Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Attack on carrier USS Franklin 19 March 1945.jpg

Attack on carrier USS Franklin, March 19, 1945

 * Reason:I have seen thousands, yes, thousands of all kinds of photographs from World War II. This one is in my opinion a true masterpiece; I was stunned when I examined it. Artistically it's in my opinion almost perfectly composed, except for the small crop of the carrier to the right. The resolution could be higher, but it is a historical photograph.
 * Proposed caption: The aircraft carrier USS Franklin is afire and listing by 13° after being hit by a Japanese air attack on March 19, 1945, during World War II. The crew is clearly seen on the flaming deck, watched by the crew of the light cruiser USS Santa Fe, which was alongside assisting with firefighting and rescue work. The casualties totaled 724 killed and 265 wounded.
 * Articles this image appears in:USS Franklin (CV-13), soon more, after I'm done with this nomination...
 * Creator:Photographed by PHC Albert Bullock from the cruiser USS Santa Fe, Official U.S. Navy Photograph, Public domain


 * Support as nominator Dna-Dennis 16:22, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose I really want to support but the quality is very poor. There are heavy artifacts, the crop is distracting, and it's pretty small. Is there any way a higher resolution version could be obtained? CillaИ &diams; XC 17:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC) Support higher-res version, although the contrast is now a bit too stark. CillaИ &diams; XC  04:11, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I could send an email to the National archives, and hope they support Wikipedia... --Dna-Dennis 18:21, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I've just done this. --Dna-Dennis 23:03, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Here's the archives.gov listing. Unfortunately it's exactly the same size... MER-C 03:22, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

*Oppose. Doesn't meet size guidelines. Spikebrennan 17:43, 2 October 2007 (UTC) A bigger version was uploaded on top of the original. MER-C 05:14, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose Unfortunately it is a bit too small. -Fcb981(talk:contribs) 00:21, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Support - Bigger size is mucho better, really captures the sceen --  Chil dzy  ¤  Ta lk  09:47, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Awesome! Puddyglum 17:50, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Remarkable image, powerful and very encyclopedic.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Krazykenny (talk • contribs) 02:27, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Support--Mbz1 16:33, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Cutoff part of ship spoils composition, image quality is pretty poor (e.g., a significant part of the image is completely blown out sky, pretty unsharp, plus other faults), and we already have better FPs of similar incidents. Going on how many photos of 'WWII warships being hit by planes' or 'after enemy attacks' we get through here, they can't be that rare. Sure, this may be the best photo of this particular incident, and some may argue that we should have a featured picture of them all regardless of quality, but I don't buy it. --jjron 12:35, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

MER-C 03:57, 9 October 2007 (UTC)