Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/C-17 carrying passengers out of Afghanistan

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2021 at 10:04:26 (UTC)

Reason: This is a high quality, public domain photo of a historical event that adds significant value to at least three articles.
Articles in which this image appears: Operation Allies Refuge, Fall of Kabul (2021), 2021 Taliban offensive
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/War
Creator: Zoozaz1 (uploader)

Support as nominator – --Posted by Pikamander2 (Talk) at 10:04, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Andrei (talk) 12:17, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support as uploader. Zoozaz1 talk 15:16, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support TheFreeWorld (talk) 17:16, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Isnt this picture too young to be a Featured Picture? GamerPro64 03:53, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This has high circulation in the media, I see no way this will be replaced by another photo. Bammesk (talk) 03:04, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - IMO, it belongs in the "In the news" section on the main page, not as a featured picture. The diagonal cable totally destroys it as a FP for me, hence oppose. --Janke | Talk 08:15, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Jumbled composition reduces EV. It's not readily apparent that they're inside an airplane. As Janke notes, not bad as an ephemeral spot news pic, but not up to Criterion 3 for an FP. – Sca (talk) 12:03, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose topical but not an FP composition - i.e. the wire. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:52, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Have to oppose due to the sheet and wire ruining the composition. I wish the photographer had gotten a composition like this. -- Veggies (talk) 00:59, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- It seems rather unreasonable to expect USAF aircrew to go on near-combat missions with cameras on sticks as must have been used to take that photo. This is a documentary image. Nick-D (talk) 11:52, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not "expecting" them to do anything but their jobs. We're judging this picture's FP qualities, not USAF professionalism. It just doesn't have the composition that I would consider to be FP-quality. -- Veggies (talk) 17:43, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Good photo with excellent EV. I really don't understand the comments regarding composition above: this photo depicts an absolutely packed military transport aircraft during an historic flight undertaken in emergency conditions, so the obstructions are to be expected. The sheeting was likely screening the toilet facilities, which are located in that part of C-17 aircraft, so it's odd to suggest that it shouldn't have been there. In short, the photo accurately depicts what this event looked like, and in a pretty striking way. Nick-D (talk) 05:28, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Janke & Charles. —kallerna 12:48, 26 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Per Nick-D this is a live action, documentary photo. It shows the chaotic, unplanned, unusual circumstance well. The messiness of the composition complements the messiness of the whole operation. In this case EV takes priority over artistic value IMO (criterion 5). On a sidenote: it's already used in 7 articles. Bammesk (talk) 03:04, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:22, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Janke. MER-C 10:05, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - that's a historic photo, and even if the composition is not perfect, it's the case where subject is more important that quality. - Artem.G (talk) 07:37, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 12:19, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]