Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cambridge skyline November 2016 panorama.jpg

File:Cambridge skyline November 2016 panorama.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Feb 2017 at 21:19:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Cambridge skyline November 2016 panorama.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cambridge skyline November 2016 panorama.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
•  Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:19, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:19, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support very good, excelent light Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 21:31, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Nice. --Clemens Stockner (talk) 23:04, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support lNeverCry 23:06, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 23:11, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Of course. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:55, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Very nice panorama; I added it to the Cambridge article on the English Wikipedia. WClarke 00:03, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:15, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:03, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support good Charles (talk) 08:36, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 08:38, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --cart-Talk 10:13, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose Technically on an outstandig high level, but the motif itself isn´t wowing me. It´s an ordinary American skyline--Milseburg (talk) 12:49, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose, with apologies - I actually kind of agree with Milseburg, and that's why I hadn't voted yet: The dilemma is that this is a very high-quality panorama of what I find a pretty uninteresting scene. If only the more interesting, shorter buildings on the left side could be emphasized over the boring modern boxes in the center and right...And so, this is a notable achievement and a very useful picture, but I'm feeling it as a really good QI/VI, not an FP. However, I can understand perfectly why almost everyone is voting for a feature for this. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:07, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose QI yes, for FP bridge is spoiling this shot. Should be more in or completely out. --Mile (talk) 15:45, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose QI certainly, and I appreciate your calling to our attention the lesser skylines of the Northeastern U.S. as you did with Jersey City. But this skyline, while it makes ample use of the evening light, goes for comprehensiveness at the expense of wow ... it takes care to show us the lower buildings of Harvard, but as a result leaves us feeling decidedly unbalanced when the taller buildings around MIT suddenly pop up on the right (Compare this)

  I can't blame you for trying as all those boxy modern buildings don't give you too much to work with, but this wasn't it. Daniel Case (talk) 18:03, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

•  Support --Ralf Roleček 22:01, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /lNeverCry 09:11, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes