Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Complejo San Francisco, Arequipa, Perú, 2015-08-02, DD 79-81 HDR.JPG

File:Complejo San Francisco, Arequipa, Perú, 2015-08-02, DD 79-81 HDR.JPG, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Aug 2016 at 09:41:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Complejo San Francisco, Arequipa, Perú, 2015-08-02, DD 79-81 HDR.JPG Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Complejo San Francisco, Arequipa, Perú, 2015-08-02, DD 79-81 HDR.JPG

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
•  Info Night view of the religious complex of San Francisco, Historic Centre of Arequipa, Peru. The complex, founded in 1552 and of mixed style, consists of a Franciscan church, a convent and a minor temple known as the Third Order. Its simple but robust construction made possible that it conserves very good for over 400 years in spite of the frequent earthquakes. Poco² 09:41, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Support -- Poco² 09:41, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:08, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Question It's a really good photo and the two guys with their bottle are part of the composition, perfectly positioned under the doorway btw, but is it possible to remove three or four of the other rubbish (can, mugs, cig pack, bottle cap)? w.carter-Talk 11:32, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

  W.carter, I've edited it and uploaded a new version, but I don't feel 100% comfortable about this kind of edits. As it was a Sunday night I assume that it was dirtier than otherwise and that's why I guess it's ok. Poco² 12:09, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

• Dearest Poco, it really was just a question not a command, hence the 'question'-template. :) Any good reason for not doing the edit, such as the one you provided above (authenticity), would have been legitimate and acceptable. If you don't want to alter a pic, just say so. I think most editors here would agree, if the reason was solid. Anyway:

 Support --w.carter-Talk 14:48, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

•  Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 14:46, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:56, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Support INeverCry 18:39, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Comment Imo, the composition is uncomfortably tight at the bottom. Was that intentional or did you run out of space? --DXR (talk) 20:34, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

  DXR: I couldn't go further back as there was a road with a lot of traffic. Otherwise I'd had looked for a futher position. There were also some cars parked around the place, so, I didn't have that freedom. I could though offer a more generous crop at the bottom but the stairs will still be cut off and I'd also lose a bit on both sides. Poco² 20:46, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

  I see. It's a bit unfortunate. --DXR (talk) 07:43, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

•  Support Reguyla (talk) 23:22, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose I don't know, but the composition just doesn't work for me. The black sky and the rather ugly fence don't help either. Sorry. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:49, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Mö1997 (Questions ?!?!) 20:20, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Daniel Case (talk) 06:18, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose The composition doesn't work for me, sorry. --Laitche (talk) 18:24, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Ralf Roleček 06:52, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 13:47, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:56, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings