Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Church of St. Teresa Ceiling, Vilnius, Lithuania - Diliff.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Church of St. Teresa Ceiling, Vilnius, Lithuania - Diliff.jpg, featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2015 at 17:32:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Pofka -- Pofka (talk) 17:32, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
- Support -- Pofka (talk) 17:32, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
- Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:15, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
- Support — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:17, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
OpposeI don't find the subject to be too interesting, to be honest. — Julian H.✈ 09:11, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
- What do you mean by that? Flowers are flowers, planes are planes, ceilings are ceilings. How can you make it more interesting? It is a great capture of the ceiling decorations (one of the finest in Wikipedia) and there really is nothing more to be done. It is technically perfect. I think your opposing reason is not suitable to be counted because it is way too abstract and without arguments. -- Pofka (talk) 10:11, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
- The subject has to matter, clearly, as much as anything else in the photo. It has to be a great-looking image overall. It's not possible to take a FP of every subject imaginable, even if you capture the subject very well. So I understand if you disagree with me, but I don't follow what you mean with your rather fundamental criticism of my reasoning. — Julian H.✈ 10:17, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
- Perhaps I should add: I don't mean "interesting" in an intellectual manner or anything like that, just visually. — Julian H.✈ 10:19, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
- I meant that your argument is way too abstract. For me, the church interior is way more interesting than planes or paintings, however I will not oppose the picture only because the subject is not very interesting FOR ME. Furthermore, POTY is always divided into the various categories: plants, landscapes and so on, so as the featured pictures. Don't compare church with planes or landscapes. This is just incomparable. The main question, at least for me: "Is this picture among the most valued pictures in its category?". I think in this way it is much more objective. -- Pofka (talk) 13:59, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
- I'm comparing this to other curches and even other church ceilings. — Julian H.✈ 14:41, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
- Then probably our tastes varies. Lets see what the others thinks. -- Pofka (talk) 14:56, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
- Julian, I'm not sure exactly what issues you had with the image, but I've reprocessed it as I think the image was a bit dark and lifeless before. I suspect your opinion won't change but I invite you to have another look just in case. ;-) Diliff (talk) 10:40, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
- I'm comparing this to other curches and even other church ceilings. — Julian H.✈ 14:41, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
- I meant that your argument is way too abstract. For me, the church interior is way more interesting than planes or paintings, however I will not oppose the picture only because the subject is not very interesting FOR ME. Furthermore, POTY is always divided into the various categories: plants, landscapes and so on, so as the featured pictures. Don't compare church with planes or landscapes. This is just incomparable. The main question, at least for me: "Is this picture among the most valued pictures in its category?". I think in this way it is much more objective. -- Pofka (talk) 13:59, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
- Neutral at least, with the less dark appearance. — Julian H.✈ 11:48, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
- Support -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 14:15, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
- Support Diliff skills at its best. --Hubertl (talk) 16:35, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
- Support --Tremonist (talk) 13:52, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
- Support. I don't think this is my best ceiling (probably this one is better), but the details on the ceiling are interesting and it's a difficult and technical stitch. I might try to reprocess it so that it's slightly less dark though. Hopefully it will be considered an improvement and not complicate the nomination. Diliff (talk) 10:28, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
- OK, I've uploaded a new version which is a bit brighter and lively. Hopefully nobody has any issues with this edit. Diliff (talk) 10:40, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Oppose--Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 16:38, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /KTC (talk) 22:54, 17 March 2015 (UTC)) 22:00, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors