Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Old Italian Wall

Old Italian Wall

 * Reason:good pic., catches eye, bright colors, high res.
 * Articles this image appears in:Veneto  Villa   Wall
 * Creator:Redmarkviolinist


 * Support as nominator Ṝέđ ṃάяķvюĨїήīṣŢ  Drop me a line §  04:43, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose For such an easily reproduceable image, there is much left to be desired in terms of sharpness and composition.The freddinator (talk) 05:47, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose Capital photographer (talk) 07:31, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose by the above. Plus this was just crammed into three articles where it provides no additional value, and the image description is more than lacking. Where was this taken for example? Also I believe this rather shows an Arcade than a wall. It contributes nothing to Villa (except allegedly being taken near a villa), and the relation to Veneto is unclear (plus it is a completely arbitrary picture, should we add random shots of gardens to all articles on regions in the world?). --Dschwen 14:06, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment How about a more positive tone? It's all very well to talk about an "easily reproduceable image" but someone has to physically go there with a decent camera, feel inspired to take a picture, and have the motivation to upload it. This image was taken on a Canon Powershot, arguably about as good as portable cameras get, so without lugging around a heavy SLR this is about as sharp as possible. If I was going to vote on this, I don't think it is interesting enough, but I do think the comments should focus better. ProfDEH (talk) 15:21, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose I wish I could add something positive but in this case I find it hard. The focal point is way off shot to the right, and the funny angle of the arches from this viewpoint fails to bring it back. The plants on the top of the wall are partially cut off, and there is very little information that can be derived from the picture. It has indeed got nice bright colours ("but not necessarily in the right order"). Dschwen makes very valid points, and hitting articles with FPCs is a matter of concern - although in this case no damage seems to have been done. Perhaps there should be a required waiting period between adding a pic to an article and submitting it for FPC. (and size should be default with the upright tag in the articles) Motmit (talk) 16:11, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose Not featured picture quality. -- Sharkface T/C 19:33, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

MER-C 09:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC)