Support Nice. Not sure I like its random placement on the TJ article, but it almost works better in the cheque article. I'm always a little weirded out at seeing handwriting from centuries past. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 04:14, 18 April 2013 (UTC)reply
The placement was not entirely random: based on a
Commons discussion, I wanted to display Jefferson's autographed signature underneath the infobox placement of the subject's facsimile signature. Thanks for the support. --
Godot13 (
talk) 04:53, 18 April 2013 (UTC)reply
If someone could help (fix) the link in my comment above I would be grateful...--
Godot13 (
talk) 05:06, 18 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Fixed. You have to put "commons" twice: once to get to the project, and once to get to the commons namespace on the project. Grandiose(
me,
talk,
contribs) 10:57, 18 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Much appreciated.--
Godot13 (
talk) 18:21, 19 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Oppose I find that it offers absolutely no EV to the Thomas Jefferson article, which already has a clean sig in the infobox, and in fact would advocate removing it as unnecessary. As to its usage in the article on checks, I see it as being a gallery piece, as it's stacked up in a column with other period checks, and is only on top because it's oldest.
Sven ManguardWha? 16:20, 20 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Regretful Oppose The historical value of the check is way higher then the EV... I mean, it's not like it was a unique aspect to Thomas J. only, and the article does already have a copy of his signature.
Dusty777 01:55, 22 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Oppose. I have to agree with the above, the EV is pretty low.
Rreagan007 (
talk) 03:18, 22 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Not Promoted --
King of♥♦♣ ♠ 20:34, 30 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Support Nice. Not sure I like its random placement on the TJ article, but it almost works better in the cheque article. I'm always a little weirded out at seeing handwriting from centuries past. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 04:14, 18 April 2013 (UTC)reply
The placement was not entirely random: based on a
Commons discussion, I wanted to display Jefferson's autographed signature underneath the infobox placement of the subject's facsimile signature. Thanks for the support. --
Godot13 (
talk) 04:53, 18 April 2013 (UTC)reply
If someone could help (fix) the link in my comment above I would be grateful...--
Godot13 (
talk) 05:06, 18 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Fixed. You have to put "commons" twice: once to get to the project, and once to get to the commons namespace on the project. Grandiose(
me,
talk,
contribs) 10:57, 18 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Much appreciated.--
Godot13 (
talk) 18:21, 19 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Oppose I find that it offers absolutely no EV to the Thomas Jefferson article, which already has a clean sig in the infobox, and in fact would advocate removing it as unnecessary. As to its usage in the article on checks, I see it as being a gallery piece, as it's stacked up in a column with other period checks, and is only on top because it's oldest.
Sven ManguardWha? 16:20, 20 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Regretful Oppose The historical value of the check is way higher then the EV... I mean, it's not like it was a unique aspect to Thomas J. only, and the article does already have a copy of his signature.
Dusty777 01:55, 22 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Oppose. I have to agree with the above, the EV is pretty low.
Rreagan007 (
talk) 03:18, 22 April 2013 (UTC)reply
Not Promoted --
King of♥♦♣ ♠ 20:34, 30 April 2013 (UTC)reply