Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ukraine elections map
Brillant, simple, colorful, informative graphic that clearly demonstrates the geopolitical divisions in Ukraine. It looks best at about 500px, which is its size on the 2004 Ukrainian presidential election article. Neutralitytalk 04:05, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)
- Support. Neutralitytalk 04:05, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)
- Comment. I would like to support but the full image looks exceptionally jagged (see discussion at FPC talk) and I'm worried that this image will be very dated soon enough, which is less than useful for featured pictures I suppose. -- [[User:Solitude|Solitude\talk]] 08:39, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)
- Support. James F. (talk) 13:34, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Support. Don't be put off by the lack of anti-aliasing on the original, this was provided by my request by User:Steschke. It is from the source image, which can be coloured in easily. As Neutrality said, it looks fine slightly smaller, but I kept it the original size when I uploaded so it would (a) have a smaller filesize and (b) be easier to edit. ed g2s • talk 16:11, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Oppose. Featured images should be timeless. This graphic will be out of date very soon. Janderk 23:10, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Support. Shows that wikipedia has competence also at actual afairs and can illustrate an article significantly. --Steschke 02:56, 2004 Dec 1 (UTC)
- Oppose. On its own, it's not particularly relevant for the Ukranian elections, as the winner is decided by popular vote, not by an electoral college.
Besides, the legend is wrong: one of the districts in the middle of the country has a percentage of 47% for Yushchenko; but the colour is given as 50%-60%.Eugene van der Pijll 16:58, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)- The point of the map is not to show how much of the vote each candidate got, it is to show the geographical distribution of the vote, i.e. the clear East/West divide. It would be no more relevant for an electoral college system it representing this point. As for the key, it has been fixed. ed g2s • talk 19:42, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- But the geographical distribution of the vote is not the most important thing about the election results. It's the total number of votes of both candidates that is important. Image:Ukrainian_presidential_election_2004-10-31.png is a much better picture that this one, as far as the information it contains. The importance of the geographical distribution only becomes clear in its context in section Ukrainian presidential election, 2004#Runoff. Eugene van der Pijll 22:04, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- The fact that you feel the geographical distribution is not the most important thing about the election results is quite irrelevant. The East/West divide is a fact of the election result, and is very well illustrated by this picture. The picture therefore does its job of illustrating this point. Other pictures illustrating other points better have no relevance to this. ed g2s • talk 21:54, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Agree with Ed; this is an unactionable complaint. James F. (talk) 15:50, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- But the geographical distribution of the vote is not the most important thing about the election results. It's the total number of votes of both candidates that is important. Image:Ukrainian_presidential_election_2004-10-31.png is a much better picture that this one, as far as the information it contains. The importance of the geographical distribution only becomes clear in its context in section Ukrainian presidential election, 2004#Runoff. Eugene van der Pijll 22:04, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- The point of the map is not to show how much of the vote each candidate got, it is to show the geographical distribution of the vote, i.e. the clear East/West divide. It would be no more relevant for an electoral college system it representing this point. As for the key, it has been fixed. ed g2s • talk 19:42, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Oppose. While it does add a lot the article it is not especially clear or informative; even though the results graphed are clear and shocking, the picture is not. ✏ Sverdrup 17:00, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Yeah, the legend is wrong, which is why in my original pic, I'd simply had it say "< 60%". In the Kirovohrad oblast' official results for Yushchenko were 47.08 while Yanukovich's were 46.48. But nonetheless, that detail aside, I think I'll vote for support. Aris Katsaris 20:17, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- support
- above vote by User:66.47.230.45, could you please create an account/sign in if you want to vote. ed g2s • talk 19:42, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- support. I think it is good to have topical diagrams. If it becomes stale in the future, it can always be delisted. -- Solipsist 21:06, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Oppose. This picture is neither beautiful nor fascinating. Just out of interest, that 74.69% - what is it pointing to?? Is it pointing to the river? Very unclear. Enochlau 20:26, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Oppose --ScottyBoy900Q∞ 00:17, 06 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Oppose. The picture does not show the true geographical distribution of votes, because it is based on fraudulent results. Mark1 02:45, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
