Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Salzburg panorama.jpg

File:Salzburg panorama.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2009 at 17:04:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Salzburg panorama.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Salzburg panorama.jpg

•  Info created & uploaded by Diliff - nominated by JovanCormac
•  Info After delisting this and this, it's time we feature a picture that does this beautiful city justice. This is Salzburg as I know it.
•  Support As nominator. -- JovanCormac 17:04, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Support I don't know Salzburg yet, but it seems it's worth a trip :-). --NEUROtiker ^⇌ 17:41, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • I really recommend it! IMO Salzburg is more beautiful than even Vienna. Also, your mother tongue being German, you probably don't live too far from it - what are you waiting for? -- JovanCormac
•  Oppose, dull light and low resolution for a panorama of four pictures, sorry. --Aqwis (talk) 19:44, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • This attitude of judging images on what they could be instead of what they are seems a bit silly to me. Why don't you also oppose it because it wasn't taken with a 50 megapixel medium format camera? :-P This was taken 5 years ago with a 6 megapixel camera. Yes it is lower resolution than it could be, but until a better image comes along that is everything this is plus extra resolution, judge it on its merits. Diliff (talk) 22:07, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
    • I agree 100% here. Aquis' comment is pure nonsense. Resolution is average for a FP, and image quality is next to perfect, easily besting 90% of all Featured panoramas. Did you know that there were actually people opposed to or neutral to delisting this picture of Salzburg, which has 1/3 of the candidate's resolution and terrible image quality compared to it? I try not to think too much about those "injustices", because if I do they always make me mad... -- JovanCormac 06:33, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Per Maedin's comment about overlap I have retracted that part of my oppose. --Aqwis (talk) 12:12, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
        • Aqwis, IMO you were right, when you complained about the resolution of the panorama. A single image of 6 megapixels camera gives resolution of 3000 x 2000. Here we have four images panorama with a resolution, which is lower than a resolution of a single image. A strange overlap, isn't it :) Of course the resolution is within the rules of FPC, yet your oppose reason was still a legitimate one. On the other hand claiming that image should be promoted because there's no better one now availabale on the subject is a silly reason for promoting an image. The reaction of the user on the oppose votes, including retaliating to me in absolutely different place, seems inappropriate. I do not agree that this image is "easily besting 90% of all Featured panoramas". diliff is taking breathtaking panoramas, one of the best, maybe the best panoramas on Commons, but the nominated image is simply not one of them, and it is not the end of the world :).--Mbz1 (talk) 13:59, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Neutral - nice image but not stunning.--Avala (talk) 22:19, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Agree with Agwis. Sorry.--Mbz1 (talk) 02:46, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Support I think the lighting is fine, and of course the resolution is, too. Besides, we have no idea how much overlap there may have been in those 4 images. Maedin\^talk 06:45, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Yann (talk) 08:44, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Nothing special, normal quality image. --Karel (talk) 18:23, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose I don't see the special thing that would qualify this as an exceptional picture, sorry --S23678 (talk) 07:48, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /JovanCormac 09:34, 1 October 2009 (UTC)