Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Streisand Estate.jpg/2

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

File:Streisand Estate.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Dec 2013 at 07:09:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Image is aerial photo taken as part of the California Coastal Records Project; it later spawned the Streisand effect (with background described on Wikisource.)

Alt 1[edit]

Alt 1

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 18:17, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Per the new CC guidelines, we must mention what modification we made to the original (to protect the integrity of the original author). So please mention the modifications too. :) Jee 18:24, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done :) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 18:42, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. :) Jee 02:34, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - My thanks to Alchemist-hp for the improvements, -- Cirt (talk) 21:16, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yes, much improved, but still no wow for me. Valued Image, I agree, but not FP IMO. --Avenue (talk) 21:46, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose Rotation & crop are fine, but the colour adjustment shifts shadows into a blue tone and the images loses detail due to the refined black point. A black point starting at the histogram's left should work. Regards, Christoph Braun (talk) 23:30, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I uploaded a new version with a better color adjustment, I hope. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 00:02, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for the changes, looks good to me now. Regards, Christoph Braun (talk) 01:10, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As an image, it has improved, but its documentary value has decreased since it is no longer the image that caused the controversy. I'm still OK with featuring this version though. --King of ♠ 01:51, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Low quality, bad crop, low details, no "wow" at all except scandal. --Kikos (talk) 06:27, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Apart from the celeb-connection i see nothing special. No wow, no exceptional quality, no historical significance. Kleuske (talk) 09:31, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The improvement is very significant, but neither the clipping nor the lack of sharpness can be corrected through editing. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 16:12, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 05:39, 22 December 2013 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 20:23, 24 December 2013 (UTC)