This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sculpture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sculpture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SculptureWikipedia:WikiProject SculptureTemplate:WikiProject Sculpturesculpture
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts
I believe this page is now in good shape; The old page "Battlo Crucifix" is now moved here, and then I have corrected it for style and references. Unfortunately, I also created a page "Batllo crucifix" which should be deleted as it now duplicates this one. I hope that's okay. --Imervard (talk) 05:48, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nice work. The old page is now a redirect and tagged as a duplicate, it does not need to be deleted. -- Ϫ03:34, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The current image in the infobox, which is the "most valued picture" of the artifact in question, is very well-lit and good-looking in its thumbnail form. However, when one zooms in, it becomes very clear that the image has been subjected to a variety of sharpening, color-intensity increasing, and other interventions/edits. I'm not sure why, since I'm sure the original photo is fine, but I find it troubling that a manipulated image be used for such a well-known artifact. Does anyone else have thoughts on this?
I'll add that [File:Majestad Batlló (48995864901).jpg] is a more accurate representation of the Majesty's actual appearance, and has a very good resolution. Theodore Christopher (talk) 22:34, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
