I do not know when (and why!) this was featured, but it probably wouldn't even get one single supporting vote today. I like the composition and subject. Its technical quality, however, is a different matter:

• extremely unsharp
• very noisy
• a slight tilt
• artifacts
• very badly edited (Gaussian blur seems to have been used to get rid of some of the noise, however that wasn't done uniformly.)
• blown-out highlights

That this is on the front page today is somewhat embarrassing.

NOTE: original nomination.

• Delist. - mstroeck 11:25, 24 October 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delist. Noisy background and parts of the sword seem oversharpened. howch e ng { chat} 18:16, 24 October 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delist per above. -- KFP ( talk | contribs) 21:52, 24 October 2006 (UTC) reply
• Strong delist - when I saw it on the front page I came here to see if anyone had set it up for delisting; if they hadn't, I'd have done it myself. A good subject but an awful photo, embarrassing to the Wiki. Maybe in future a person/team should check the upcoming front page pics and check any which may not be up to par? -- CountdownCrispy ^{( ?} 22:26, 24 October 2006 (UTC) reply
  • I don't usually check the rerun images when I schedule the PsOTD, but I can probably start doing that. They are scheduled one month in advance, so anyone who wants to can check through November 2006. howch e ng { chat} 22:57, 24 October 2006 (UTC) reply
    • Just had a browse through and they invariably look superb; the only one that could be considered close to contentious is due to its relatively small size. However, given that a) this was acknowledged at the time of nomination, b) the picture is from the 1800s and c) it's unbelievably striking I don't see a problem. -- CountdownCrispy ^{( ?} 23:06, 24 October 2006 (UTC) reply
      • As a side note, the reruns are currently being pulled from Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs 02. howch e ng { chat} 23:53, 24 October 2006 (UTC) reply
        • A lot of those don't meet modern standards - is there some way of having a mass review of them? -- CountdownCrispy ^{( ?} 21:04, 25 October 2006 (UTC) reply
          • Besides the current process of nominating them individually, no. howch e ng { chat} 22:48, 25 October 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delist - I thought the same thing when I saw this on the front page. The white cloth looks horribly -- Coasttocoast 23:25, 24 October 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delist I am the author of the image, and I also agree that it is not up to current standards. (Was a very dark environment). I completely forgot that it was a featured image -- Chris 73 | Talk 10:50, 25 October 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delist per author, edges are too dark to see the shape. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 14:53, 26 October 2006 (UTC) reply
• Delist. Horrible quality. On a side style note, please refrain form writing bias captions. Nautica Shad e s 20:12, 27 October 2006 (UTC) reply

Delisted. -- KFP ( talk | contribs) 17:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC) reply