Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Car in Oradour-sur-Glane4.jpg

Car in Oradour-sur-Glane[edit]

Reason: High quality image with emotional impact. High encyclopedic value for Oradour-sur-Glane article. Already featured on Commons.
Articles this image appears in: Oradour-sur-Glane
Creator: TwoWings, contrast enhanced by Calibas

Support as nominator --Kaldari (talk) 21:02, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree on the emotional aspect. I didn't even know about that village, and now want to go. Wonder what the car model is. It looks familiar, but I can't tell. if someone knows... Blieusong (talk) 22:52, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be a Peugeot_202. Blieusong (talk) 22:55, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Question Moving scene; would it be possible to shoot under better lighting conditions without (obviously rebuilt) power lines in the scene? Durova^Charge! 05:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree the power lines are a bit of a distraction, however, I think I actually like that the lighting isn't that sunny. It contributes to the lonely feeling of the image. I know that just sounds like a dumb excuse, but I actually think the gloomy lighting is kind of appropriate. Kaldari (talk) 05:30, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure that the power lines are obviously rebuilt... they're not rebuilt in a modern style anyway. I wonder what the chances of them just surviving the last 60 years intact is. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 09:31, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's unlikely that something as flimsy as power lines would have survived such extensive damage. Basically I'm looking for something that can stand on the same footing as our existing FPs of World War II damage. Durova^Charge! 16:41, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, compared to those images, I don't think it has quite the same impact. Feel free to oppose if you think it isn't up to snuff. Kaldari (talk) 17:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That said, I don't think its fair to compare contemporary historical scenes to ones taken in the heat of war. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 17:52, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's why I'd expect a shot minus the immediacy to compensate in other ways: through superior lighting and composition. Durova^Charge! 07:48, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Opppose/Comment First, I changed the caption to what it reads in the article. Second, its a great image, but I do not see a huge distinction between the other images available. smooth0⁷0₇ (talk) 20:23, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure why you changed the caption. I didn't think the captions here were required to match the captions used in the articles. Regarding the other images of the ruins, I think this one is much better than the others, but I suppose that is a subjective opinion. Kaldari (talk) 20:49, 7 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The second one is better. I don't feel any emotion from this image alone. The article does a good job without this one. Greener Cactus (talk) 20:15, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comparing the two is like comparing apples and oranges. smooth0⁷0₇ (talk) 01:29, 9 July 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Perhaps this apple should be sliced separately from the oranges (not promoted).Greener Cactus (talk) 07:42, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 03:36, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]