Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Jökulsárlón

Jökulsárlón

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Feb 2013 at 00:49:46 (UTC)

Reason

Outstanding quality, resolution, EV.

Articles in which this image appears

Ice, Jökulsárlón, etc.

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Sciences

Creator

User:Tillea

• Support as nominator --LlamaAl (talk) 00:49, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Note
  Chick Bowen 01:15, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Reply: But this is about Ice. It is an Ice block near the lagoon. --LlamaAl (talk) 01:21, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ah. Well, perhaps you can see how, based on the caption, I might have been confused about that.
      Chick Bowen 01:42, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply
      ]
• Oppose While this is a nice picture, the darkness caused by the strong low sun makes it very difficult to see much of this picture - it look a bit of careful study to confirm that it was definately sitting in water... The issue over the caption affects my vote as well - the caption definately seems to indicate this is about the bay, whereas the picture is actually a lump of ice that could be anywhere in the world... gazhiley 11:04, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  Reply - Caption changed; image already FP on Commons. --LlamaAl (talk) 02:06, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you for your update on my talk page. I have amended my oppose accordingly, however still oppose due to darkness issues... gazhiley 15:53, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• • In the arctic, even in summer, the sun is fairly low down, though. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 01:59, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Eye catching, and shows the subject matter front-and-centre. EΤΓΞΦ 15:40, 16 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TotallyNotEtreo (talk • contribs)
• Support, although a bit better focus would have been nice. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 04:41, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose yes, a very nice image, but it is only an "eye catching" image and without EV for me, additional per Chick Bowen. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 11:19, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose the way the image was created makes it unencyclopedic in nature. Artistc, yes but the issue for me is simply a lack of a clearly defined subject taken in a manner to allow the viewer to understand the subject better. I can't tell what the scale of the ice actually is or if it is in a natural setting or was placed there was by the photographer from their fridge (OK so that stretching a bit, but you get the gest of what I am saying) This could well be a piece of store bought ice. Nothing about this really seems natural to me by the way it was photographed.--
  talk) 07:18, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Weak support The water is incredibly dark but it's a good image and the main focus is fine. Cat-fivetc ---- 07:20, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Support I think this is an adequate illustration of the subject with some interesting aesthetics. --Pine^✉ 22:07, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 00:57, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]