Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:COA Russian SFSR.svg

Image:COA Russian SFSR.svg, not featured

•  Info created by - uploaded by - nominated by Pianist --Pianist 07:09, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
•  Support--Pianist 07:09, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment Unsure. On the one hand, this is a valuable, useful work, and quite well done, and I don't think anyone wants to say that your work isn't appreciated. On the other hand, the original logo isn't particularly interesting, from an artistic point of view. We obviously need things like this, but I'm not sure if Featured Picture is quite the right category for it - Valued images (when they get off the ground) might be better. In short - great work by you, not so great work by the logo designer =) Adam Cuerden 12:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
•  Neutral  Support As Adam Cuerden said, the COA itself isn't quite FP material, but the way it was done definitely is FP-quality vector work. Very well done - better than some FP CoAs I've seen. - Rocket000 03:58, 4 March 2008 (UTC) Edit: On second thought, I don't know how it could be better either. The more I look at it the more I like it. - Rocket000 17:54, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
•  Support I don't know how it can be better. --Beyond silence 11:16, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose Скучная фотография, хорошая для статьи, но не интересная как избранные изображения.--Mbz1
  •  Question Could you repeat in English? Normally it doesn't make a difference to me, but in this case your insight might be valuable to others. -- Ianare 06:15, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

• I just said that while the image is good for the article it is used for, I do not find it to be interesting enough to get FP status.--Mbz1 16:18, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

She thinks this is photo. («фотография» is translated as photo) --Pianist 06:56, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

•  Oppose low quality of the black borders, top red star with asymmetric borders. But I'm expecting improvements, F l a n k e r 12:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
  •  Support I've made some corrections. --F l a n k e r 15:05, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

• I am not sure you could overwrite the original version as you did. All the votes before your correction are kind of invalid now because people voted for a different image.--Mbz1 17:25, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

• Reverted to my version. --Pianist 07:28, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

• If the image is here is editable. Anyone can change his vote after looking at the corrections. So what's the problem? --F l a n k e r 09:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

• There are two problems. First problem is that the image's creator might like his/her version better than your edit. The second problem is that people, who have voted for the image already, voted for the original version and might never return to the nomination and never notice that the image was changed.--Mbz1 15:49, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

• Understood, thanks for explanation. F l a n k e r 12:50, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

•  Support Clean and well built Serg!o 23:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Mbz1. Lycaon 12:53, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
•  Opposeit is a well made SVG. but i am not really sure that is enough to be FP. i wouldnt doubht making it QI on the other hand.-LadyofHats 03:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose as per LadyofHats --Cpl Syx 03:21, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

• This account has no contributions and created especially for voting.--Pianist 07:24, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

• There is no rule against that and there is nothing in the voting pattern indicating malicious voting. Lycaon 10:36, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

• It's your account?--Pianist 06:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

• I already have one, thanks  :). Lycaon 08:13, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

•  Oppose Quote Mbz1. WinSocket 17:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

result: 4 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Mywood 08:36, 12 March 2008 (UTC)