Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/57 mm Gun M1 in Saint-Malo

57 mm Gun M1 in Saint-Malo

Reason

Just great image with very nice visual angle and so on. Caught my eye and decided to scan it (eventhough at greatest reso it has some marks, which though aren't visible on paper.)

Articles this image appears in

Ordnance QF 6 pounder

Creator

(US Army)

Nominator

Pudeo (Talk)

• Support — Pudeo (Talk) 13:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral, the ISBN you gave doesn't resolve, so I can't check the book you got it from. Also, the quality as far as colors, detail, blur, grain, etc. isn't very good. I like the poses, and it's a good shot, but I'd rather we got a higher quality version than a thirdhand scan. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 22:19, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral, very interesting but yeah it would be much better to get a scan of the actual photo --froth^T 23:34, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• NeutralI agree with the abve statements. Voshvoshka 01:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose This picture is grainy, has bad colouring and bad lighting. The vertical lines where the sky meets the sea make it quite unpleasing. The composition isnt very good either as your can mostly just see out the window because thats where the focus seems to be. The faces of the soldiers cannot be easily seen and the cannon is hidden behind the troops. The empty shells and crates seem to stand out also. -Midnight Rider 03:51, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose due to inferior quality - this is a scan from a printed page, which causes severe
  moirés. --Janke | Talk 10:12, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Oppose per MidnightRider. TotoBaggins 14:46, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose Vertical stripes on the largest version - Adrian Pingstone 15:56, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose, not very high quality.
  Review
  )00:35, Saturday, 3 February '07

Not promoted --KFP (talk | contribs) 21:17, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]