Hunting of the Snark - Plates 1–10

Reason
These engravings were created with Lewis Carroll's assistance and approval, which makes them have very high encyclopedic value for the poem. They are all restored images. See above for the rest. This is a featured picture set nomination.


Articles this image appears in
The Hunting of the Snark
Creator
Henry Holiday, image uploaded and retouched by Commons:User:Adam Cuerden at Commons This credit was missed, so I'm adding it.Caspian blue 00:33, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The images are currently arranged in order, as the set would also follow in the order (as intended as illustrations for the poem). What size would you suggest that they be changed to? The current size fits within my browser with extra space (2 per line). Is this different for other browsers? Ottava Rima (talk) 16:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Maybe a gallery would be more helpful. This takes up a lot of space. wadester16 20:30, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Discussions on the format moved to the talk page since I have no reason to bear Ottava Rima's incivility.--Caspian blue 01:32, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just to let you know, Featured Sets usually don't go over well. I'm not saying this because I don't want to close a set, just giving you the historical heads up. You may be better off doing these one by one. Dropping 10 in one nom, when it's sometimes hard to get enough votes on one image, probably won't work well. Theoretically, a reviewer must devote 10 times as much time into reviewing this than a regular nom. Sometimes it's just too much. (BTW, while I appreciate the humor in Plate IV, I feel it has little chance of passing...) Oh, and by a gallery, I meant <gallery>...</gallery> wadester16 03:09, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • They are a set and only have historical value as a set. And if Plate IV doesn't past, then the set is disrupted. Ottava Rima (talk) 03:15, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Fair enough. Just offering my 2¢. Note we have many engravings from novels that appear alone; typically they give the best overview of the piece of writing. But it's your decision. wadester16 04:01, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Put into gallery. I couldn't get the poetry to work - it doesn't like HTML line breaks - but the text is still there for someone else to clean up. HereToHelp (talk to me) 15:32, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The poetry part was the reason why it wasn't converted to gallery, by the way. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:55, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wow. Really? I did look at the article before I voted, and I stand by my comments. All those pictures in that section are quite distracting. The section isn't really about the illustrations anyway; rather, it's about whether the illustrations are faithful to the text. Like I said, one or two of them probably have the exceptional EV required to be FP, but not all of them. Plate 4, for example, certainly doesn't add to the article. Makeemlighter (talk) 22:10, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's a section discussing the illustrations - which were published witht he first edition and almost every edition thereafter until modern times (when publishing books stripped of their illustrations became common) but you don't feel that having all the original illustrations, compiled with Lewis Carroll's approval, adds encyclopedic value, adds encyclopedic value? Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 22:19, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Plate 4 is 100% essential to the text - the author wanted that plate because it shows the humor and carries the levity into the illustrations. It distinguishes the pictures as an addition to the work that compliments it and not just mimics it. The illustrations are obviously notable on their own and as a set. Ottava Rima (talk) 22:24, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted set --wadester16 05:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Categories