Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Haitian Presidential Palace in 2010 Earthquake

Haitian Presidental Palace destroyed by Earthquake
Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2010 at 03:53:56 (UTC)
 * Reason:Shows some of the damage caused by the Earthquake. High Ev. Featured on Turkish and Spanish wikipedia
 * Articles in which this image appears:National Palace (Haiti), 2010 Haiti earthquake, Port-au-Prince, Presidential palace
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/History/Others
 * Creator:Logan Abassi


 * Support as nominator --Spongie555 (talk) 03:53, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. The image is impressive and the composition fits the theme very well. Though the colors might be faded a bit and the image is tilted the slightest bit though (at least by the road), and the shadow is not ideal, I think it can make a great FP with some minor touchups. Nergaal (talk) 05:04, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Question Given the flaws mentioned above how re-producable is this picture? I don't mean in terms of having another earthquake but what state is this building in now? Is it possible that it hasn't yet been repaird and thus can be photographed again? If not then I will consider my support... gaz hiley .co.uk  08:51, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It's worse. Chick Bowen 14:32, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link - so in theory it should be able to be photographed better? I'll Oppose then... Btw who on earth took the lead picture in th article in your link?! They should be fired... Taking of a picture of how run down the palace is but from behind a fence that obscures the view of it is shocking photography! crazy...  gaz hiley .co.uk  15:24, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I was thinking of this when I wrote my support, but I noticed that the picture was taken the day after the earthquake. In that sense at least is not reproducible. Nergaal (talk) 17:10, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * In theory though if it hasn't changed since then (which it hasn't by all recent reports), then it must be reproducible... Though of course it does reduce the EV for the "next day" - but does it need to be the next day though? gaz hiley .co.uk  20:19, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually if you look at that picture link it shows the rotunda demolished. Since the earthquake they demolished the rotunda and they are thinking of demolishing it all as said in the main article. Spongie555 (talk) 21:16, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * My comment was too terse: I would not consider the image reproducible, since the building has continued to degrade; the nominated image shows the damage the earthquake did, whereas in its current state that damage is not distinguishable from the effects of neglect as well as (as Spongie555 says) deliberate demolition. Chick Bowen 22:29, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Support; supposed minor compositional woes are vastly outweighed by the sheer EV and historicness (it's a word!) of the picture. --Golbez (talk) 19:36, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment can I suggest that somebody with more skills at this to try to correct the tilt and brighten the colors a bit? Nergaal (talk) 23:34, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Prefer edit also, and pointing out that this image is not reproducible because it the bottom part of the image it shows the tents locals used after the earthquake. Nergaal (talk) 04:11, 22 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Support edit I attempted to correct the tilt and brightened the colors a bit using slight tone mapping. I hope I didn't overdo the contrast! Purpy Pupple (talk) 03:10, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

-- Jujutacular  talk 04:27, 29 October 2010 (UTC)