Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Map of Gibraltar
- Reason
- Moved from picture peer review. Nice detailed map showing important locations; pretty much a perfect vector map. Edits to the original moved labels from the legend to the map and removed the boxy frame, and added the Ibrahim al-Ibrahim Mosque.
- Proposed caption
- Gibraltar is a British overseas territory located near the southernmost tip of the Iberian Peninsula overlooking the Strait of Gibraltar. The territory shares a border with Spain to the north. Gibraltar has historically been an important base for the British Armed Forces and is the site of a Royal Navy base.
- Articles this image appears in
- Gibraltar
- Creator
- Eric Gaba (Sting) with edits by the nominator
- Support as nominator Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 04:52, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Support per nom. --Malachirality (talk) 06:33, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Cacophony (talk) 07:09, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Support, looks good and comprehensive. --Golbez (talk) 19:20, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Support Yes, it's good. —αἰτίας •discussion• 21:47, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Support per nom - very good. 13:04, 9 December 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thelb4 (talk • contribs)
Oppose "Cemetery" is spelled wrong.I have a hard time checking the spelling of the rest of the captions due to the way my computer renders SVGs, but I oppose until these problems are fixed. Spikebrennan (talk) 03:58, 10 December 2007 (UTC)- Comment. Is the area that is labeled "Reclaimed Land" actually a geographic area with that name, or does the caption simply describe the fact that the land there is reclaimed? Perhaps an italicized caption might make it look less like the name of a neighborhood. Spikebrennan (talk) 14:40, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- Comment "Reclaimed Land" is in fact a geographic area, or "subdivision" so to speak. Chris.B • talk 15:38, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- I fixed the label; also resized down to 1000px wide. Any smaller and the labels will be illegible. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 18:55, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Display problems here too (Mac/Firefox) which make it impossible to view, let alone evaluate. Why does it have to be so big?
--mikaultalk 12:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've fixed the spelling on both versions. The edit has been resized, and the text has been converted to paths. This conversion should help rendering but at the expense of file size. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 17:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- It seems to render a lot better but is still quite unwieldy, ie very slow to scroll and pan, which I can only put down to file size. I see it's quite a bit smaller, but (unless I'm mistaken) with this scalable vector stuff there's no reason to have a default viewing width of more than (say) 800px, which might work better. It'll all be immaterial anyway once we get FFox3.0 but for now it's not quite happening. --mikaultalk 18:07, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Why is it that Apple and/or FFox can view .svg? Anyone know? --Malachirality (talk) 19:55, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not quite sure what your question is, but I'll try to explain. SVG files are really nothing more than text that uses a special markup (XML). The text is basically a list of coordinates, colors, and other attributes. Each browser has to "render" the file for itself, meaning it has to draw the picture based on the information in the (text) file. Some browsers are more reliable than others at rendering the file correctly, and especially older versions of most browsers have problems handling SVGs. The operating system is only important insofar as it determines which version of what browser you run. Some features that are allowed in the SVG format, such as certain blur filters and animation are not supported very well, if at all, in many browsers (yet!). Another option for folks whose browsers can't render vector images well is opening the file in a vector image editor, such as the free program Inkscape. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 23:45, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- It seems to render a lot better but is still quite unwieldy, ie very slow to scroll and pan, which I can only put down to file size. I see it's quite a bit smaller, but (unless I'm mistaken) with this scalable vector stuff there's no reason to have a default viewing width of more than (say) 800px, which might work better. It'll all be immaterial anyway once we get FFox3.0 but for now it's not quite happening. --mikaultalk 18:07, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- I've fixed the spelling on both versions. The edit has been resized, and the text has been converted to paths. This conversion should help rendering but at the expense of file size. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 17:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - I do believe that the locator map in the upper left is too small in proportion to the map itself. Other than that, this is a great map. Oscar (talk) 19:45, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Support I can't believe I missed a map of my own home! I have been far too busy on commons, shame on me. It is really a great map, Sting told me it was one of his most accurate. Chris.B • talk 15:33, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Support, really well done and sourced. gren グレン 20:23, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
- Support Edit 2 Only Per fixes. --Sharkface217 05:20, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Promoted Image:Gibraltar map-en-edit2.svg MER-C 07:38, 14 December 2007 (UTC)