Support Meets criteria, I don't think we have that many photos from the region. It is a little soft at full size, but that doesn't matter given the ample resolution. I can't see any stitching errors etc. JJ Harrison (talk) 23:09, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Don't featured pictures require a more full description? Particularly, I am curious as to what the ridges that appear to be man made are. If it is common to use an article as the description, we should require that the article adequately explains the picture. RyanVesey18:51, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It says that they are terraces in the caption both here and in the article, so I'm a little confused. Did you have something more specific in mind you were referring to? SpencerT♦C20:17, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe a good idea to wiki-link "terraces". Some might interpret it (as I initially did and perhaps Ryan did) as just levels and miss the agricultural meaning. Makeemlighter (talk) 02:57, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I see this was already promoted, somehow it got taken off of my watchlist. I was referring to the complete lack of a description on the image page. Isn't that what the criteria are referring to? RyanVesey05:10, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I presumed description meant captioning of the picture in the article (considering the image description page is on Commons). I don't know if this is a faulty view or not, but I added a mention of terraces to the Commons image page. SpencerT♦C22:49, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]