Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Castle of São Jorge 2

Castle of São Jorge

 * Reason:great size and detail, a good overall view of the citadel's position, has been stable in both articles for several months. (I stole the caption from the previous nom, here: Featured picture candidates/Castle of São Jorge, which failed to reach quorum.)
 * Articles in which this image appears:Castle of São Jorge, Lisbon
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Places/Panorama
 * Creator:Massimo Catarinella


 * Support as nominator -- Mae din \talk 21:43, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Support as before. Makeemlighter (talk) 03:04, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Time3000 (talk) 09:41, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. NotFromUtrecht (talk) 10:36, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Great detail. Fletcher (talk) 12:37, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Good Picture Hive001   contact  08:55, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 19:52, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Support --Avenue (talk) 05:01, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose Frankly, when I see this picture the first thing I notice is not the castle but some boring, identical blocks of flats. Moreover, it's at places hard to discern where the fortress begins and where the modern buildings end. I'm sure we could find much more beautiful views of Lisbon than this.Desiderius82 (talk) 10:15, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * To clarify a couple things, an FP doesn't have to be beautiful, and the scope of this nom is the Castle of São Jorge, not Lisbon in general. Of course you are still entitled to your oppose.  Fletcher (talk) 02:08, 11 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Support. This is intended as a panorama designed to show the castle in context of location; it would have been quite easy to get just the castle itself. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:35, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, but does this panorama stand out, deserving to be considered an FP? I'm saying no. For panoramas of important buildings in their contexts that are worth to be FP's you can check out or . This one is not just good enough - IMHO.--Desiderius82 (talk) 18:16, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

-- Jujutacular  T · C 22:32, 11 May 2010 (UTC)