Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Medina in Tripoli

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Sunset in Tripoli[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Mar 2011 at 00:44:02 (UTC)

Original - Sun sets over the old medina in Central Tripoli.
Reason
An evocative and colorful picture of the city. Its serene tone gives another side to the stories about the current unrest in Libya, while giving a glimpse into the aging architecture and cramped conditions in the city. What it lacks in resolution it makes up for in tone and clarity.
Articles in which this image appears
Tripoli
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Places/Urban
Creator
Salutandre
  • Support as nominator ---Matthew Cieplak (talk) (edits) 00:44, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • No, it does not make it up in tone and clarity (has the name of a photoshop slider now become an official FPC criterion?). If by tone you mean saturated, then I wonder where the encyclopedic value is. The depicted part of town looks random and could be any north african or middle eastern city. There is nothing particularly special in the frame, and to study "normal" cityscape the resolution is nowhere near good enough. And, sorry, but the filename is not ok either. --Dschwen 04:58, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose Size is sufficient for me, though Dschwen does make some good points. JJ Harrison (talk)
    • To clarify, I mean the size is sufficient for me to oppose. JJ Harrison (talk) 05:06, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose Size is insufficient. Image quality is poor - there are blown out highlights, lens flare (in the bottom right), and image noise in the darker areas. Furthermore, there are JPG artifacts and aliasing (e.g. in the green building on the left). Upon close examination there are random splotches of green and magenta. Filename suggests that image has been aggressively downsampled from the original; and even this was poorly done, as evidenced by the aliasing. Moreover, Dschwen raises good points about encyclopedic value. Purpy Pupple (talk) 03:43, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
    • To clarify, I mean the size is insufficient for an FP; hence I oppose. Purpy Pupple (talk) 06:55, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose Small size, odd lighting, noise issues. Okay enc.SpencerT♦C 21:11, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 02:19, 8 March 2011 (UTC)