Not particularly taken on the idea of this as a featured set. Personally I don't feel 'the set' is that much more informative than a single image, and all possibly have some issues. Sets are not a very popular concept either. Perhaps you could suggest which one of the three you think to be the best of the lot and go from there. --
jjron (
talk) 08:55, 5 June 2009 (UTC)reply
I was really curious in learing about the possibilities of a set. I am not really interested in any single one.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM) 23:57, 6 June 2009 (UTC)reply
Personally I wouldn't support the set, but if you want to try just create a standard nom like you have here, and say that you're nominating as a set. --
jjron (
talk) 13:40, 7 June 2009 (UTC)reply
Not particularly taken on the idea of this as a featured set. Personally I don't feel 'the set' is that much more informative than a single image, and all possibly have some issues. Sets are not a very popular concept either. Perhaps you could suggest which one of the three you think to be the best of the lot and go from there. --
jjron (
talk) 08:55, 5 June 2009 (UTC)reply
I was really curious in learing about the possibilities of a set. I am not really interested in any single one.--
TonyTheTiger (
t/
c/
bio/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:LOTM) 23:57, 6 June 2009 (UTC)reply
Personally I wouldn't support the set, but if you want to try just create a standard nom like you have here, and say that you're nominating as a set. --
jjron (
talk) 13:40, 7 June 2009 (UTC)reply