Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Osprey firing flares

V-22 Osprey firing flares
Intense photo of an interesting aircraft. - brian0918  &#153;  00:49, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Nominate and support. - brian0918  &#153;  00:49, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Jonas Olson 10:50, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Nice photo but it does not "add significantly to that article". Just stuck at the bottom. Maybe on Featured pictures? --Andrew 16:25, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Alright, now it's at the top of the article. It illustrates the aircraft better than the other image, which is relatively low-res.  -- brian0918  &#153;  16:34, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I disagree - the original image shows the plane doing what it's designed to do, carrying (and air-dropping) marines. The flares add to the photo's prettiness but don't show anything about what the plane is for.  And simply moving it from the bottom to the top hardly makes it "add significantly" to the article. --Andrew 06:54, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Nothing special about this particular photo --Bricktop 21:56, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Support Very unusual plane, and the flares are a bonus. --Fir0002 03:45, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Support &mdash; TomStar81 04:43, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Unusual aircraft. Illustrates article on the V-22 Osprey perfectly. Crisp image. Mgm|(talk) 09:20, Apr 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I really couldn't tell it was interesting until I read the comments above that told me it was supposed to be interesting. Enochlau 12:36, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying this case is the same, but that's essentially what you have to do for the Chopin and First photos to be interesting. -- brian0918 &#153;  13:03, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose Not a very special aircraft image. Janderk 20:01, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Support - stunningly deadly (even if they are only flares). A great action shot. And check out those propellers! - Pioneer-12 23:11, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Huh? It's not even (necessarily) armed! Check out the other picture in the article, which illustrates what it's actually for. --Andrew 10:27, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)


 * Oppose there's many a spectacular aviation photo, and this one is just adequate. Also, the crop (or lack thereof) doesn't work to its advantage. Matthewcieplak 06:17, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * +5 / -6 -- Solipsist 21:00, 12 May 2005 (UTC)