Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Mt. Rainier

Mount Rainier

Reason

Low resolution

Nominator

Punctured Bicycle

• Delist — Punctured Bicycle 21:17, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist per nom, artifacts also. Debivort 02:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where? - Mgm|^(talk) 09:11, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There. Debivort 15:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delist wow, low quality. gren グレン 04:19, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're confusing quality with resolution. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:11, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't resolution an aspect of quality? gren グレン 04:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delist - resolution, artifacts, subject washed out. !Vote notwithstanding, I really must reiterate that informing the original uploader of the image about the delist nomination is not optional. Punctured Bicycle (and everyone else), please ensure that you have fully complied with the delist procedure instructions. --YFB ¿ 16:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yelling is unnecessary. Punctured Bicycle 09:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't yelling - yelling would have been CAPS. I just wanted to make sure it didn't get missed - it's been pointed out several times in the nominations below and people are still not doing it. No offence intended. --YFB ¿ 17:23, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delis - Change my vote to Keep when the higher resolution is provided. --Arad 23:47, 29 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist Yeah, I agree. Nothing special about this. Dark and dull... --Vaelta 17:51, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • JPEG is a lossy compression technique. Yes, it creates artifacts. The basic idea is that -whith moderate compression- they are unoticeable at normal enlargement ratio. What are you trying to prove by enlarging over 100% ? 62.212.105.216 11:51, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• What am I trying to proove? Hmmm let's see ... that this particular photo has jpeg artifacts that are too obvious? I only posted the blow up when Mgm couldn't see them at 100%. To me, they were obvious from the start. Debivort 15:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Uploader Comment Hi, I can have the high resolution image uploaded in a couple of weeks --
  JediMaster16 05:09, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
  • Obi Wan, er, JediMaster, make sure that you don't apply much jpeg compression in the uploaded version, as that was another problem. (Save at like 90% - 100%.) Beautiful shot, aside from this. I hope the high-res version is also detailed. Althepal 17:58, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination suspended pending high-res version. --YFB ¿ 18:43, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delisted. It seems that the high res version never happened. --KFP (talk | contribs) 18:42, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]