Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/MV Sorrento

MV Sorrento

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2010 at 14:16:41 (UTC)

Reason: 'Sister ship' to the MV Queenscliff below, with the same reasons, though I spose just more article junk to most people here. Some suggested reasons for opposing: too dark/bright, too big/small, too sharp/soft, bird in the background is highly distracting, Loch Ness Monster emerging from the water is scaring me... (be creative!).
Articles in which this image appears: MV Sorrento (2001), Peninsula Searoad Transport
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Engineering and technology/Machinery
Creator: jjron

Support as nominator --jjron (talk) 14:16, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, very nice. J Milburn (talk) 15:17, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It strikes me as a sterile, unremarkable picture of a ferry. It seems somewhat dark. It would be nice to have truly remarkable and/or interesting pictures on the Main Page. Greg L (talk) 16:47, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agreeing with Greg L, the picture does not seem to possess the potency of a Featured Picture. XeroJavelin (talk) 20:30, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Greg L. See the above nomination, much more eye catching. A very informative picture though. -- bydand•talk 19:59, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support per my reasons on another nom - I actually find pictures like this quite interesting... And that wierd dock thing looks good in this! ;-) Gazhiley (talk) 11:47, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is just going to become a running joke, isn't it? :) WackyWace ^{converse | contribs} 09:50, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Quite bland compared to the boat above. P. S. Burton (talk) 12:43, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry to jump in here - but this is not a comparison site... Please judge it on it's own, not whether it's better or worse than a nearby nom... And if you have any other reason to oppose please list that instead.. Gazhiley (talk) 22:06, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Well, in a way it is... but anyway, I would have opposed it nonetheless, per Greg L, "a sterile, unremarkable picture of a ferry". P. S. Burton (talk) 23:08, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - And that's different from things like the many element samples in what way? I also notice Greg L always supports those - to quote his vote in the most recent nom "Support As always...". This is large, sharp, highly detailed, etc, etc. Seems like these votes are based on the nominator, not the image. --jjron (talk) 03:07, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - To be fair to Greg tho he wasn't supporting the images by saying "as it's better than the above nom" or something similar... But thanks P.S. Burton for clarifying your vote... Gazhiley (talk) 08:35, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        The inconsistencies and self-defined criteria are obvious. --jjron (talk) 14:47, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        Come on now, you took a picture that just isn't worthy of FP status. No matter, what criteria we have, selection is always gonna be arbitrary, since we are essentially judging art.P. S. Burton (talk) 15:05, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        On the other hand, if we all were to judge by Greg's stop and stare criteria, I guess we would be featuring this lady as POTD every day. P. S. Burton (talk) 15:43, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 18:27, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]