Oppose. Noticeable compression artifacts, e.g., on the bill and the tree bark.--
ragesoss (
talk) 05:41, 6 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Distracting background/composition, and artifacts. NauticaShades 15:59, 6 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Oppose per the points mentioned by Nauticashades. —
αἰτίας•discussion• 19:53, 6 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Oppose Very noticeable compression artifacts and a distracting background. – LATICS talk 03:37, 8 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose. Background is fine, compression artefacts are the problem.
Papa Lima Whiskey (
talk;
todo) 20:42, 8 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Oppose This is a really good image otherwise, but I think the compression artifacts all over the image really do mar it at full size.
vlad§ingertlk 22:54, 8 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Not promoted . --
John254 01:36, 11 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Noticeable compression artifacts, e.g., on the bill and the tree bark.--
ragesoss (
talk) 05:41, 6 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Distracting background/composition, and artifacts. NauticaShades 15:59, 6 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Oppose per the points mentioned by Nauticashades. —
αἰτίας•discussion• 19:53, 6 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Oppose Very noticeable compression artifacts and a distracting background. – LATICS talk 03:37, 8 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Weak oppose. Background is fine, compression artefacts are the problem.
Papa Lima Whiskey (
talk;
todo) 20:42, 8 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Oppose This is a really good image otherwise, but I think the compression artifacts all over the image really do mar it at full size.
vlad§ingertlk 22:54, 8 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Not promoted . --
John254 01:36, 11 August 2008 (UTC)reply