Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Waterspout

Nominate and support. - I think that this picture in better quality can be a really great picture. Baseracer 01:52, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Doesn't meet size requirements per Wikipedia:What is a featured picture?, is way too grainy, and has blown highlights. I agree with the nominator, a better picture would get more support, but this version just doesn't cut it. --Tewy 02:12, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Agree with Tewy, very impressive scene, very underwhelming quality capture. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 13:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Tewy. Also, some people are not into doctored photos. There is a link to the original where you can see dust has been removed (good) and clouds painted in the top right corner (possibly bad). I personally don't care that much about that aspect, but I know some voters distain this sort of thing so I am mentioning it.--Andrew c 16:39, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per all above. --Bridgecross 18:59, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose 636 pixels across, 1000 minimum is the requirement - Adrian Pingstone 20:13, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Horrible quality, and much too small. Please read WP:WIAFP. NauticaShad e s 21:03, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose. As per above. - jlao ⁰ ⁴ 02:40, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --KFP (talk | contribs) 22:56, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]