Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:VWGolf6Int.jpg

File:VWGolf6Int.jpg, not featured

Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2009 at 18:15:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:VWGolf6Int.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:VWGolf6Int.jpg

•  Info created by Michel de Vries - uploaded by Bilindustrien - nominated by Kozuch -- Kozuch (talk) 18:15, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support -- Kozuch (talk) 18:15, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Great image, amazing professional quality. -- JovanCormac 18:45, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Airwolf (talk) 19:09, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose I am not comfortable to see too many PR photos published here and promoting every one as FP is also ridiculous, since the superior quality of such professionally taken and elaborately doctored pictures is beyond question. Apart from that general thing, in this image, you can clearly see, that the background needlessly has been replaced with some sort of glacier or arctic landscape. You can tell that because of some corrugation e.g. under the mirror or above the central console, where the glass pane usually would begin. Furthermore the satellite navigation device shows the current position of the car close to Montabaur in the German state of Rhineland-Palatinate - which is not known for harsh winters.--Curnen (talk) 10:03, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Curnen's argument is convincing. If it is a mishmash of multiple unrelated pictures, that should at least be described on the image notes. 99of9 (talk) 11:10, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Can't see any PR. Its just a professional picture. (any PR is in your mind) Background is obviously faked. Look at the bottom of the side mirror. --Niabot (talk) 12:18, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
• I hereby change my vote to  Oppose per above. I don't mind doctored photos as long as they are marked as such and above all, as long as the doctoring is done flawlessly. Airwolf (talk) 13:11, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose It looks quite fake and artificial. Nesnad (talk) 13:42, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Curnen --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:02, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Info {{Retouched picture}} template added.--Kozuch (talk) 18:26, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Support Looks very nice. That it is retouched seem quite obvious so does not feel like an issue. /Daniel78 (talk) 21:20, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Strong Oppose For Curnen's argument. Jacopo Werther (talk) 21:31, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Strong Oppose per Curnen. Maybe we can promote some PR photos but this one isn't close to being the best one, it's not unique and it's full of small issues like the fake background.--Avala (talk) 14:25, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Would not like to present promotional from Volswagen content on aur main page. --Mbdortmund (talk) 20:00, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
  • We present promotional pictures from the US military, so... Yann (talk) 08:06, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
    • Yes, you are right. But I also did not support any promotions of that kind. --Curnen (talk) 10:18, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- I'm sorry, but this is just a car interior. MartinD (talk) 08:49, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Strong Oppose Nothing special, really.Ter890 (talk) 06:33, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose I don't care if it's a promotional image, but I really don't like it --Phyrexian (talk) 00:22, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 12 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 00:45, 15 October 2009 (UTC)