Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Austrian military hospital, 1916

Austrian military hospital, 1916

 * Reason:Another fine American Colony Jerusalem photograph of World War I. Restored version of File:Austrian military hospital WWI.jpg.
 * Articles this image appears in:Military Chaplain, Casualties of World War I removed, see note below Guest9999 (talk) 05:14, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Creator:American Colony Jerusalem


 * Support as nominator -- Durova Charge! 04:33, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment This is a difficult one. The coat-hanger bothers me, although without it, we may not be able to recognize the outline of the priest's face at all, given the low contrast in highlights. Looking at the picture with EV goggles, the best illustrated feature I can make out is the oriental rug, second would be the lamp (but with not enough pixel count). The focus is on the group of men in the background, who are dressed in a variety of garments, mostly mid-tone shirts with asymmetric buttoning, and wear mustaches. But I'm left with the feeling that if the EV is mostly on the furniture and dresses, we should have a different (set of) photograph(s) for this. Furthermore, this is the third photograph on Military Chaplain depicting a Catholic Mass, with none for any other denomination. And it doesn't make a good top image for Casualties of World War I, as the casualties are not the central subject of this picture (I'd say the priest is, if anything, in spite of the focus problem). This is a better photo to illustrate casualties. Maybe someone can see more EV than I can. I'd be grateful. Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 11:33, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note I've removed the image from Casualties of World War I because - in my opinion - the previous image was a better depiction of casualties in World War I and there is no mention of military hospitals or religious services in the article. Guest9999 (talk) 05:14, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * You could have just said that you agree with me. ;) Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 03:22, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose I'm not totally convinced by this, as per the above, and nobody has brought forward a defending argument, and I think the default should always be to not promote images when there isn't a good reason for promoting them. Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 13:07, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose Decent quality (proving historical images can meet a quality bar) but I'm also not convinced that it has the necessary EV - I prefer the scene in this image for Military Chaplain --Fir0002 09:06, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

MER-C 07:09, 5 February 2009 (UTC)