Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The Grassle, Ghent

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2012 at 19:28:31 (UTC)

Reason: A good quality picture that conveys nicely the mood of a very popular place in the city of Ghent, including the usually overcast sky of the region
Articles in which this image appears: Ghent
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Urban
Creator: Alvesgaspar (talk)

Support as nominator --Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:28, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support, already rated as high level of quality at Wikimedia Commons, high encyclopedic value, high educational value, good usage on the project. — Cirt (talk) 20:10, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support, Nice overview image. good EV. Lycaon (talk) 07:49, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Tomcat (7) 11:10, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Modern place, easy to rephotograph, therefore the extremely overcast/cloudy day isn't ideal, we can do better. — raeky t 13:33, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you. It's a shame, but the lighting is so flat and dull, for me it really detracts. 86.146.106.216 (talk) 18:39, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional Support Per Raeky. I don't care for the cloudy sky, but in the event of a clear sky picture coming available, I suggest a D&R. Dusty777 17:45, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is useful image which was competently executed. However, the flat lighting unfortunately means that it doesn't have a strong visual impact. Nick-D (talk) 10:42, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose in its current form per raeky and Nick-D. Samsara (FA • FP) 12:49, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support If this weather is typical for the location then I see no reason to vote against this. A sunny day would be visually nicer but that doesn't make the photo more encyclopedic or educational. --Pine^✉ 20:45, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Julia\^talk 16:11, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Even counting Dusty's ambiguously conditional support, this nomination does not reach a 2/3 majority, although it's close. Please feel free to renominate if this outcome is unsatisfactory. Julia\^talk 16:11, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
6:3 is a 2/3 majority... Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:37, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I made a mistake. My apologies. Julia\^talk 20:10, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]