Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Non-nude example

===Featured picture candidates/ I am nominating this picture to be a featured article because I think it is very encyclopedic and significant to the article it is contained in. The image is eye grabbing and forces you to do a double take and absorb more of the information in the article.  The photograph is high quality, properly centered, and manifests an artistic mastery that is uncommon among many images on Wikipedia.  It appears in the [[Nudity article and was created by Craig M. Groshek.
 * Non-nude example]]===


 * Nominate and Support.-Wikipediarul e s 2221 06:09, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. This is a re-nom, originally March 2006 - it was then shot down pretty harshly, only 2 supports (not counting nominator) vs. 19 opposes. The photo certainly hasn't got any better since then... "Artistic mastery" -  you're joking, right?  --Janke | Talk 06:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Heh. I mean, Oppose. She has red-eye! Stevage 08:29, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose I'm sorry to disagree, this a common snapshot and also a quite innocuous one. Alvesgaspar 09:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Blown highlights on the jewelry, very grainy, too dark. Nautica Shad e  s  09:54, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Very poor quality. Please read WP:WIAFP before nominating, this image obviously fails to meet criteria 1, 3 and 7. -- Pharaoh Hound  (talk)  13:37, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment This fails number 7? Um, have you read WP:WIAFP youself?  If you have, I highly doubt you comprehended what you read.Wikipediarul e s 2221  00:23, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Please, let's keep things civil here. "Pleasing to the eye" is a matter of personal taste, and there is no need to make comments like that. Raven4x4x 01:13, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I should have made it a little more obvious that I was joking. No harm done (I hope).  Cheers!Wikipediarul e s 2221  02:11, 15 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose If this is a featured picture, then so is every other image on the internet. It's just common, and only mildly titillating. --Bridgecross 15:18, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose Just a snapshop, a featured picture needs technical excellence. Nice to look at though. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 17:19, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose if you're going to rebel against your parents, at least don't do it half-heartedly --Niro5 17:27, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Um...what...?!Wikipediarul e s 2221 00:19, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * To clarify, If you (A freshman girl) are going to rebel against your parents (by flashing), at least put your heart in it (by showing nip). Just a little joke.--Niro5 03:18, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Is that not a little "nip" on the girl on the left? --DonES 08:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Has been nominated and failed before. - User:Samsara (talk· contribs) 20:15, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Looks kind of like a teaser for Girls Gone Wild.  howch e  ng   {chat} 22:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * More like girls gone mild! sorry, too easy.  Ok, I am done with this thread.--Niro5 03:18, 15 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose I fail to see any reason why it should be featured. -- Elaragirl  | | | | | | TalkundefinedCount 15:19, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose, even if... the photo's not impressive either. - Mailer Diablo 17:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose per many above, Pstuart84 22:04, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose, this is a ridiculous nomination for too many reasons to say, just look at all of the above reasons. --th e marble 05:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose Why was this renominated? I see no reason to change my vote.  SteveHopson 21:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

--KFP (talk | contribs) 13:45, 21 November 2006 (UTC)