to a set nomination. -- carol (talk) 10:33, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Regarding crit 6, I think I will start a discussion about the formulation, as it really should state that it ia properly organized. For living organisms the official Commons policy, cf. COM:TOL is to place species images in a gallery of the same latin name (which this is) and not in a species category. The Category:Plants of Greenland is sort of a secondary categorization. I do think this cat should only contain images of plants photographed in Greenland. I see some inconsistency elsewhere regarding this as some users associate species which may be found in a specific country (but also in other countries) in a category like that, but that is misleading IMO as that will direct users looking in a plants of.. category to images which may not be from that particular country. Concerning the set proposal I would say no as I do not see the value of the set is significantly higher than the added value of each individual image. They are related though as it is different images of the same plant. I agree the other image is a better illustration of the flower. I might nominate that within the scope "Cerastium arcticum, flower" one day. -- Slaunger (talk) 10:52, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Unless you are involved with the TOL group, their methods of communicating do not exist unless one is to interpret their decrees from aggressive edits seen via a watched watchlist. I don't consider this to be adequate communication as it is available for interpretation only. -- carol (talk) 18:39, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
