Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Mandoe.JPG
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Mandoe.JPG
I was quite struck by this image when I first saw it on Bertilvidet's user page.
Abandoned shoe, Kåre Sand, Wadden Sea, Denmark. Photo by User:Bertilvidet
- Nominate and support. - Moby 12:09, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. WP:WIAFP. What is the encyclopedic value of this image? The low viewpoint does not help picturing the Wadden Sea and abandoned shoes are certainly not a typical feature there. --Dschwen 12:58, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. Agree with Dschwen. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 13:22, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. Interesting picture, but it has no encyclopedic value. Try Commons, maybe. bcasterline t 15:19, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. Agree with the above.--Mikoyan21 17:31, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose Agree with all above. --Janke | Talk 17:48, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. Per above, but perhaps nominate at Commons. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 18:28, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
- Support. Hope that my vote is accepted despite being the photographer. At low tide you can basically have a walk at the sea bottom in the Wadden Sea (thereby the name). And - maybe surprisingly - it is filled with left overs from humans such as shoes and pieces of clothing. So this view is in it self not uncommon - even though I noticed Dschwen just deleted the photo from the article.Bertilvidet 18:48, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
- Yeah, I replaced it. As the only photo in the wadden see article it is definitely not encyclopedic enough. --Dschwen 21:01, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose not a great photo (lack of focus, highly grainy) and doesn't add much encylcopaedic info to the article. chowells 00:54, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
Oppose its sort of interesting, but it has very little encyclopedic value. if anything, it should be in an article about sediment or weathering. drumguy8800 - speak 04:09, 3 May 2006 (UTC)- Oppose A fascinating piece of observation but not FP material - Adrian Pingstone 12:14, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment My lord, that shoe looks huge from this angle. --Xtreambar 21:12, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- Weak Support, It may not by very encyclopedic but it could be added to the article abandonment. -- BWF89 21:53, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose, not used in any articles, therefore, not adding any encyclopedic information. Night Gyr 00:20, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose, great image, but, as per above, not encyclopedic. Perhaps one for commons featured pictures —Pengo 01:37, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
- Comment. it's art. --Moby 02:49, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
- Yes, and it's a very cool picture. But this isn't a collection of cool pictures, this is an encyclopedia and we want pictures that can illustrate things for our readers. That's a different set of criteria than what makes art. Night Gyr 06:52, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. Very "artsy", however I can't see much value in it for wiki.--Pharaoh Hound 14:23, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. Has little value for Wikipedia See WP:WIAFP. -Ambuj Saxena (talk) 09:43, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
- While the image could easily illustrate an article on the shoe, I have to oppose. The shoe is cut off to the left, the image is grainy and the shadow makes it even harder to see properly. - Mgm|(talk) 09:45, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. I admire whoever stuck their chin down in the sand to get this shot, but it's just weird. Also blurry on the left. Mooveeguy 17:24, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose. Totally unencyclopedic. Unless there is an article for Abandoned shoes on Danish beaches, then I'm willing to change my vote posthaste. Miwa * talk * contribs ^_^ 17:46, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Not promoted howcheng {chat} 18:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Not promoted ~ Veledan • Talk 18:36, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
