Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Sidsmith.jpg
- Reason
- This is a picture I really like, taken by my Hebrew-Wikipedia mate, Almog. I believe it is suitable to become a FP and be displayed on the Main Page.
- Articles this image appears in
- Acre, Israel, Mortar (weapon)
- Creator
- Almog
- Support as nominator — Tomer T 17:55, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- Support My only complaint is that I'd prefer a wider crop on the bottom. Enc with no real problems, and certainly large enough.--HereToHelp 18:53, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
- Support - Enc and technically adequate. --TotoBaggins 01:16, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
- comment I'm not sure how much it does to illustrate Acre. Debivort 02:25, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose - Dire composition (subject cut off, funny angle, nothing centred, no rule of thirds...), uninspiring subject (rubbish at bottom right, mortar appears to have been graffiti'd with "JL 04"), apparently meaningless filename ("Sidsmith.jpg"?) and doesn't really inform about Acre or mortars. Nul points. --YFB ¿ 04:34, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
- I think it informs about Acre and some about the history of mortars. Citation from the article Acre, Israel: A heavy land defense wall was built north and east to the city in 1800-1814 by Jezzar Pasha (called by the locals Al-Jezzar) and his Jewish advisor Haim Farkhi. This wall is the first notable thing to come into sight when coming to Acre. It is a modern counter artillery fortification which includes a thick defensive wall, a dry moat, cannon outposts and three Burges (large defensive towers).
- I think it informs about Acre and some about the history of mortars. Citation from the article Acre, Israel: A heavy land defense wall was built north and east to the city in 1800-1814 by Jezzar Pasha (called by the locals Al-Jezzar) and his Jewish advisor Haim Farkhi. This wall is the first notable thing to come into sight when coming to Acre. It is a modern counter artillery fortification which includes a thick defensive wall, a dry moat, cannon outposts and three Burges (large defensive towers).
- Tomer T 05:15, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
- What you've illustrated is that the article gives a reasonable description of the site. This photo does very little to elaborate on that description, being a photo of a rusty, apparently vandalised metal object in front of a small, context-less, non-descript segment of wall of unclear importance. It tells me nothing at all about the history of mortars and all I learn about Acre is that it apparently has some sea, some sky, a fast-moving bird, some unidentified stalks/poles/cranes, some topiary, a rusty cannon-thingy pointing through a gap in an uninteresting wall and, in 2004, apparently at least one bored teenager with the initials JL. Citing the contents of Wikipedia articles does nothing to improve the image to anything approaching featured-quality. --YFB ¿ 06:01, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think you're right and I think you're exaggerating the disadvantages of this picture. I don't think this image is so bad as you illustrated it. In my opinion, this is a great picture and it illustares an important historical object. I also have the reason for the name of the picture, as Almog told me: It is called "Sidsmith" because it was pictured for usage in the Hebrew article about William Sidney Smith (The description in the Hebrew article under the photo, translated to English: A cannon fixed in the walls of Acre in front of the sea in the battlefield in which Smith won his great victory against Napoleon) Tomer T 11:07, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
- What you've illustrated is that the article gives a reasonable description of the site. This photo does very little to elaborate on that description, being a photo of a rusty, apparently vandalised metal object in front of a small, context-less, non-descript segment of wall of unclear importance. It tells me nothing at all about the history of mortars and all I learn about Acre is that it apparently has some sea, some sky, a fast-moving bird, some unidentified stalks/poles/cranes, some topiary, a rusty cannon-thingy pointing through a gap in an uninteresting wall and, in 2004, apparently at least one bored teenager with the initials JL. Citing the contents of Wikipedia articles does nothing to improve the image to anything approaching featured-quality. --YFB ¿ 06:01, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose per YFB. Looks like an ordinary tourist snapshot. -Wutschwlllm 12:01, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose Just not FP material at all. Really, being in focus, or big enough, or "not too bad" are insufficient reasons to support. It might have enc value at mortar, but so do others; it simply isn't an outstanding illustration of the subject. It might be within the walls of Acre but there's insufficient context to be highly enc for that article – again, less so than others on the page. I don't think there's anything more to say about it, other than the "graffiti" is almost cetainly written in some form of abjad script and is not a date/handle. At a glance it looks like "shalom" written in Arabic, which is nice. Still not a reason to promote! mikaultalk 12:53, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
- Heh, excuse my inadvertent Anglo-centric bias. Didn't occur to me that it might be Arabic script, but I think you're right. Still not the most enc addition to something 200 years old :-) --YFB ¿ 14:04, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose, doesn't show the subject adequately. BTW, the picture messes up the layout at Mortar (weapon).--Svetovid 17:00, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose Wow... the back of a mortar! 8thstar 00:15, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Not promoted --Raven4x4x 05:33, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
