Support as nominator – ―Howard •
🌽33 22:19, 22 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose Way down in the article so not so much EV. Taj Mahal not at its best in this 'side' view with two towers obscured.
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 00:02, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment Oppose – Composition seems quite predictable. Little visual interest or EV – Cf.
this pic of the bldg. –
Sca (
talk) 13:52, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose – per Charles, but mostly per Sca. Also, the blown highlights near the minarets and the overexposed sky.
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 16:47, 28 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose on EV. The article text doesn't mention the Taj Mahal at all, nor is it clear which part of the text the image is illustrating. --
Paul_012 (
talk) 09:49, 30 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Are these colours natural? They look a little oversaturated for the robes Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 8.9% of all
FPs. 01:58, 2 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator – ―Howard •
🌽33 22:19, 22 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose Way down in the article so not so much EV. Taj Mahal not at its best in this 'side' view with two towers obscured.
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 00:02, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment Oppose – Composition seems quite predictable. Little visual interest or EV – Cf.
this pic of the bldg. –
Sca (
talk) 13:52, 23 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose – per Charles, but mostly per Sca. Also, the blown highlights near the minarets and the overexposed sky.
The Herald (Benison) (
talk) 16:47, 28 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose on EV. The article text doesn't mention the Taj Mahal at all, nor is it clear which part of the text the image is illustrating. --
Paul_012 (
talk) 09:49, 30 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Are these colours natural? They look a little oversaturated for the robes Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 8.9% of all
FPs. 01:58, 2 April 2024 (UTC)reply