Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/File:AlfredPalmerM3tank1942b.jpg

M3 Tank

 * Reason:A compositional mess, blurry, with far too much surrounding open space, dust cloud takes away from the image as well. Even after a clean-up, this is so far below par.
 * Previous nomination/s:Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:M3 tank, 1942
 * Nominator: Nezzadar   [SPEAK]


 * Delist &mdash; Nezzadar   [SPEAK]  01:30, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. The nomination is a case in point about the haphazard nature of historic image delistings.  While we have this (eminently replaceable with better material by the same photographer) and this (dismally low resolution), a high resolution file which is one of the very few color images that depicts WWII arms in operation during its working lifetime goes up on the block.  Color photography was in its infancy during World War II, and was very expensive.  Both the Library of Congress notes about this being a "transparency" and the border markings on the original strongly indicate that this was shot on Kodak sheet film, which was a superior process and more durable (in terms of discoloration over time) than the cheaper color processes which followed after the war.  Alfred Palmer did a few others from the same series and LoC has subsequently provided higher resolution scans, so if someone else wants to restore an alternate would consider delisting and replacement.  Durova  359 02:04, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Durova. Tracked vehicles tend to raise dust when operated at any kind of speed, so this dust is characteristic of it (particularly operation in the North Africa Campaign). The dust does not obscure the body significantly, just the tracks. Mostlyharmless (talk) 02:46, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Good EV and eye-catching. Dust clouds are expected near tanks --Muhammad (talk) 15:59, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I remember finding this on LoC and being knocked out by it. As Durova says, its a very early and rare example of large-format colour photography that must have been incredibly difficult to work with in these circumstances. No need to go into any more detail, this is a completely misguided delist nom. Can it please be closed early? mikaultalk 19:47, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Withdrawn pwned... Nezzadar  [SPEAK]  17:22, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

-- Nezzadar   [SPEAK]  18:58, 9 November 2009 (UTC)