Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:US Navy 110316-N-0000W-254 Members of the U.S. Navy parachute demonstration team, the Leap Frogs, perform a T-formation during a training jump abov.jpg

File:US Navy 110316-N-0000W-254 Members of the U.S. Navy parachute demonstration team, the Leap Frogs, perform a T-formation during a training jump abov.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2012 at 01:53:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:US Navy 110316-N-0000W-254 Members of the U.S. Navy parachute demonstration team, the Leap Frogs, perform a T-formation during a training jump abov.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:US Navy 110316-N-0000W-254 Members of the U.S. Navy parachute demonstration team, the Leap Frogs, perform a T-formation during a training jump abov.jpg

•  Info created by James Woods - uploaded by User:BotMultichillT - nominated by User:Astros4477 -- Astros4477 (talk) 01:53, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
•  Support -- Astros4477 (talk) 01:53, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
•  Support special, although full of details. Tomer T (talk) 08:15, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose Not special enough. Propaganda. Kleuske (talk) 09:52, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose as Kleuske. Average quality, poor educational value. Yann (talk) 12:50, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose Just a little too much for my taste. --Slaunger (talk) 22:15, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
•  Support - Lots of "wow" factor which negates some of the technical issues. Tiptoety ^talk 03:48, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
•  Support I don't know if this is propaganda. I'd support the image too if the flag was different. It's quite typical for military parachuting exhibitions to carry the national flag. --Kadellar (talk) 14:32, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • I think it is promotional, propaganda is such a flavoured word, which depends much on personal preferences. The too much issue I have about it, is how the promotional aspect is exaggerated with the huge flag. It is too obviously promotional for my taste. There is not any kind of subtlety, discreteness or balance in it IMO. But I have no problem that others have different opinions. On the other hand one can say it is very honest. One cannot say that the US Navy is trying to hide any objectives by releasing it under a free license. Obviously getting it on the main page of Commons would fulfill the objective of publishing it. --Slaunger (talk) 14:46, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
•  Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 15:17, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:22, 7 July 2012 (UTC)