Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bicycle diagram

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Bicycle diagram[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2012 at 09:21:31 (UTC)

Original – Schematic Diagram of a bicycle.
High EV, good illustrative diagram
Articles in which this image appears
Bicycle, Template:Bike equipment
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Diagrams, drawings, and maps/Diagrams
  • Support as nominator --Tomer T (talk) 09:21, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment: it was recoloured re to be more "eye-friendly" but I'm not convinced - it makes the red pointing circles harder to discern. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 10:38, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Wow! Just noticed the file history now. Prefer the green one. Jkadavoor (talk) 07:19, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Support: This has to be both the simplest and most informative diagram of a bicycle I have ever seen. I can't imagine a better diagram ever being uploaded and see no reason why this image should not be featured. 16bitz 19:10, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Support per 16bitz. I wish one in Malayalam too. Jkadavoor (talk) 09:21, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Support Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:32, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Question: Is it just me or do the grey boxes look awkward/distracting to anyone else? SpencerT♦C 21:01, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
  • I noticed that unusual thing earlier; but not very disturbing to me. Instead it acts as a handle to hold and group the links together. Moving the letters left and right to avoid the overlapping may better; but it is just my taste. Jkadavoor (talk) 07:12, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Not "amazed" by the quality; a solid image, but IMO not quite FP worthy. SpencerT♦C 07:55, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Graphically this is rather crude, although more or less technically correct. It would be a lot clearer as a simple line drawing, for example the cranks would stand out from the chainring not blend into the dark mass there, and coloured rims distract from the pointers as above. It's absolutely basic in diagrams that your pointers don't cross over, or touch other things - the front derailleur label goes right over the rear one. The grey boxes are distracting and serve no purpose. Finally, the labels are grouped semi-logically e.g. the head tube is part of the frame, there are no labels for brake levers or brake cables. A very definite 'no' to FP as it stands. ProfDEH (talk) 07:36, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment: The underlying line drawing is in fact very nicely done, lots of clear detail, and it would be great to see that without any colour, or just a light tone that highlights the solid parts but keeps all the detail visible. That and rearrange the labels a bit. ProfDEH (talk) 07:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Support It is rare that the EV itself conveys a "wow" factor, but wow. -- King of ♠ 10:25, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose I'm definitely not a fan of the grey boxes or the font choice. Change them and I'd support in an instant! Aaadddaaammm (talk) 18:59, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Oppose as is A few important things are missing, like the stem, or much mention of braking components (lever, cable, should say front caliper break). It would be nice to have a rear caliper brake and a front disc brake to illustrate both types of components there. I'm not a huge fan of the arbitrary grouping ("Saddle Area" is just something invented for this particular diagram, better not to mention it, "Group set" is usually the name given to the drive train components including the crankset but not the pedals). JJ Harrison (talk) 08:39, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Support very clear,concise and uncluttered.One minor nitpick-should it be tire or tyre-I'm not certain whether this is a 'British' or 'US' article Lemon martini (talk) 12:25, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Support Armbrust The Homonculus 09:26, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment Grey boxes need to go. Would prefer colorless version too. Makeemlighter (talk) 02:53, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 23:57, 1 November 2012 (UTC)