Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Melbourne Central shot tower

Melbourne Central shot tower


Spectacular architectural picture of the Coops (Melbourne Central) Shot Tower article, although not very large, seems to meet the other requirements.


 * Nominate and support. - - Jack (talk) 16:32, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose. The subject looks great, but the image is slanted at an awkward angle. It seems that at a different time of day the image would be better. -- AJ24 16:40, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose quite small and there is something distracting in the top right hand corner. Ch ild zy  ( Talk 17:37, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose Image is too small to have much detail and resolution. A larger version of this would get my vote. --WikipedianProlific(Talk) 19:07, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * oppose too small and i find the dark object in the upper right very distracting--Vircabutar 19:20, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Ridiculously small and distracting thing in upper right corner. --Dschwen 20:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I like the composition that AJ called "slanted", but I have to agree that the distracting thingy in the corner and the lack of resolution kill the chances of this image. - Mgm|(talk) 21:04, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Same as above, the resolution is very bad.--Enano275 05:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose - regretfully, I wish it had more resolution. HighInBC 02:06, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose -- agree, object at top right is a distraction. - Longhair 05:08, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment for what it's worth, the distracting thing is a balcony (see ). It's difficult, but not impossible to not get one in the shot. I had the same problem, but mine was at the bottom. Stevage 11:47, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
 * And in case anyone is curious, this is a 3 part ultra-wide panorama that I took late last year showing just what it looks like. Diliff   | (Talk)   (Contribs) 13:06, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Anyone who's lived in Melbourne will know how easy it is to take a photo like this... I'm sure I've got better ones myself but I wouldn't nom them for FP! 219.89.69.93

Thygard -  Talk  -  Contribs  -  Email   04:38, 2 August 2006 (UTC)