This picture is not only too small by today's standards, but the quality is horrible. It has blown highlights, it is unsharp, and it is very grainy, not to mention those borders.
- Delist. - Nautica Shad e s 18:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delist per nom. -- KFP ( talk | contribs) 11:01, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delist per nom gren グレン 15:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. I agree with Nauticashades that the quality is bad by today standards. But delisting the picture is like "revising the past" (it immediately comes to my mind George Orwell's 1984), and I believe we shouldn't do that. On the contrary, by delisting a recent picture we are just correcting an error of judgement. -
Alvesgaspar
18:36, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- This is the entire point of delisting: too clean out old Featured Pictures that don't meet standards anymore. As Wikipedia's pictures' quality improve, so must its Featured Pictures. Arguements on whether old FPs should be delisted or not should be done at the talk page or at the Village Pump, not here, which is bordering on WP:POINT, in my opinion. Nautica Shad e s 21:24, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Consensus can change, and what is considered a featured picture is not set in stone. We can always leave a note that images used to be featured; we're not deleting any sign that it ever was and throwing it down the memory hole. Night Gyr ( talk/ Oy) 15:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep -- Fir0002 22:14, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Strong delist - I can't believe the level of support for this picture which, by today's standards, is woeful. -- CountdownCrispy ( ? 17:04, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delist. The FP list is fluid. There is no reason in keeping poor quality FPs for the sake of preserving history. Change is inevitable and necessary. It keeps standards high and wikipedia benefits. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 10:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - Per Alvesgaspar's comments -- ZeWrestler Talk 01:05, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- I cannot believe the support for this image - if it was merely too small by modern standards then yes, it could probably stand. However, this is a horrific photograph with numerous flaws and an atrocity of a border - having this as 'featured' is an embarrassment for Wikipedia if you ask me, and, as has been said before, damaging the way that the delisting process works just to prove a point is not something which Wikipedia supports. This is just silly. -- CountdownCrispy ( ? 18:11, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delist. Neutrality talk 21:00, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delist. History can be preserved using {{ FormerFeaturedPicture}}. -- Dschwen 14:50, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Delisted. -- KFP ( talk | contribs) 15:25, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
This picture is not only too small by today's standards, but the quality is horrible. It has blown highlights, it is unsharp, and it is very grainy, not to mention those borders.
- Delist. - Nautica Shad e s 18:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delist per nom. -- KFP ( talk | contribs) 11:01, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delist per nom gren グレン 15:03, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. I agree with Nauticashades that the quality is bad by today standards. But delisting the picture is like "revising the past" (it immediately comes to my mind George Orwell's 1984), and I believe we shouldn't do that. On the contrary, by delisting a recent picture we are just correcting an error of judgement. -
Alvesgaspar
18:36, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- This is the entire point of delisting: too clean out old Featured Pictures that don't meet standards anymore. As Wikipedia's pictures' quality improve, so must its Featured Pictures. Arguements on whether old FPs should be delisted or not should be done at the talk page or at the Village Pump, not here, which is bordering on WP:POINT, in my opinion. Nautica Shad e s 21:24, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Consensus can change, and what is considered a featured picture is not set in stone. We can always leave a note that images used to be featured; we're not deleting any sign that it ever was and throwing it down the memory hole. Night Gyr ( talk/ Oy) 15:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep -- Fir0002 22:14, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
- Strong delist - I can't believe the level of support for this picture which, by today's standards, is woeful. -- CountdownCrispy ( ? 17:04, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delist. The FP list is fluid. There is no reason in keeping poor quality FPs for the sake of preserving history. Change is inevitable and necessary. It keeps standards high and wikipedia benefits. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 10:29, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - Per Alvesgaspar's comments -- ZeWrestler Talk 01:05, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- I cannot believe the support for this image - if it was merely too small by modern standards then yes, it could probably stand. However, this is a horrific photograph with numerous flaws and an atrocity of a border - having this as 'featured' is an embarrassment for Wikipedia if you ask me, and, as has been said before, damaging the way that the delisting process works just to prove a point is not something which Wikipedia supports. This is just silly. -- CountdownCrispy ( ? 18:11, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delist. Neutrality talk 21:00, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delist. History can be preserved using {{ FormerFeaturedPicture}}. -- Dschwen 14:50, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
Delisted. -- KFP ( talk | contribs) 15:25, 12 November 2006 (UTC)