Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Dinkfuneral3.jpg

Hrant Dink's Funeral

 * Reason:A striking image from recently assassinated Armenian-Turkish journalist Hrant Dink's funeral. Over 100.000 protesters walked against the ultra-nationalist ideas that killed him, carrying placards reading "We are all Hrant Dink" and "We are all Armenians" in Turkish, Armenian and Kurdish. The picture dramatically covers the crowd overflowing from the Halaskargazi Boulevard. The Building towards the left with the black banner is the office of the Agos newspaper, where Dink was Gunned down.


 * A little bonus in the picture is the appearance of Murat Belge, a famous Turkish journalist, towards the middle (Straight down from the red light with 1 second remaining. He is the one with white beard)


 * Articles this image appears in:Hrant Dink
 * Creator:Ombudsee
 * Nominator: Ombudsee

* Support &mdash; Ombudsee 20:47, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Edit 1. Dude, you are a wizard!. When sending the originals, I did expect better than my stitching; but this is just unbelievable, way beyond expectations. Teach me! I'll be your slave !:)Ombudsee 08:24, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Holy crap that's a lot of mourners! The image is extremely warped at the ends, and at the right side you can see half of someone's face taking up most of the height of the frame --⁪froth T 21:51, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Cropped a little on right did auto-contrast.Ombudsee 22:37, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Weak Support Comment. Definitely needs cropping on the right. gren グレン 21:57, 30 January 2007 (UTC) -- It has some problems, but, it's pretty  good and I have seen nothing similar that could replace this. gren グレン 16:05, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support - I like that it's warped; it probably was intentionally done with a lens. I think it adds to the magnitude of the setting. Plus, it's a good photo. --Iriseyes 22:32, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Actually it's not warped. it's 7 photos of a straight boulevard stiched together in a panaroma. taken from the same point, of an angle a little less than 180 degrees causes that warp effect.Ombudsee 22:43, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose, between the distortion and the skewed angle, it's not very striking. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 23:06, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Tough scene to shoot a pano of. There are stitching errors all over the place. Maybe a pano is just a lost cause here. Or you have to put a lot of work into fixing it (but for that you need lots of source pics, with lots of overlap). --Dschwen(A) 23:32, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Fully Support! I found maybe one stitching error. But it wasn't of any significance.  If there are others, they don't detract from the historic moment this photo captures.  I find it striking, well exposed and of high encyclopedic value.--Mactographer 02:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose -- Enc, but not striking visually, especially when not at full size. . I withdraw my oppose, on the grounds that it's an historic event.  TotoBaggins 03:44, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support (also for Edit 1). Photograph shows important event in history of Turkey in clear way. It has caught the feeling of the moment very well. Of course it has its "distortion", how else is 180° panorama picture to be on flat plane? Hevesli 13:58, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support We have plenty of FPs with flaws which we overlook for various reasons; historical value, difficulty of shot, etc. This photo has high historical content, and it's a panorama of moving people of course there are going to be some stitching errors.  It's an event that will not be captured again and it was done very well. --Bridgecross 14:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Support. A historic event from a creative perspective. This picture has artistic, political and social importance and deserves to be a featured picture. Deliogul 20:54, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The picture doesn't have any importance. It's the events that are important.  I haven't seen this picture having any impact politically or socially. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 22:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The picture, to coin a phrase, "is worth a thousand words." In this case, probably more.  The picture (or more often the photo) is one of our most important tools to have been created in the last 150 years in documenting historic events.  Thus, this picture has significant historical value in describing the "event."  Thus, this picture is important.  Thus, I think you are mistaken.  Thus, I am finished with my soapbox. --Mactographer 01:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * P.S. If pictures aren't important, I'm just guessing that Playboy wouldn't sell as many issues as it does.  Could be wrong, just a guess...--Mactographer 01:50, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I think you've misinterpreted Night Gyr's comment. There are a number of pictures that are in and of themselves important, without regards to the subject they depict (for example, The Blue Marble, Image:Lange-MigrantMother02.jpg, that one from the Vietnam War with the naked girl running from napalm). This picture has no significance of its own.  howcheng  {chat} 21:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)


 *  Weak support edit 1 Flaws, but the momentousness of the occasion makes up for it. We can always take another shot of the Pieta, getting those folks together again will be pretty hard. ~ trialsanderrors 02:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Might someone among the "stitching gurus" here, do a better job by re-stitching this to avoid the curving? It's a historically important image, so it would be great if it could be technically improved by re-stitching. --Janke | Talk 09:39, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to give it a go if the originals are made available. Ombudsee, would you be able to email them to me? Diliff  | (Talk)   (Contribs) 13:38, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Document of an important event, thus making the picture important (see Mactographers comment). -Wutschwlllm 20:08, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Support edit 1 changed vote because of edit -Wutschwlllm 12:02, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Edit 1. Agree with mactographer's comments too. The quality is quite good and the significance of the event pushes it into FP territory for me. Diliff  | (Talk)   (Contribs) 23:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Support edit 1 - high enc, high quality image of historic occasion. --Janke | Talk 10:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Support edit 1, how you can get that few stitching errors with that many faces is beyond me. Jorcoga  ( Hi! / Review ) 00:22, Saturday, 3 February '07
 * Support - per nom. Nareklm  14:53, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Support per Janke -- Davo88 16:24, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Edit 1 per Janke. -- Aivazovsky 17:07, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Support An important event, thus making the picture important. Also high quality picture. A striking image. ROOB323 20:01, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Support edit. That's a very powerful picture.--ragesoss 20:22, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment, I notice in the edit... I see this one man a few times... once he's right next to himself and it's close to where an adult's head transforms into a kid's... gren グレン 22:24, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Ha nice catch, it's unavoidable in a moving crowd though. --⁪froth T 08:30, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Agreed, I think it's alright because the point of this image is more to catch the feel. I do think that we should put a dislaimer on the image page so that people don't think this is just an incredibly wide-lens panorama (which I did at first).  But, I must say, it works out poorly that the error is in the least bust part of the photograph. gren グレン 23:57, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Even a true single-exposure panorama isn't immune to this: I once read an interview with a guy who would take such pictures of large groups of school children with a camera that scrolled from left to right, and would get a kid to stand at one end, wait for the exposure to start, and then dash behind the crowd to the far end in time for the camera to scroll to him and thereby capture him twice in the same image. :) --TotoBaggins 02:07, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe that's his twin. ♠ SG →Talk 17:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose I look at the image and I'm not impressed; it's just a picture of a crowd. Looking at the caption puts it into perspective and makes it somewhat interesting (but not really that interesting). Many images can get away with being subpar because the context is so fascinating, but I don't think this isn't one of them. --⁪froth T 08:37, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose Down from the Anadollbank, at the bottom, the women with the glasses appears twice. So do the people around her. { Slash -|- Talk } 04:41, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Support Edit 1 This image is incredible.  I don't see it as "just a crowd" because of the signs and the fact everyone is walking in the same direction.  Also the doubled people are not obvious unless you start playing Where's Waldo? with this image.  Spebudmak 04:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Perhaps, if this gets approved, it could be fast-tracked to appear on the Main Page soon, due to its topical nature? Spebudmak 07:57, 7 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Support Edit 1 - This is perhaps the best picture of that funeral. I have not seen anything even similar nor equal to this on a newspaper, magazine or t.v.. We're just lucky here that the owner releases his rights. Great panaroma too and the edit worked out well nice. Nerval 16:25, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Support edit 1. mstroeck 08:19, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Support Edit 1 - David's Magic. But there is also many many flaws. As stated above, right under Anadolbank you can see a few people twice and also some other having signs instead of head. It's good for a laugh. --Arad 03:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC) --Arad 02:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Support (also edit 1) --Absar 13:22, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

--KFP (talk | contribs) 21:25, 8 February 2007 (UTC)