Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/F-16 Fighting Falcons above New York City(2).jpg

F-16 Fighting Falcons above New York City



 * Nominate and support. --Neutralitytalk 18:58, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Support good image --rogerd 22:14, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * This is a beautiful photo, but it adds nothing at all to the only article it's in, New York City. It might be better at Thunderbirds (squadron), but that article is already ridiculously image-heavy. &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 22:27, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It leans to the left a bit for me, and might benefit from a bit of down-sampling to sharpen up some of the in-focus features, like the planes. Will likely support. Debivort 02:12, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Support now that issues are fixed Debivort 01:38, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Support - Great. --Kilo-Lima 15:02, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Nice picture, but definitely appears tilted. I'm also not sure it significantly contributes to the New York City article. Camerafiend 18:22, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. The towers in the background make a beautiful contrast with the planes in the foreground. A true collage of human-build stuff.[[Image:Weather rain.png]] Soothing R  22:46, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Support I've uploaded an edited version of the image (rotated to correct tilt, increased contrast) and added the edit to the Air show page. I think it's a great addition to that page. &#126;MDD4696 23:26, 1 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I've uploaded the modified version over the original on the Commons. &#126;MDD4696 05:26, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Agree with SoothingR. —DO&#39;Neil 09:43, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Support now that the issues have been resolved. Camerafiend 16:32, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose the dark sky and some of the blurred buildings distract from the photo. Flcelloguy (A note? ) 02:18, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
 * [[image:Symbol_oppose_vote.png|15px]]Oppose Too gloomy. I prefer cheerful or striking pictures. --[[Image:Tux.png|20px]] ★ U k d r a g o n 3 7 ★ talk  [[Image:Tux.png|20px]] 20:34, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, we should feature your signature ;-) --Dschwen 21:25, 3 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Support I like the image. I think it illustrates the airshow article quite well. --Ironchef8000 21:22, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. I like the background. Renata3 05:14, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * ( + ) Support Any version. Great action shot, although still a little bit noisy/lacking in sharpness --Fir0002 06:46, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * The second shown version. (#2?) very nice capture.  Also the angle shows the formation well..  drumguy 8800  - speak? 07:03, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Shows its subject matter well. The buildings, while busy, provide context and don't detract much from the subject. enochlau (talk) 11:16, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Support Sarah Ewart 13:34, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Support D u r a n talk  I prefer the second one, it looks pretty neat. 21:09, 8 January 2006 (UTC) Thx for the cool sig Ukdragon :P

Raven4x4x 07:10, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

