comment - kinda neat at full size, but the thumb is pretty pathetic... Don't know if anything can be done about that. Would support if we can get a zoomed in scrolling version.
Debivort 04:49, 28 June 2007 (UTC)reply
Pop in some wiki code and you're set. Jumpingcheese 06:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)reply
How's this? It can be modified/adjusted easily enough. —
BRIAN0918 • 2007-06-28 18:38Z
Or use the {{wide image}} template, but either is fine. Oh...and Support. Very encyclopedic and historical pic. Great quality for such an old subject. Jumpingcheese 03:44, 3 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Comment - It's shocking how beautiful the penmanship on the "indited" message is. Morse must have been going s ... l ... o ... w. --
TotoBaggins 13:45, 28 June 2007 (UTC)reply
You can see what look like rough versions (in pencil maybe) underneath the fancy lettering. It looks like the first draft wasn't as pretty.
Debivort 20:25, 28 June 2007 (UTC)reply
Strong support. Historic, encyclopedic and good quality.--
Svetovid 15:09, 28 June 2007 (UTC)reply
Support. Excellent, very historic. —
BRIAN0918 • 2007-06-28 18:38Z
Support, I like it.
8thstar 18:47, 28 June 2007 (UTC)reply
Oppose - wonderful encyclopaedic value, but awful technical quality. Full of JPG artifacts, and it would be nice if it was a little higher res vertically. E9T4A8. I've also expanded the div containing the image above, but I've used a relative measure (percent not pixels, vector not absolute) to specify its width so it scales for those running at higher and lower resolutions. —
Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξφ 18:57, 28 June 2007 (UTC)reply
Strong support. The paper wasn't straight when it was originally photographed, so I'd say it's accurately preserved here. Stitching is very well done if you look at the top/bottom edges.-
DMCer 07:15, 29 June 2007 (UTC)reply
Supoort - The historical importance of the image outweighs the technical issues in my opinion.
Supaluminal 03:57, 30 June 2007 (UTC)reply