Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Mount Rinjani

Lightning strikes Mount Rinjani

 * Reason:Amazing quality, perfect size, well-placed angle, all the qualitites of an amazing picture.)
 * Articles this image appears in:Mount Rinjani, Volcano, Lightning, List of volcanoes in Indonesia
 * Creator:Oliver Spalt


 * Support as nominator  Meldshal42 Hit me What I've Done 20:16, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy close Bad quality, lots of noise, not even close to the size requirements. Clegs (talk) 20:34, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose per above sentiments, plus I question its EV. An interesting shot nonetheless. Almost looks faked. I don't know if a speedy close is warranted; I'm sure there are those would would give a great deal of weight to the power of the image (and presumably the difficulty of the shot) and give it passes on the technical shortcomings. Matt Deres (talk) 22:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong oppose per size requirements.  crassic ![ talk ] 22:11, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Oppose After examining the image, I am quite sure it is a digital manipulation with the lightning composited in. The small size is likely to reduce the likelyhood of people seeing the cloning work. The lighting and contrast makes it clear this is not an original single exposure image. Capital photographer (talk) 07:12, 15 May 2008 (UTC)


 * The Picture is not a fake. When I took the photograph it was nearly impossible to take one without lightning. I have around 20 slides of the outburst with lightning. This one was the most picturesque. I agree with the comments about the qualitiy. I scanned the slide almost 6 Years ago and the qualitiy of the scanners were not as good as nowadays.--Spolloman (talk) 07:30, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

--jjron (talk) 08:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: I speedy closed this more to avoid further inappropriate comments from voters and pile-on votes (as per WP:SNOW), rather than for the reasons given. It would serve well for some voters to either read or reread WP:BITE. Apologies to the nominator and photographer. Perhaps an improved scan is possible now? --jjron (talk) 08:34, 15 May 2008 (UTC)