Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Skyscrapers of Shinjuku 2009 January.jpg

File:Skyscrapers of Shinjuku 2009 January.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Apr 2010 at 19:26:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Skyscrapers of Shinjuku 2009 January.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Skyscrapers of Shinjuku 2009 January.jpg

•  Info created by Morio - uploaded by Morio - nominated by Patriot8790 -- патриот8790 (talk) 19:26, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support -- патриот8790 (talk) 19:26, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Neutral, not terribly wow-o-genic, a little bit soft esp. at the leftmost edge, composition somewhat nondescript, wide aspect ratio w/o being a panorama, contrast a bit on the harsh side... --MAURILBERT (discuter) 19:40, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Not so great composition, motion blur, hazy. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 20:24, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

• The sky must be rather clear to see Fuji from 100km distance. What you describe as motion blur/hazy is probably the effect of being taken through a not so perfect glass. --Elekhh (talk) 08:41, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

•  Support --Lošmi (talk) 00:50, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment I agree with Maurilbert on sharpness, contrast and composition. I would therefore oppose it, but I´m not shure how seldom mount Fuji can be seen from the city, and how likely we are to get a better one in the near future. Nikopol (talk) 12:59, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Small. —kallerna™ 14:42, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Detailed landscapes like this really need to be high-res. --99of9 (talk) 14:24, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 20:13, 11 April 2010 (UTC)