289:
would make for some silly looking images. The thumbnail version gives a great overview of the image. Viewing in full size offers more detail. And that would be the smart way to do it in my opinion. Laziness or privileged information has nothing to do with it. And while "adages" are all warm and fuzzy in an Uncle Remus sort of way, I would prefer you point to actual FP criteria written in cold hard text so everyone can see it and no one has to guess what the current adages are.
51:
567:. I was looking for what the colours mean, and it's frustrating to go looking for information that is not there/relevant, so I believe this simple fix should be executed. If the picture is found to have no appeal with uniform colours, then it also had none with random colours. What we're trying to convey is information, not fuzzy sensations at meaningless multicoloration.
676:
in response to some of the comments. Colors are consistent, foot conversion added to lengths, scale bar toned down a little and "Seawise Giant" added to biggest ship to (hopefully) reduce confusion. In addition, all the text bits are now actual text so they can be more easily edited/translated. This
267:
I think "fine" is the last description that applies in its current state. The adage has always been that FPs should stand on their own at main page size, and in that sense, this is definitely below par. There is no possible reason other than laziness that one kind of information should be privileged
520:
Since the colours of the ships don't seem to mean anything in particular, I suggest that the same two colours (one consistently for above waterline, one consistently for below waterline) be used for all ships. Of the listed combinations, red-bottom and grey-top seems sensible, although blue-bottom
323:
Again, to repeat what I said above... it has more to do with appearance than one bit of information being more worthy than another. The text is the size it is because it looks best that way. And you're missing an important point... the text is secondary. The main purpose of the image is the visual
288:
Laziness? I think you're way off base. In a technical image (of which this is a simple one), it's perfectly reasonable to scale the text size to the image... NOT blow up all the text in a clumsy attempt to make everything always legible at thumbnail size. I would argue that's just plain stupid and
545:
While I understand the seeking of uniformity, I would suggest the varied colors do not really disrupt the readers' understanding by any significant amount. Actually, I think the colors might even add to the visual appeal... they also emphasize that these are a series of
596:- Yes, it is useful and has obvious ev. But I see nothing extraordinary justying the status. In my opinion, it lacks the sophistication of most of our featured illustrations. By the way, the distance scale is awfull!
87:
143:
could we perhaps have underneath the images of each of the ships, what type of ships they are; oil tanker, cargo ship(?), passenger vessel and military? I think that would make it more informative --Thanks,
421:
the largest"... that's good and hopefully will carry into the article. The QE2 is case in point... it's not the largest passenger ship by length but it is by weight. I found that a bit confusing at first.
461:-- Informative, well put together, very encyclopedic and adds interest to any article its in. Plus it's in SVG format so it can be easily changed, updated, translated, etc.
728:
399:
Maybe it should be mentioned in the caption that Knock Nevis/Seawise Giant/Jahre Viking was scrapped in 2010. Other than that, a very nice and informative diagram.
324:
representation of differing ship sizes. If you removed all text except the names of the ships it would still convey 98% of the information it is meant to convey.
668:
nonetheless. Though it has okay enc. and looks much cleaner than it did at the start, I don't feel that this is one of the "top" images on
Knowledge (XXG).
718:
628:
I think s/he means the scale at the bottom. A grid would theoretically be better, but it would make the picture less pleasing to look at, methinks.
17:
65:
This is a very illustrative and educational diagram of some of the largest ships of different kinds. It has high EV and even shows the waterline.
723:
572:
526:
308:
273:
230:
478:
As above I can see why it is informative, but I can't see it as part of wikipedia's best work, and not worthy of FP in my opinion.
303:
You haven't answered the question, which was: why is one kind of information judged worthy of a larger font size than the other?
704:
686:
659:
637:
623:
605:
582:
559:
536:
511:
489:
470:
445:
431:
408:
394:
370:
333:
318:
298:
283:
262:
240:
217:
205:
180:
166:
148:
135:
118:
193:
71:
651:
I understand the purpose of the different colors on individual ships, but why do different ships have different colors?
578:
532:
314:
279:
236:
500:
All objections should be accompanied by a specific rationale that, if addressed, would make you support the image.
700:
131:
633:
601:
441:
390:
176:
114:
366:
99:
696:
404:
253:
be visible/legible at thumbnail size. That's why it's a thumbnail. I think it's fine as it is.
568:
522:
304:
269:
226:
127:
682:
629:
619:
597:
555:
507:
484:
466:
437:
427:
386:
329:
294:
258:
201:
172:
162:
110:
417:
I noticed that somewhere along the line the photo caption changed from "the largest" to "
436:
Yeah, I changed it to bring it closer to the article wording. I had missed the "some".
362:
502:
Just to stir the pot a little, what could be addressed to make you support the image?
712:
400:
381:
95:
79:
75:
50:
653:
214:
213:
thanks for taking my comments onboard. I think it looks a lot better now --Thanks,
145:
678:
615:
551:
503:
479:
462:
423:
325:
290:
254:
249:
I think it would look bad with that text large as well. It's not necessary that
197:
158:
677:
image won't achieve FP status, but maybe these changes made it a better image.
171:
Requested at the lab. I don't have Corel Draw or a similar SVG editor anymore.
225:
to be legible at least in a main page sized thumbnail, if not article-sized?
88:
Knowledge (XXG):Featured pictures/Diagrams, drawings, and maps/Diagrams
57:– A comparison of some of the largest ships of five different classes
49:
361:: Knock Nevis doesn't even seem to be included in the main list.
498:
At the top of this page in the How to
Comment section it says
521:(not currently used) might add to ease of understanding.
35:
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.
8:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Featured picture candidates
729:Featured picture nominations/October 2011
7:
157:I was thinking the very same thing.
68:Articles in which this image appears
614:What is meant by "distance scale"?
719:Ended featured picture nominations
24:
379:Note that it is another name for
190:Added the ship type to the image.
664:Well, my question was resolved.
28:Comparison of the largest ships
1:
194:List of world's longest ships
72:List of world's longest ships
724:Featured picture nominations
705:10:06, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
687:10:31, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
660:04:42, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
638:00:00, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
624:23:29, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
606:23:07, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
583:15:15, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
560:23:02, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
537:21:51, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
512:16:13, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
490:10:26, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
471:06:19, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
446:21:52, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
432:19:16, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
409:16:25, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
395:15:18, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
371:14:37, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
334:01:24, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
319:00:05, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
299:11:59, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
284:15:22, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
263:22:43, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
241:22:03, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
218:22:54, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
206:19:58, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
192:(Type name according to our
181:06:42, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
167:01:04, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
149:22:56, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
136:18:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
119:03:25, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
223:Can we have that big enough
745:
84:FP category for this image
58:
39:Voting period ends on
98:, derivative work by
53:
107:Support as nominator
59:
577:
548:different classes
531:
313:
278:
235:
47:
736:
656:
575:
529:
487:
482:
311:
276:
268:over the other.
233:
38:
36:
744:
743:
739:
738:
737:
735:
734:
733:
709:
708:
654:
485:
480:
37:
34:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
742:
740:
732:
731:
726:
721:
711:
710:
693:Not Promoted
690:
689:
671:
670:
669:
645:
644:
643:
642:
641:
640:
609:
608:
590:
589:
588:
587:
586:
585:
565:Oppose for now
540:
539:
517:
516:
515:
514:
493:
492:
473:
455:
454:
453:
452:
451:
450:
449:
448:
412:
411:
397:
374:
373:
355:
354:
353:
352:
351:
350:
349:
348:
347:
346:
345:
344:
343:
342:
341:
340:
339:
338:
337:
336:
244:
243:
220:
184:
183:
152:
151:
138:
121:
103:
102:
100:Maxrossomachin
93:
90:
85:
82:
69:
66:
63:
45:03:25:48 (UTC)
33:
30:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
741:
730:
727:
725:
722:
720:
717:
716:
714:
707:
706:
702:
698:
697:Makeemlighter
694:
688:
684:
680:
675:
674:Updated image
672:
667:
663:
662:
661:
658:
657:
650:
647:
646:
639:
635:
631:
627:
626:
625:
621:
617:
613:
612:
611:
610:
607:
603:
599:
595:
592:
591:
584:
580:
574:
570:
566:
563:
562:
561:
557:
553:
549:
544:
543:
542:
541:
538:
534:
528:
524:
519:
518:
513:
509:
505:
501:
497:
496:
495:
494:
491:
488:
483:
477:
474:
472:
468:
464:
460:
457:
456:
447:
443:
439:
435:
434:
433:
429:
425:
420:
416:
415:
414:
413:
410:
406:
402:
398:
396:
392:
388:
384:
383:
382:Seawise Giant
378:
377:
376:
375:
372:
368:
364:
360:
357:
356:
335:
331:
327:
322:
321:
320:
316:
310:
306:
302:
301:
300:
296:
292:
287:
286:
285:
281:
275:
271:
266:
265:
264:
260:
256:
252:
248:
247:
246:
245:
242:
238:
232:
228:
224:
221:
219:
216:
212:
209:
208:
207:
203:
199:
195:
191:
188:
187:
186:
185:
182:
178:
174:
170:
169:
168:
164:
160:
156:
155:
154:
153:
150:
147:
142:
139:
137:
133:
129:
126:, I like it.
125:
122:
120:
116:
112:
108:
105:
104:
101:
97:
94:
91:
89:
86:
83:
81:
77:
76:Seawise Giant
73:
70:
67:
64:
61:
60:
56:
52:
48:
46:
42:
29:
26:
19:
692:
691:
673:
665:
652:
648:
593:
564:
547:
499:
475:
458:
418:
380:
358:
250:
222:
210:
189:
140:
128:Aaadddaaammm
123:
106:
54:
44:
40:
32:
27:
666:Weak Oppose
630:Crisco 1492
598:Alvesgaspar
438:Crisco 1492
387:Crisco 1492
173:Crisco 1492
111:Crisco 1492
713:Categories
251:everything
80:Emma Mærsk
41:4 Nov 2011
649:Question:
550:of ship.
401:Otto Jula
363:J Milburn
96:Notafish
55:Original
655:Spencer
569:Samsara
523:Samsara
459:Support
419:some of
359:Comment
305:Samsara
270:Samsara
227:Samsara
215:Hadseys
211:Support
146:Hadseys
141:Comment
124:Support
92:Creator
679:JBarta
616:JBarta
594:Oppose
552:JBarta
504:JBarta
486:(talk)
481:JFitch
476:Oppose
463:JBarta
424:JBarta
326:JBarta
291:JBarta
255:JBarta
198:JBarta
159:JBarta
62:Reason
16:<
701:talk
683:talk
634:talk
620:talk
602:talk
556:talk
508:talk
467:talk
442:talk
428:talk
405:talk
391:talk
367:talk
330:talk
295:talk
259:talk
202:talk
177:talk
163:talk
132:talk
115:talk
196:.)
43:at
715::
703:)
695:--
685:)
636:)
622:)
604:)
581:)
579:FP
573:FA
558:)
535:)
533:FP
527:FA
510:)
469:)
444:)
430:)
407:)
393:)
385:.
369:)
332:)
317:)
315:FP
309:FA
297:)
282:)
280:FP
274:FA
261:)
239:)
237:FP
231:FA
204:)
179:)
165:)
134:)
117:)
109:--
78:,
74:,
699:(
681:(
632:(
618:(
600:(
576:•
571:(
554:(
530:•
525:(
506:(
465:(
440:(
426:(
403:(
389:(
365:(
328:(
312:•
307:(
293:(
277:•
272:(
257:(
234:•
229:(
200:(
175:(
161:(
130:(
113:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
