Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Honor guard in line at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier (Moscow)

Honor guards in line at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier (Moscow)
Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2010 at 02:57:34 (UTC)
 * Reason:It is a good picture. It is featured on Commons and German and Turkish wikipedias also it came in 3rd place for 2009 picture of the Year so alot of people thought it was good
 * Articles in which this image appears:Tomb of the Unknown Soldier (Moscow), Honor Guard
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/People/Military
 * Creator:MC1 Chad J. McNeeley, USN


 * Support as nominator --Spongie555 (talk) 02:57, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It's a nice photo, BUT... (a) it focuses on a single soldier who afawk is not notable (minor point), (b) DOF is so shallow as to make location unrecognisable, therefore (c) greatest EV seems to be for the uniform, but nothing is said about it, and (d) even the uniform is not shown in full (counter-example with bland composition but more complete view of uniform); also, (e) in reality, the uniform seems to be a bit more blue (another example). Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 08:46, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong Oppose Has no EV to the tomb as does not show the tomb... Shows guards, and in particular this one guard... Has no other relevance than co-incidence that this was taken there (if it was - we have no proof from this photograph of course that it actually was)... I would even go as far as to suggest speedy close but will understand if no-one else agrees with that request... gaz hiley .co.uk  10:41, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. It would have EV in Honor guard if there were such a section, which there could be along the lines of the other countries noted in the article. Chick Bowen 14:08, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah I could go for that, but then I'd argue that it's too arty a shot and doesn't show enough of the guard to give full EV - a full length portrait would be better... gaz hiley .co.uk  16:29, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I thought of that article, too - there is a very Monty Python-esque image there of the Kremlin guard that could do with replacing. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 21:00, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Excellent suggestion. I have updated the photo in the Honor guard article. Tim Pierce (talk) 01:27, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose as above. Short of the main subject (the chap second from the right) or the photographer being notable, I really don't see how this could have the EV necessary. It's a very nice picture, but far better suited to Commons FPC than here. J Milburn (talk) 18:25, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose Limited depth of field.  Spencer T♦ C 22:51, 22 September 2010 (UTC
 * Support - I agree that this photo does not have very high EV in the context of Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, but it is an excellent illustration of an honor guard. Tim Pierce (talk) 01:29, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Howso? Surely, a picture showing the full uniform would be far better... Not to mention the fact there isn't actually a single mention of Russian honor guards in the (already heavy illustrated) article. J Milburn (talk) 10:55, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It's a good illustration of soldiers standing in formation at a formal state ceremony. Contra, the shallow DoF serves to emphasize the length of the honor guard.  I agree that a similar picture which showed the full uniform would be better to document the dress uniform, but I don't think that's the only thing that gives a photo of an honor guard encyclopedic value.  Frankly, I think this is a better photo of an honor guard than most of the pictures already on the article, many of which are poorly composed, off center, low resolution, and in some cases do not even appear to be of an honor guard. Tim Pierce (talk) 11:26, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I think this image, although with an angled composition, is a smidgen better (imagine the traffic light switched off and a crop from the right) - certainly when you consider encyclopedic value. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 16:47, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose Weak EV as it doesn't show anything but a line of heads Nick-D (talk) 08:31, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Oppose Clearly no EV. Great for Commons, but not here.  upstate NYer  00:42, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 00:18, 1 October 2010 (UTC)