Too small, lots of artifacting in the sky, interesting but not unreproducible, doesn't even have an {{FPC}} tag on the image page..
- Nominate and delist. - — Vanderdecken∴ ∫ ξ φ 15:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
- Delist per nom. -- moondigger 20:23, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep I've always loved this photo despite the size -- Fir0002 07:03, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
- Neutral it is too small but dont agree on the unreproducible, it looks to be incrediably well formed Childzy ( Talk| Contribs) 14:46, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
- Weak Keep. Although a few clouds in the middle left of the image are somewhat blurred, the overall image is astounding. Amazing cloud formation. The remainer of photo is of FPC quality. -- AJ24 17:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Excellent scene. — BRIAN 0918 • 2006-07-17 19:05
- Keep -- Chris 73 | Talk 22:32, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
- Delist too small, artifacts -- Glaurung 06:14, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - Cribananda 06:56, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep Size and artifacting is the only really valid (as far as the criteria for a FP are concerned) issue with the image , the fact that it's unreproduceable doesn't mean anything since many FP's are situations that are unreproduceable and somebody put a {{ FP}} tag on the image page, which you can do yourself in the future if you want. Pegasus1138 Talk | Contribs | Email ---- 21:32, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep it's a very nice photo with exception of being slightly on the small side I feel it should be a FP, as far as being reproducable, it may be, but it would be hard to do. PPGMD 22:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- Comment There is another version, but it has a lot of problems. -- liquidGhoul 09:35, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
- Comment. I could support an edited version of the shot LiquidGhoul found, but both it and Edit 1 have an unnatural color cast that should be cleaned up. Also it could use some careful sharpening. I could give it a try later today, if nobody else does. -- moondigger 13:38, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
- Comment. I do not support Edit 1. The Edit 1 image looks unauthentic and pinkish. -- AJ24 19:40, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep I oppose color editing of this photo, if it looked pink when taken, let it stay that way. - Ravedave 07:47, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Great pic despite the size. -- jjron 09:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Retained Raven4x4x 07:01, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
Too small, lots of artifacting in the sky, interesting but not unreproducible, doesn't even have an {{FPC}} tag on the image page..
- Nominate and delist. - — Vanderdecken∴ ∫ ξ φ 15:30, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
- Delist per nom. -- moondigger 20:23, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep I've always loved this photo despite the size -- Fir0002 07:03, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
- Neutral it is too small but dont agree on the unreproducible, it looks to be incrediably well formed Childzy ( Talk| Contribs) 14:46, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
- Weak Keep. Although a few clouds in the middle left of the image are somewhat blurred, the overall image is astounding. Amazing cloud formation. The remainer of photo is of FPC quality. -- AJ24 17:48, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Excellent scene. — BRIAN 0918 • 2006-07-17 19:05
- Keep -- Chris 73 | Talk 22:32, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
- Delist too small, artifacts -- Glaurung 06:14, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - Cribananda 06:56, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep Size and artifacting is the only really valid (as far as the criteria for a FP are concerned) issue with the image , the fact that it's unreproduceable doesn't mean anything since many FP's are situations that are unreproduceable and somebody put a {{ FP}} tag on the image page, which you can do yourself in the future if you want. Pegasus1138 Talk | Contribs | Email ---- 21:32, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep it's a very nice photo with exception of being slightly on the small side I feel it should be a FP, as far as being reproducable, it may be, but it would be hard to do. PPGMD 22:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
- Comment There is another version, but it has a lot of problems. -- liquidGhoul 09:35, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
- Comment. I could support an edited version of the shot LiquidGhoul found, but both it and Edit 1 have an unnatural color cast that should be cleaned up. Also it could use some careful sharpening. I could give it a try later today, if nobody else does. -- moondigger 13:38, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
- Comment. I do not support Edit 1. The Edit 1 image looks unauthentic and pinkish. -- AJ24 19:40, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep I oppose color editing of this photo, if it looked pink when taken, let it stay that way. - Ravedave 07:47, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Great pic despite the size. -- jjron 09:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
Retained Raven4x4x 07:01, 24 July 2006 (UTC)