Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/File:Treasury of Athens at Delphi.jpg

Treasury of Athens at Delphi
Voting period ends on 7 Apr 2011 at 03:21:56 (UTC)
 * Reason:The old image had mixed reviews at the initial nomination, including concerns about perspective, and also has noise, some speckling, and a lack of sharpness (I kind of feel like the focus might be on the near wall rather than on the building). I'm proposing an alternative as a possible delist and replace, although I'm not crazy about the angle or exposure and I think a straight delist is also a possibility.
 * Articles this image appears in: Delphi
 * Previous nomination/s: Featured picture candidates/Treasury of Athens
 * Nominator: Chick Bowen


 * Delist and weak replace &mdash; Chick Bowen 03:21, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I think the image is better than the suggested replacement which has a bad composition with too much weight (proportion of the image, light) on the side wall. I disagree with comments from the previous nomination that the perspective distortion would need correction: Greek architecture was clearly conceived with a view on how the building is really seen. While I agree that a better image of the subject would be possible, I don't see any urgent need to delist this one. --Elekhh (talk) 21:08, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delist, do not replace. I don't think the original is up to scratch quality-wise, and I'm not wild about the composition of the alt. J Milburn (talk) 00:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't replace The alt is worse lit and worse composition. I'm not experienced enough to know whether the original meets the quality standards, but I'm confident that the alt shouldn't be featured. --99of9 (talk) 13:09, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delist, do not replace, per J Milburn.  Jujutacular  talk 16:56, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delist, do not replace Original's quality isn't high enough. The suggested replacement is okay but not up to FP standards. That shot makes me think, though, that an FP-quality picture of the Treasury of Athens is definitely possible. Makeemlighter (talk) 23:23, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I agree, and was disappointed that that was the best I could come up with given the attractiveness of the whole category. I think it doesn't occur to our more historically serious photographers to shoot these reconstructed monuments, but they have their own educational value distinct from the less adulterated artifacts at other sites.  But in general we don't have enough archeological FPs. Chick Bowen 02:32, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 01:48, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Only 4 delist votes. Makeemlighter (talk) 01:48, 4 May 2011 (UTC)