Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Fort de Mutzig

Fort de Mutzig
Voting period ends on 21 Aug 2010 at 00:04:59 (UTC)
 * Reason:Strong and eyecatching image showing a key feature of the structure. An image of the tunnels has been favoured over an image of the surface fortifications as the lead image throughout the article's history. It drew me in, as this is not something that I associate with a fort- I think what I imagine is a little outdated!
 * Articles in which this image appears:Fort de Mutzig
 * FP category for this image:Interiors?
 * Creator:Bresson Thomas


 * Support as nominator --J Milburn (talk) 00:04, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak support, as I do consider the oppose arguments fairly convincing. J Milburn (talk) 17:53, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose I hovered over this at Commons, and didn't oppose it there because it's sort of nice to look at. However, when you get down to it, it's just a tunnel, and not much more can be said about it. Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 00:40, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I did think that. It took some thought for me to nominate it. What convinced me was the fact that it's been pictures of the tunnels all the way through on article- I get the distinct impression that they're the significant/interesting thing about the fort. J Milburn (talk) 00:56, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose Precisely per PLW. Greg L (talk) 02:44, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I really like this image, except perhaps the flared lightbulbs. -- I'ḏ ♥  One  04:36, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Support It may be just a tunnel, but I wasn't aware we judged on whether something is a tunnel or not - as tunnels go this this is a good picture, well taken given the tricky lighting issues... I strongly object to the oppose reasons above as we could say the same thing about any nom - eg "It's just a mushroom", or "it's just a bird", or "it's just a picture of a collection or glass and concrete in chicago"... Gazhiley (talk) 10:04, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * You should try to read the comments until the end, and you would have found that the argument was that "not much more can be said about it". Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 11:15, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I did thank you PLW but thanks for the advice anyway... Whether any more "can be said about it" or not, it's still a good quality picture... "Nothing more can be said" about many noms on here, doesn't mean they should be opposed...  The whole host of element pictures recently and gases were all pretty self explanatory but still got supported... Just saying that's all...   —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gazhiley (talk • contribs) 17:27, 12 August 2010 (UTC) \
 * Pictures that don't offer encyclopaedic value shouldn't make it to FP - nothing could be clearer from the criteria. Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 12:30, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If this is actually a picture of Fort de Mutzig tunnel (which under WP:AGF we kinda do have to accept that it is) then you can't get higher EV for them than a picture of them... Gazhiley (talk) 14:13, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment This is very interesting from an architecture/civil engineering/construction standpoint. Tunnels take many different forms (look at the multiple images) and I stopped, stared, and clicked.Cptnono (talk) 03:21, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Support: It's a nice shot, composition very nice. There must be some story behind the way it was designed and built, like exactly where the material for the cladding came from.  ℳ ono     05:27, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Neither the English, German nor French articles say *anything* about the tunnel. Where are your sources? Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 09:57, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Sources? Did Mono state any facts? He/she just said that there must surely be a story... No sources required for a statement like that... It's more of a question if anything... Gazhiley (talk) 12:25, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * If the story is not recorded by reliable sources, then the story is irrelevant to Wikipedia. Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 12:30, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * What story though? Mono hasn't quoted a story... Just mused that there must be one somewhere... Gazhiley (talk) 14:13, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn, if I can withdraw while there are support votes. It's not gonna be promoted, the oppose arguments are very convincing. J Milburn (talk) 11:00, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Are you sure? It's 3-2 in favour of support... Gazhiley (talk) 13:46, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, I suppose I'll let it run its course. J Milburn (talk) 17:53, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Neutral Very eye-catching but not so much EV. --Extra  9 9 9  (Contact me  +  contribs) 11:14, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 02:41, 21 August 2010 (UTC)