Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Sanaksar

Sanaksarski monastery


I think that this is a beautiful picture. It appears in the article "Monastery". My colleague created this image during our visit to this monastery.


 * Nominate and support. - Olegivvit 18:58, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Nice subject, but lacking in sharpness and blown-out highlights (with blooming, killing lots of details). --Dschwen 11:49, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose Too blurred for FP - Adrian Pingstone
 * Oppose for reasons already stated by Dschwen. SteveHopson 13:48, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Same as all the other reasons. Overall, poor image. Diliff  | (Talk)   (Contribs) 16:20, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * [[Image:Symbol oppose vote.png|15px]] Oppose - too blurred, poor focus, blown highlights, bad detail, not very good lighting or colour. And it appears that the user created their account for the sole purpose of submitting this for FP. The account was created, this was uploaded, and it was immediately nominated. &mdash;Vanderdecken&there4; &int;  &xi;  &phi;   18:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I know - the author/nominator originally tried to submit it (albeit incorrectly) so I removed the mangled code from the page and left a message on their talk page advising them to read the instructions properly, but to reconsider nomination in the first place. Ah well. I tried. :) Diliff  | (Talk)   (Contribs) 20:12, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose This is not FP quality. See comments of Adrian and Dschwen. Mikeo 18:57, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. If your collegue created the image, you cannot legally submit it under any license and if the image isn't used in any article, it's not eligble either. - Mgm|(talk) 09:48, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose, I like how the monestary is contrasted to the barren and featureless landscape around it. But the photo cuts off the left part of the monistary and just shows a field of tall grass in the right. -- BWF89 03:07, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

 howch e  ng   {chat} 18:39, 12 May 2006 (UTC)