Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Contaminacion del Lago de Maracaibo.jpg

File:Contaminacion del Lago de Maracaibo.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2012 at 18:33:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Contaminacion del Lago de Maracaibo.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Contaminacion del Lago de Maracaibo.jpg

•  Info This is not a beautiful composition, however, I think it's important to be shown. All by -- The Photographer (talk) 18:33, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Support -- The Photographer (talk) 18:33, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Sad but true. --–Makele-90 (talk) 19:47, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Tomer T (talk) 21:01, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Beautiful and tragic. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:51, 9 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Ю. Данилевский (talk) 04:34, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Question Is this a stitched file (20MP)? I prefer a 4:3 format as in the original upload. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:53, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Yes, this is a stitched image. I considered it contemplates unite more details, there is greater range of coast, thanks --The Photographer (talk) 15:11, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. Adding the relevant template may be good. This is a good image with enough EV; may be a rare seen in developed countries. But this is a common seen in other places of the world, including our country (although it is shame for me to tell it loud).  Neutral because I prefer a wider format (per Murdockcrc). -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:51, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

•  Support Tragic? Yes. Beautiful? Hell, no! Excellent picture, sure! Kleuske (talk) 10:54, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

  I was using it in an ironic sense. ;-) King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:22, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

•  Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 12:00, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Support something different. --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 14:30, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose - I don't see this as being one of the finest images in commons only because it raises awareness of a hot topic. --Murdockcrc (talk) 14:42, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
  •  Comment Ummm.. Come again? Your reason for opposing is that "it raises awareness"? Besides. I wish it were a hot topic, but, by the looks of it, it ain't. Kleuske (talk) 16:14, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
    • Hi Kleuske. No, I am not opposing it for raising awareness. I made the comment because I have the impression some of the supporting votes are there just because of that. I am opposing it mostly on the grounds that it is a very tight and distracting composition. It has great EV though, but I don't see this as a FP. --Murdockcrc (talk) 16:40, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Support -- JDP90 (talk) 16:46, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose Nice picture to get published so that the responsible blush, original as well, but no wow Poco a poco (talk) 20:42, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose Sad, but no wow. -- -donald- (talk) 07:11, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose No wow. And I don't like the ratio. Several errors in the stitching (with source photos focus not even matching). - Benh (talk) 10:42, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose Good shot but it lacks of wow for FP. --Taraxacum (talk) 13:27, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Kraft (talk) 13:51, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose – The tight crop undercuts the intended effect of this image. Some viewers may even see it as photographic bias, imagining that the scene might improve outside the small frame. It would serve nicely as a part of a photo essay, but on its own it doesn't match the scope of its topic. This would make a very good foreground for some larger picture, one which apparently could show a stunning view of pollution around the lake. SteveStrummer (talk) 03:45, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:39, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:02, 19 September 2012 (UTC)