Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Paul Cézanne - Mont Sainte-Victoire and the Viaduct of the Arc River Valley (Metropolitan Museum of Art).jpg

File:Paul Cézanne - Mont Sainte-Victoire and the Viaduct of the Arc River Valley (Metropolitan Museum of Art).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2022 at 16:09:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Paul Cézanne - Mont Sainte-Victoire and the Viaduct of the Arc River Valley (Metropolitan Museum of Art).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Paul Cézanne - Mont Sainte-Victoire and the Viaduct of the Arc River Valley (Metropolitan Museum of Art).jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Exteriors#Landscapes
•  Info created by Paul Cézanne, uploaded by Crisco 1492, nominated by Yann (talk)
•  Support -- Yann (talk) 16:09, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Oppose Perfectly good reproduction, but I think it really pales in greatness, compared to the super-sharp extreme closeups we've been featuring that are by museums or the Google Art Project. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:52, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Ikan is right, but it still impresses me much; resolution and sharpness are sufficient to study the brushwork (that’s my personal resolution requirement for reproductions of this kind of paintings). --Aristeas (talk) 08:06, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support partially as per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:30, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
•  Support per Aristeas; I'd say it's better than another digitization of a Cézanne landscape we have, View of Auvers-sur-Oise, which I wrote an article about (although, to be fair, the main reason I wrote the article about it was that it was stolen from the Ashmolean in 2000, and thus it has been impossible since then to get any better digitization of it). Daniel Case (talk) 17:42, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

•  Comment You take what you can get, but seeing that that reproduction is below the absolute minimum size for FPC, that seems like a very weak reason to support this one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:11, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 21:10, 20 June 2022 (UTC)