Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Koffler accelerator

Koffler accelerator

 * Reason:Eerily futurist looking building, exemplified here by the twilight. Yes, it has grain and the building isn't immaculately focused, there are colour balance issues and the light at the bottom is blown, and a little distracting; but I think the colour and the dazzling light add to the effect.
 * Articles this image appears in:Israel / Rehovot / Weizmann Institute of Science
 * Creator:User:Physicistjedi
 * Nominator: Jack (talk)


 * Support either &mdash; Jack (talk) 16:12, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Regretful oppose per nom, grain, soft focus, exposure and color balance problems. The foreground is distracting from the subject. I am sure this picture could be retaken to be a featured picture because it is a wonderful subject. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 16:16, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.svg|15px]] Oppose There's quite a bit of noise in the sky, and as HighInBC said, the foreground bushes aren't really necessary. It's a good photo, just not up to FP standards. H4cksaw   (talk)  16:51, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Distracting plants, grainy, and a bit out of focus. Good capture though.--enano (Talk) 20:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose, but could support. This picture has lots of good things going for it. Great colors and lighting, interesting shapes. Dream-like night setting. But I agree with Enano275. I think the picture would work better if the foreground plants were cropped out. Greg L 22:57, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose Bad ENC composition with the plants. dust etc. from probably a scanner. grainy. nice subject and lighting. -Fcb981 02:24, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * What dust? I think the white dots in the sky that don't appear anywhere else in the image are stars. And the black dots on the tower are probably rivets of some sort - Jack (talk) 13:27, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, you may be right, some of the stars have some weird shapes but given that they only appear in the sky that is probably right. Even without the(dust) I still don't think it will make it. -24.128.48.224 23:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Oppose, but I'll support a version with the plants cropped out. Jor co ga  Hi! 08:28, Monday, January 29 2007 Support cropped version.  Jorcoga  ( Hi! / Review ) 23:35, Sunday, 4 February '07
 * Support cropped version This picture has lots of good things going for it. Great colors and lighting, interesting shapes. Dream-like night setting. It certainly looks like the sort of picture that would make people stop scrolling and take a moment to check it out. Greg L 04:08, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Support cropped version - Per above --Arad 00:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

--KFP (talk | contribs) 21:04, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

The koffler acclerator was for propelling nuclear particles, containing them in defined beams, Likewise at CERN, the LHC or Large Hadron Collider, see for yourself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.177.18.6 (talk) 08:51, 17 July 2015 (UTC)