Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Cloud Gate/archive4

I changed the photo layout to this test layout for several reasons, then undid my edit to discuss it here. I will compare the test layout to the current layout.

In the test layout, the differences are the positions of the images of the omphalos with seams and of the tent, and the alignment of the image of the boy and his distorted reflection. In both versions the lead images and map layout are identical and I was not planning on discussing them further here.

In the test layout, the last four images go in chronological order (construction, seams, polishing tent, boy and reflection). The image of the omphalos with visible welds is in the section where the constuction of the omphalos and polishing of the welds are discussed in great detail. In the current layout the image of the omphalos is in a section where the omphalos is discussed, but the image does not show the current appearance of the omphalos. In the test layout, the tent image has been moved out of the section where most of the discussion of the tent is, but there is a mention of the tent and its impact on shooting a feature film in the section where the tent image is (in the test layout).

The test layout has at least one image in each major section, the current section does not have an image in the Reception section. The test layout alternates images right/left and has the boy looking into the text (as the MOS suggests). The test layout also has images and quote boxes on opposite sides of sections - the current layout has the image of the boy and the quote box on the same side of the Themes section.

I think that the tent image placement makes a little more sense in the current layout, but I think the omphalos image is more important and better placed in the test layout (and as a fair-use image, I think the omphalos image should be where it best fits). I also prefer the text layout's chronological order and right/left alternation of images, as well as the alternation of quote boxes and images. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 17:11, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your layout is fine. Dr. Blofeld had also contemplated using File:OmphalosCloudGate.jpg to represent the omphalos. I am not a photographer and am not sure which is better.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:39, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The image layout looks great, but we need to be careful with adding more images of the sculpture. I know last time this was at FAC, some image experts had big problems with even the 3 original images we had at the time. We might want to consult someone before we begin adding more. --Torsodog^Talk 20:20, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I went back to the "test" version as the current layout. While I really like the Dr. Blofeld omphalos image, I think the current one is better from a WP:NFCC point of view, since it shows the welds before they were polished out. It also is easier for me to see that the structure of the omphalos is similar to a belly button (innie) in the version with the welds. I agree that the article needs to be careful not to overdo it with images of a copyrighted artwork. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:04, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mmm I think the one I uploaded is an excellent image. The reaosn why I removed it was precisely because of fair use concerns. If somebody wants to swap rationales I have no complaints but if you think the current one meets fair use criteria better then I don't mind either way. What I don't want to see however is an oppose based on something trivial. Dr. Blofeld ^{White cat} 21:25, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]