Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Swisscom-Sendeturm St. Chrischona

Swisscom-Sendeturm St. Chrischona
Voting period ends on 8 May 2012 at 19:12:54 (UTC)
 * Reason:High EV and good quality
 * Articles in which this image appears:Swisscom-Sendeturm St. Chrischona
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
 * Creator:Taxiarchos228


 * Support as nominator --Tomer T (talk) 19:12, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Support technically sound; interesting subject; good EV as leading image in article; clean composition. Too bad the base of the tower is obscured. Purpy Pupple (talk) 21:02, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose With the bottom half of the tower obscured by a hill and trees the EV is dramatically reduced. — raeky  t  01:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose Technicals mostly: oversaturated, soft and noisy. JJ Harrison (talk) 10:43, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment- I can't decide what to vote. It looks good overall, but it has problems with composition (as per Purpy Pupple, alliteration totally intended) and coloration (as JJ Harrison said). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gupdoo3 (talk • contribs) 16:20, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose A communications tower? It's mundane. It's not colorful. It's not visually interesting. The composition is poor. The trees at the base clash with the tower. etc. Dr. Morbius (talk) 17:40, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * ...which isn't to say we wouldn't feature a photo of a communications tower. Any subject could have a featured picture. - Running On Brains (talk) 06:12, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree, this is a very interesting and unique communications tower, and definitely worthy of having a FP, it's just unfortunate that the picture was taken from this vantage point. unobstructed views can be had, and that's why I can't support this image. — raeky  t  06:44, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: I added an alt (which isn't in the article). Is it any better? Tomer T (talk) 09:21, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you Tomer T for nominating this picture that was made by me. But the technical achievement of this picture does not dignify the FP requirements. My photographic skills 2008 was not as good as they get in the later years ;-) --– Wladyslaw (talk) 17:20, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Beautiful setting though. Nicely seen and captured. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:14, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 22:10, 8 May 2012 (UTC)