Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kiyomizu-dera, Kyoto, November 2016 -02.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Kiyomizu-dera, Kyoto, November 2016 -02.jpg, not featured
[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2017 at 09:18:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Japan
Info Main Hall of Kiyomizu-dera, Kyoto, Japan, during Koyo, part of UNESCO World Heritage Site Ref. Number 688. Although I've already successfully nominated another image of the temple's main hall, I think this photo deserves a chance as well. Admittedly it doesn't show as many fiery red leaves but it provides a more complete view of the temple's general layout by including its famous three-storied pagoda. All by me --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:18, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:18, 13 April 2017 (UTC)- Weak support per my !vote for the other image. Daniel Case (talk) 06:05, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
- Support --Joalpe (talk) 12:35, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
- Support a bit busy at bottom left+not sharp at far left, however the composition, light and colors make it a successful image IMO Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:48, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
- Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 19:29, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
- Mild
Oppose - Is this a successful image? Sure, absolutely. But is it an FP? Not to me. I know there's no way to avoid the vegetation on the right side and get the rest of the photo, but to my eyes, that vegetation prevents it from being an FP. If only the upper half of it could have been cut down. :-) (Sorry, I'm not smiling at opposing, but at the absurd suggestion I just gave.) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:50, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
*
Comment Does this comply with the renomination procedure? I thought they have to have be submitted filename.jpg/2 Charles (talk) 20:25, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
@Charles: This is not a renomination. In case you're referring to the "-02" - that's just a (personal) sequential number and as such part of the original file name... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:19, 20 April 2017 (UTC)sorry. I thought I'd seen it before Charles (talk) 06:47, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 09:45, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
