Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Cathedrale de Coutances.jpg

Image:Cathedrale de Coutances.jpg (~ 800x1035 without the frame), Not Featured

•  Nominate

// Urban 05:54, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

•  Support // Urban 05:54, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Support technically impressive, and the name of the photographer is very discrete ♦ Pabix ℹ 07:03, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Support -- Godewind 08:03, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Support --Gloumouth1 08:25, 7 December 2005 (UTC) - but crop the frame and remove the signature... --Gloumouth1 22:18, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Neutral — The white border makes the image bigger than it really is, plus visible copyright text. ADSR6581 12:38, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Oppose with this white frame. It may look good on a dark background but it makes it difficult to use the image in Wikipedia etc. I'd voted pro without the frame --SehLax 13:46, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Support - but yes, please crop that white frame! - MPF 16:54, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Support --Elgaard 17:17, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- Get_It (Talk) 18:38, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Support--Shizhao 01:35, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Oppose, It has a giant white frame and a distracting author name in the bottom-right corner, there's no need for the latter since the license being used for the image guarentees atribution. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 11:39, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Support pfctdayelise 01:44, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Support Thuresson 06:23, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Support. villy ♦✎ 08:29, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Support - Janek 21:53, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Oppose. With or without the frame. No utilities, we can see nothing complete. A very bad composition for a interieur Church. Petrus 22:45, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Oppose ACK Petrus norro 20:06, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Oppose - E rulez 08:27, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Support - I think it's stunning. Renata3 03:47, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Oppose - The author name in the right corner makes it clearly non-featured. Andreas Tille 06:27, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
•  Oppose - Perspective distortion at the bottom of the frame is probably unavoidable, but is too strong for my liking. -- Solipsist 09:40, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

12 Support, 8 Oppose, 1 Neutral => Not Featured--Shizhao 01:28, 22 December 2005 (UTC)