Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/SCOTUS

US Supreme Court Building

 * Reason:Have at it.
 * Articles this image appears in:United States
 * Creator:User:Noclip


 * Support as nominator --Noclip (talk) 03:09, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Opose. It does not illustrate the subject in a particularly compelling way, doesn't make me want to know more. It's too dark, and doesn't stand out as being Wikipedia's best work. An other image from the article it's in would be better suited to be featured.Dwayne Reed (talk) 06:46, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * User has <10 edits, almost all of which are on FPC all within 1 hr timespan --Fir0002 09:21, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Huh, what's up with that 'reason' for nominating? Can we get a real reason here that actually makes sense? --jjron (talk) 10:13, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose I dislike the frame ratio and the sky is quite dark. It also fails to properly illustrate the subject, cutting off the wings on either side. Capital photographer (talk) 13:44, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose aspect ratio - feels too cropped left and right. Also it seems like there is a lamp out behind the pillars on camera left. Should be retaken with that working. Mfield (talk) 14:02, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The lamp comment really irritates me. I think just about any other reason (up to and including something like "it sucks") would have been better than blaming the photographer for illustrating reality. To ask that a photograph look like a movie set flies in the face of what an encyclopedia is supposed to be. Noclip (talk) 00:53, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment It's an easily retakeable shot, as a photographer I would go back the following week and reshoot it as it would annoy me to have an image with a lamp missing as much as it probably offends the maintenance staff of the SCOTUS. The building probably doesn't have a lamp missing very often, and as such the image is atypical of the building at night and thus less enc. Mfield (talk) 01:10, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't think there is a lamp, there is a basement window bottom lit up left, and a small stack of scaffolding partly hidden behind the pillar. Difficult to catch an institutional building with absolutely no clutter. ProfDEH (talk) 12:07, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * No, I am talking the facade behind the columns. The right side is illuminated by a large floodlight but the left side is not. I am fairly certain its not generally that way Mfield (talk) 15:50, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose The crop annoys me. It's a good photo, but I believe more of the building should be shown. ¢rassic ! (talk) 22:01, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose I think ¢rassic   makes an excellent point. This is made even more visible by the comparison of the other picture.  smooth0707  (talk) 02:27, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

. --John254 01:18, 2 July 2008 (UTC)