Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Goalkeeper Glove
Goalkeeper glove[edit]
- Reason
- A clear representation of Goalkeeper glove, Displayed in a unique way and of high quality.
- Articles this image appears in
- Goalkeeper glove
- Creator
- Self-nom
- Support as nominator — Fcb981 18:21, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose Really uninteresting. 8thstar 20:03, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. Nice concept, but it is blurry in parts and strikes of advertising. Witty Lama 20:04, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
- Weak oppose, it's well done and I don't buy the advertising (I mean, it could be, but most goal keeper's gloves will have logos). The depth of field is off in some parts which makes for the blurriness. I just don't think it's quite up to FP standards, but it will still be useful on a page. gren グレン 23:38, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
- Weak Oppose - Great idea, but the glove is out of focus in some places. Take it again, and I'll support. Iorek85 06:36, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. Image is out of focus in places and it contains JPEG artefacts (especially in the background). - Mgm|(talk) 10:39, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose. I kinda like the concept here, but the execution strikes me as a little haphazard. Why doesn't the glove rotate by consistent amount in each 'frame', say by 45 or 60 degrees? I would also prefer that they all line up along a consistent baseline, and be the same height. To me (and this is just a personal take on it, but it's a bit to do with the shape of the glove) a left-handed glove should rotate anticlockwise; this one is rotating the wrong way, clockwise. --jjron 14:34, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose only because of the depth of field/lack of focus issue. Also, a comment- if depicting this object from a range of angles is helpful, why not an animated GIF instead?
Spikebrennan 22:32, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose There's nothing interesting in that poor quality picture. Mbz1 02:07, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Not promoted MER-C 03:17, 19 May 2007 (UTC)