Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image-Schloss Nymphenburg Munich CC edit3.jpg

Nymphenburg Palace

 * Reason:I saw this picture on Commons Featured Picture Candidates and thought it deserved a chance here. It is of high quality and of value to the article.
 * Articles this image appears in:Nymphenburg Palace
 * Creator:user:Richard Bartz


 * Support as nominator Nautica Shad es  19:58, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Support if tilt is fixed. Latics (talk) 22:08, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'd appreciate if someone did that. Unfortunately, I don't own the software to do it myself. Nautica Shad es  21:32, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll do it myself tomorrow if I get time. Unless someone else wants to do it, I'll try to edit and have it up tomorrow afternoon. Latics (talk) 00:14, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Support edit 2 Latics (talk) 22:27, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Support edit 2 or 3 Latics (talk) 01:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Support well done. —αἰτίας •'discussion'• 10:13, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Support-The quality of pictures each years just increases.  Meldshal42 Hit me What I've Done 23:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Support edit 2 great shot. —dima/talk/ 03:15, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Edit 2 Wow, the thumbnail really doesn't do it justice. faithless   (speak)  09:39, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Support edit 2 Good job, very nice image. Spencer  T♦C 03:09, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Umm, this image is used only a gallery on Nymphenburg Palace, which would mean it doesn't really add value to the article. (I'm quite surprised everyone missed this.) Please find a better home for it. MER-C 11:54, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, it is a far better image of the palace than any of the others in the article. I'm going to be bold and feature it more prominently. Nautica Shad es  20:39, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I also added it to a gallery of historical buildings of Bavaria. I doesn't add a lot of value to that article, but the palace should be mentioned there anyway. Nautica Shad es  20:56, 19 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment Edit 2 has very bad compression artefacts in the sky. Original has some weird gradations as well (scroll from left to right at full res and look at the sky change) --118.138.220.97 (talk) 23:20, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Would you like me to save edit 2 at a higher quality? Latics (talk) 02:27, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I think you should save it with the same quality as that of the original. FPs have to be as good as possible. Muhammad (talk) 12:40, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Alright. I'll have it up by midnight (CST), at least. Latics (talk) 20:48, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Newer version is up... Latics (talk) 02:06, 21 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Support (preference for edit 3) great image, meets all the criteria. 20:30, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note:The above vote was made by User:Guest9999. Spencer  T♦C 13:56, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

, edit 2 without the artifacts. MER-C 11:05, 27 May 2008 (UTC)