Support ALT as nominator –
Godot13 (
talk) 05:52, 30 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose Where's the rest of the building? --
Janke |
Talk 08:16, 30 April 2014 (UTC)reply
As part of an Oxford college quad the library faces inwards on one side of the square, meaning this is a picture of the entire library facade. See the aerial photo here:
http://binged.it/1u3HEx8 - ZephyrisTalk 11:47, 30 April 2014 (UTC)reply
The title has been amended to reflect the image is of the facade.-
Godot13 (
talk) 14:45, 30 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Still, it is chopped off, visually not pleasing, IMO. --
Janke |
Talk 12:22, 30 April 2014(UTC)
Comment Quite a lot of gras. There is no motion in the picture.
Hafspajen (
talk) 19:06, 30 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose Nice picture, but to get the sense that it's part of a quad, you would have to step back a bit to show that the walls come in on either side, right now it's ambiguous, so missing some critical encyclopedic value.
Mattximus (
talk) 23:59, 30 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment I would like to see this picture cropped. I think the ends of the picture is what it makes it - ambiguous. It ends in something that starts, if you understand what I mean.
Hafspajen (
talk) 19:23, 6 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Well, that was fast. let me think.
Hafspajen (
talk) 19:43, 6 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Ok, Support ALT. The image is good, clear and depicts an iconic building. I think it may have a place among Featured pictures, after this change. This image has the crisp quality people want about the other pictures.
Hafspajen (
talk) 19:46, 6 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Suppor ALT - The crop really brings out the facade's personality. —
Crisco 1492 (
talk) 14:55, 7 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose both - I'd want to see more, not less, of the building.
Sven ManguardWha? 01:34, 8 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose Alt 1. & Weak support original-- The picture must show the subject. You are placing a cropped version with almost 60% of library missing. IMO, original is far better than the Alt.1. But both have the quality and EV perfect.The herald 13:27, 8 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Support Alt. — Sometimes less is more.
Sca (
talk) 00:31, 10 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Support ALT as nominator –
Godot13 (
talk) 05:52, 30 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose Where's the rest of the building? --
Janke |
Talk 08:16, 30 April 2014 (UTC)reply
As part of an Oxford college quad the library faces inwards on one side of the square, meaning this is a picture of the entire library facade. See the aerial photo here:
http://binged.it/1u3HEx8 - ZephyrisTalk 11:47, 30 April 2014 (UTC)reply
The title has been amended to reflect the image is of the facade.-
Godot13 (
talk) 14:45, 30 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Still, it is chopped off, visually not pleasing, IMO. --
Janke |
Talk 12:22, 30 April 2014(UTC)
Comment Quite a lot of gras. There is no motion in the picture.
Hafspajen (
talk) 19:06, 30 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose Nice picture, but to get the sense that it's part of a quad, you would have to step back a bit to show that the walls come in on either side, right now it's ambiguous, so missing some critical encyclopedic value.
Mattximus (
talk) 23:59, 30 April 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment I would like to see this picture cropped. I think the ends of the picture is what it makes it - ambiguous. It ends in something that starts, if you understand what I mean.
Hafspajen (
talk) 19:23, 6 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Well, that was fast. let me think.
Hafspajen (
talk) 19:43, 6 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Ok, Support ALT. The image is good, clear and depicts an iconic building. I think it may have a place among Featured pictures, after this change. This image has the crisp quality people want about the other pictures.
Hafspajen (
talk) 19:46, 6 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Suppor ALT - The crop really brings out the facade's personality. —
Crisco 1492 (
talk) 14:55, 7 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose both - I'd want to see more, not less, of the building.
Sven ManguardWha? 01:34, 8 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Oppose Alt 1. & Weak support original-- The picture must show the subject. You are placing a cropped version with almost 60% of library missing. IMO, original is far better than the Alt.1. But both have the quality and EV perfect.The herald 13:27, 8 May 2014 (UTC)reply
Support Alt. — Sometimes less is more.
Sca (
talk) 00:31, 10 May 2014 (UTC)reply