Support as nominator --
ArildV (
talk) 11:39, 30 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Expand — Nice autumnal pic, but there's nothing in the very brief article about why the canal was built, for what purpose.
Sca (
talk) 14:22, 30 October 2013 (UTC)reply
I was reading
Wikipedia:Featured_picture_criteria and its only talking about the images description and not the quality of the article as far as I understand it. The canal was built to make it easier for smaller ships with supplies to reach the center of Stockholm, but also for aesthetic reasons (Djurgården is a royal park).--
ArildV (
talk) 14:42, 30 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Support; very engaging, seems representative of the canal as a whole. I echo the claim that it's a shame the article's so short, but it does seem to contain the most important information.
J Milburn (
talk) 09:58, 3 November 2013 (UTC)reply
Support --
Colin°
Talk 18:04, 3 November 2013 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator --
ArildV (
talk) 11:39, 30 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Expand — Nice autumnal pic, but there's nothing in the very brief article about why the canal was built, for what purpose.
Sca (
talk) 14:22, 30 October 2013 (UTC)reply
I was reading
Wikipedia:Featured_picture_criteria and its only talking about the images description and not the quality of the article as far as I understand it. The canal was built to make it easier for smaller ships with supplies to reach the center of Stockholm, but also for aesthetic reasons (Djurgården is a royal park).--
ArildV (
talk) 14:42, 30 October 2013 (UTC)reply
Support; very engaging, seems representative of the canal as a whole. I echo the claim that it's a shame the article's so short, but it does seem to contain the most important information.
J Milburn (
talk) 09:58, 3 November 2013 (UTC)reply
Support --
Colin°
Talk 18:04, 3 November 2013 (UTC)reply