Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/USB flash drive

USB flash drive

 * Reason:I feel this is an informative image, but unattractive, and possibly outdated. Since everyone has at least one USB flash drive nowadays, I'm sure the image would be of no trouble to take again with much better conditions. With the border removed, the images are each - and combined - way less than 1000px. My main reasons for delisting are the ugly border and low resolution, and the possiblity that a (now obsolete) 64 Mbyte drive has slightly different internals to the modern standards.
 * Nominator: Jack


 * Delist &mdash; Jack · talk · 19:39, Wednesday, 7 February 2007
 * keep pending replacement, the resolution is sufficient, I can make out all the traces and the components. Resolution is a detail issue, but I'm not missing any details on this.  The border should be improved. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 21:33, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Created edit 1, which I believe is superior, but still far short of what I wanted. We need to photo to be retaken. The edit now takes it under the size requirements, as I said it would - Jack · talk · 16:55, Thursday, 8 February 2007
 * Woah, just realised mine has serious artifacts. Not sure why, but this means the original is actually way better than mine Jack · talk · 16:59, Thursday, 8 February 2007
 * Delist All The background fusing of the edit looks bad and there are the artifacts. Mainly, for a subject such as this we really need the picture to be outstanding to make FP. This one is simpily unprofesional, tilted, and has a ugly (off pinkish white) background -Fcb981 07:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delist, purely because they look nothing like that anymore and we need a more accurate picture --⁪froth T 18:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - froth, that's actually not true - I have two (different) 3-month-old 1GB flash drives which are essentially identical internally to the one illustrated. --YFB ¿  00:41, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Weak neutral Your points: 1) background/border: agree 2) resolution: mostly disagree (could be better but on a simple image like this you don't lose too much...) 3) Obsolete?: disagree, technologically it may be less useful but it is still just as representative as a newer one. gren グレン 01:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delist per all above. --KFP (talk | contribs) 20:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delist - It's encylopaedic and doesn't strike me as horribly bad, but it wouldn't be difficult to get a much better shot. I might take one myself if I can dig out my defunct 128MB version. --YFB ¿  00:41, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Delisted. --KFP (talk | contribs) 12:04, 18 February 2007 (UTC)