Review
(criteria) |
 Comment A drawing of a pig that doesn't show anything and is used only on user pages. -- che Oppose ack nominator. -- Slaunger 14:28, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply] Support Shows the essence of a pig as observed by a child. --Foroa 19:30, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Question So, if I understand you right, you would say that this image could be relevant in relation to, e.g., w:Child art? I follow you on that point (had not thought about that aspect). I guess this would only apply if the image was created by a child, if it depicts "a pig as observed by a child"? In this case it seems like the image has been made by a student, cs:Wikipedista:Juan de Vojníkov. I am not knowledgeable in Chech, but at least that user seems not to be a child as judged from the users user page. -- Slaunger 23:17, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment It does not matter who made it precisely, it is an abstraction as normally seen by a child. (Actually, by the look of the ears, I don't believe it is made by a little child, but I am not specialist). In many cases, encyclopedic illustrations gain on clarity and are made easier to understand if we can make good abstractions. Most people will appreciate pictures on a neutral background: this is a first level of abstraction. Abstraction is an important step in understanding. It is not necessarily for child work category; some of Picasso's works could be in the same category. --Foroa 07:16, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose Can we be serious please, this is just a scribble. I can produce hundreds of those a day. Even abstraction should have quality before it becomes valuable. Lycaon 08:32, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment If one publishes new images for the Rorschach inkblot test (See here for more), they might be very valuable. I can produce hundreds of those a day. In the domain of naive art, child language and psychology, I have seen no images, so this one is the best for me. Note that I supported this image as an example to show that we need to be open minded: a real expert in the domain, as with most very specialised domains, might have an opinion which is different with 98 % of the audience. --Foroa 11:30, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I can follow you with the point you are making about being more open-minded when reviewing VICs. To review a VIC one has to consider if this is valuable for Wikimedia projects, not whether the reviewer finds it valuable based on personal values and preferences. It is challenging for many users to set own preferences aside and think about community values. And we cannot expect that reviewers can always do this. Thus, there will be some variances in the opinions. Like in this case I reach a conclusion regarding this test nomination, which differs from yours, although I see your side of the coin as well. -- Slaunger 20:07, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- @Foroa: BTW, I'm a real specialist in pigs: I'm a zoologist! ('n echte zwinekenner) ;-)). Lycaon 21:05, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- @Lycaon: Yes, in the zoological aspects of pigs, but (kidding aside) I think Foroa is after another aspect of the pig - different perceptions of pigs from a psychological POV. ;-) -- Slaunger 21:11, 6 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- @Lycaon: I'm a real specialist in stress testing of systems, especially where people tend to make it a pig nest (zwynenest). And you certainly know that stress is one of the major problems with pigs and a cause of major economic damage ;-) VIC should be stress tested by more extreme or controversial examples, such as no-logo's, cartoons, erotic pictures, ... In this particular case, zoologists should be excluded as they approach the problem too much from their professional point of view. Unfortunately, I have not much time, but it would be interesting to insert a number of heavily debated controversial images that have been (almost) deleted. --Foroa 07:17, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- @Foroa. I agree that stress testing on more images covering more diverse subjects would be beneficial. We could add a single controversial one that has been almost deleted too. I do not think we should flood this test by such examples though as it could distract from actual stress testing into debating the controversial contents of the images. -- Slaunger 07:54, 7 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed. With controversial, I mean questioned value for the wiki, not ideological debates, although often, those aspects are mixed up. --Foroa 09:11, 7 February 2008 (UTC){{citation needed}}[reply]
- Oppose I think this is an adult drawing in the style of a child. The craftmanship is better than I would expect from a child given the unsophisticated depiction of the subject and the wobbly lines. I note especially that all the lines are closed and the high degree of symmetry of the head. I would be more likely to rate this drawing higher if I thought it was the work of a child because then it could be used to illustrate articles related to art and child perception and development. Walter Siegmund (talk) 16:03, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose a joke?--Orlovic (talk) 12:51, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose -> declined -- Slaunger 21:38, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
|
