Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kaberneeme campfire site.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Kaberneeme campfire site.jpg, featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2014 at 07:37:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Nomination
- Info all by Urmas83 -- Urmas Haljaste (talk) 07:37, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- Support -- Urmas Haljaste (talk) 07:37, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:44, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose -- Not very informative and not sufficient wow to do without. It does not look like a campfire, btw, more like a chimney on fire. Kleuske (talk) 12:50, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- Info Description of the picture is in Englis: Outdoor fireplace at Kaberneeme campfire site, Estonia. You are right, it's not a campfire. "Chimney on fire" would be also a good description but it's not actually fire in the picture. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 14:44, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment Great picture without doubt. Maybe I'am a bit oldschool but in the earlier days of COM:FPC we had a maxime that a picture should be QI + VI + somehow special to become featured. This image seems to fulfill only the need of a "wow" picture, but nothing more in my opinion. Only recently I've noted that a lot of featured pictures aren't used in the whole project, what makes me sad somehow. FPC is going to degenerate into a cheap imitation of FlickR, instead of being a media file repository for making available public domain and freely-licensed educational media content. But don't worry I'am shure there will be a bunch of claqueurs who cheer up this image in their stoic manner, like they (nowadays) always do. Just my 5 cents. Regards 77.187.26.83 19:27, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment Maybe I should leave it be but after you have humiliated everybody who have or would have given their support to this image I cannot keep silent. If you think this photo is not a featured then you can just show your opposition in a way that others do. I am sure nobody will support the nomination because nobody wants to be a claqueurs. Nice move, you must be a politician. I don't know who you are because your comment was anonymous, but even if you are somebody really important, I must say your are going wrong with your statement. There are pictures that are not used in the project but it does not mean the pictures will not be used in the future. The scope of educational and useful content is not limited with your understanding of these things. People are different and they might find different photos useful. Your patronizing attitude towards me and some other users does not honor you. I don't worry about the voting, I have really nothing to lose or win here. To be honest I didn't have high hopes about this photo to be prompted to FP. I leave it yours and others to decide. But I didn't expect the comment "only idiots will support this" either. This is not intelligent. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 21:58, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- This is no question about intelligence but rather fairness. Eagerly uploaders with "only" encyclopedic contributions will never get a chance to be honoured here. My intention to add my 5 cents isn't personally, nor I want to offend someone, but in my opinion the candidate carries that "wow at any price" thing too far. 77.187.168.116 22:18, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment Maybe I should leave it be but after you have humiliated everybody who have or would have given their support to this image I cannot keep silent. If you think this photo is not a featured then you can just show your opposition in a way that others do. I am sure nobody will support the nomination because nobody wants to be a claqueurs. Nice move, you must be a politician. I don't know who you are because your comment was anonymous, but even if you are somebody really important, I must say your are going wrong with your statement. There are pictures that are not used in the project but it does not mean the pictures will not be used in the future. The scope of educational and useful content is not limited with your understanding of these things. People are different and they might find different photos useful. Your patronizing attitude towards me and some other users does not honor you. I don't worry about the voting, I have really nothing to lose or win here. To be honest I didn't have high hopes about this photo to be prompted to FP. I leave it yours and others to decide. But I didn't expect the comment "only idiots will support this" either. This is not intelligent. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 21:58, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- Support stoically claqueuring. Besides, the picture does have EV in more than just one regard and its technical quality is very good. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:38, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Support Excellent example of pathlines visualizing fluid movement. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 08:10, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Support Could be POTY Finalist. • Richard • [®] • 08:35, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Support --Ivar (talk) 08:54, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:00, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose Main reason to vote support/oppose to me is: will I see this picture on startpage of my home wiki? Nope! Nothing to see there. Nothing exceptional. Not all good quality images I'll see on frontpage - only exceptional. --Kikos (talk) 20:09, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- I Support. I know it's difficult to make a picture of quality and shooting at the right time. ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 16:25, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
- Support --JLPC (talk) 18:28, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
- Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:43, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
- Support — TintoMeches, 14:13, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena