Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Catedral de Segovia

Gothic Cathedral of Segovia


I look at this picture and I say... Wow... Found on Segovia. --AllyUnion (talk) 09:31, 2 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Nominate and support. - AllyUnion (talk) 09:31, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
 * What a great and enchanting shot. Raven4x4x 00:17, September 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutral leaning towards oppose. Somewhat on the small side, and the car in the lower left and brown whatever-it-is in the upper left are minuses.  I'm undecided whether perspective correction would benefit the picture. &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 02:36, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose- Sadly, too small. --Deglr6328 02:59, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutral. It's bordering on small, but it's ok here. It's very enchanting especially the lighting (really captures the mood of a gothic cathedral), but the car is a problem. Enochlau 13:19, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Support: it's a magical picture! Jdhowens90 09:09, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutral, I love the image, but hate the cars. Would support a version with the cars cropped out. - Mgm|(talk) 09:10, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support Nice lighting on the cathedral. Kerowyn
 * Strongly Support: Stunning, beautiful. User:Lofty 10:21, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. I can't understand why people are calling the image small (it looks plenty big to me). The cars are in the shadows off in the corner, and frankly the mesmerizing light on the cathedral walls captured my gaze completely enough that I barely noticed the cars, and when I did, they didn't trouble me at all.  A car that obscured the image in a distracting way is an objection--that I understand--but I think if we want pictures of buildings in an urban environment, I believe we need tobe at peace with a barely visible or noticeable car in the extreme corner of the frame that is otherwise filled with a gorgeous shot. Jwrosenzweig 17:16, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Exactly the reason why I voted neutral instead of oppose. - Mgm|(talk) 12:39, September 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment Jwrosenzweig, the image may look large to you because you may have a small monitor or your computer may be set to a low resolution. The image is 800x600 pixels, which provides very little detail, especially for a subject as large as this one. Secondly, if one were to print this image at (a conservative) 150dpi, this would only just be enough for a so-so 4x6 print. Personally, I think at minimum featured pictures should be at least 1024x768, if not 1600x1200 or larger. --mdd4696 00:30, 3 December 2005 (UTC)


 * I can't agree more. Support.Raven4x4x 23:51, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Stunning.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91  ($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|)  04:17, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. - MPF 16:17, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Jwrosenzweig said it best. Support. Neutralitytalk 23:20, September 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. If possible, crop or photoshop the cars, but support in any case -- Chris 73 Talk 07:47, September 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Have some sympathy with quibbles about the cars, however you could argue that they give you a sense of scale. --bodnotbod 19:21, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Support – Kpalion (talk) 23:23, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Support Anr 18:11, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Support, and very much so! -- High (Hopes) [ (+) ] 18:00, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Broken S 21:47, 22 September 2005 (UTC)