Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ambigram rotating.gif

Ambigram rotating.gif
A good example of the subject ambigram is this image itself, with bonus animation to good effect. - Bevo 19:21, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

+9/-7, 3 Neutral&mdash; Sverdrup 03:12, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Nominate and support. - Bevo 19:21, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Support, Interesting E l e c t r i c m o o s e - Electrifying 19:53, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose, this animation seems a bit obnoxious and rather uninteresting. --Spangineer (háblame) 22:59, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Not particularly interesting. -- AllyUnion (talk) 06:04, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 *  Oppose , the font is too difficult to read. -- Silversmith Hewwo 09:51, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * You do know what an ambigram is..... right? -- brian0918  &#153;  18:15, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, no need to be sarky. I just found when I tried to confirm that each letter was there, it was difficult due to the font and the fact that it moves too frequently. I also have the pic of the day on my userpage, and would find such a frequently moving image highly annoying. -- Silversmith Hewwo 19:22, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it probably would work better if it sat there for a while before rotating. -- brian0918  &#153;  03:29, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I've slowed it down from 2 to 4 seconds. Still too fast? Splarka 04:48, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I think that speed is much better. Changing to Neutral. -- Silversmith  Hewwo 09:00, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Support - beautifully drawn and very interesting (the same idea works if you handwrite "chump" in a certain way) - Adrian Pingstone 12:35, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Support, clearly shows what an ambigram is. Animation is a nice plus. Mgm|(talk) 16:03, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. In fact, I have a bias against animated pictures in general. I find it annoying to have something move when I did not ask it. Also, but perhaps I'm asking too much, an antialiased image would be better. --Bernard Helmstetter 18:27, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I created it (and the larger version) in 2 colors to keep the file size down. I believe wikipedia antialiases it when you resize it, so one could use the larger one shrunk to the size of the smaller one and get an antialiasing: [[Image:Ambigram_rotating_big.gif|180px]] . However, I agree that animated gifs are obnoxious in improper contexts. Splarka 19:27, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutral Demonstrates concept well, but the font combined with the animation actually makes it more dificult to read. --CVaneg 19:10, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I see your point about the animation obscuring the illustration, without a static reference to freely study. Perhaps there needs to be two pictures in place in the article ambigram.  One static, the other the same image, but animated. - Bevo 20:37, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutral. Author here. I've seen ambigrams of the word 'ambigram' online before, but none were free-use, so I slapped this one together in a few hours for the article. Sidenote: I originally had a tag on it but at one point the tag said "you can't release things to the public domain, change to  " so I did, but now I see the policy has changed again, so I changed it back to public domain. The neutral vote is because I am not sure if it is feature quality. I'll let others decide. Splarka 19:27, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The policy never changed. It was just someone who didn't agree with the PD terms. Mgm|(talk) 23:42, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
 * Ahh k, thanks. Splarka 04:48, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose -gave me a headache! A curate's egg 19:43, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Support: Very illustrative -- Chris 73 Talk 07:38, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * Love it. Striking. Support it. Circeus 18:02, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose - this forum is for pictures not animations. -- Oska 04:49, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * Umm...you know we also promote animations. Like this or this. This link is Broken 06:22, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Support - while not especially pretty, the image is striking and illustrates the subject magnificently. -Lommer | talk 22:34, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Support, interesting illustration. Phoenix2 23:30, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Yuk. Enochlau 08:52, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Support, it's difficult to imagine an animation better illustrating its topic. 01101001 06:43, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Animations need to be very good to get past just "annoying". ed g2s  &bull;  talk  10:48, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

