Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Iraqis vote

Iraqis vote

I stumbled upon this image when reading about the recent Iraqi elections and the January elections. The picture captures the emotions well, and the contrast between some of the people add to effect. True, it's not absolutely stunning as some of our other featured pics, but I believe that it is a great picture that illustrates Iraqi legislative election, January 2005, Purple Revolution, and 2005 well. The picture was uploaded by Mindsweeper onto Commons.

Nominate and support. - Flcelloguy (A note?) 16:57, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Sharp clear image, very appropriate to the articles it links to.--Dakota ^t ^e 04:40, 17 December 2005 (UTC) Realized I voted too early. Will support when this image is open for voting.--Dakota ^t ^e 04:49, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great photo for the relevant articles. ~MDD4696 (talk • contribs) 22:53, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. It is a good sharp image as I stated before, very appropriate to it's linking articles.--Dakota ^? ^e 05:14, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
( + ) Support I like this photo --Fir0002 08:21, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Great photo. Camerafiend 19:26, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. I don't know what to make of it. The pic has several flaws, like the blown out sky. Then it does not speak for itself. It's a couple of foreign looking guys with dirty fingers. The caption needed to understand it is the original US army press office text. Its single-sided view, and mission completed praise at the end makes me a bit sceptical. --Dschwen 17:36, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- If you want me to rewrite the caption so that it's not copied from the original press office text, I'd be more than happy to. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 19:42, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I've added a brief alternate caption to the photo. Flcelloguy (A note?) 21:14, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This just feels like a photo on CNN or BBC... What really makes a photo a FP? Nothing of that here... --Janke | Talk 07:58, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I hope you don't mind if I answer your question here. :-) I believe that the photo captures the emotions of the day well, and the contrast between the voters add the quality of the photo. True, it's not as stunning as some of our other FPs, but it illustrates the topics very well and is a great photo. Of course, I respect your vote and opinion. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 21:20, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I've seen a lot better picture of the elections in the press. - Hahnchen 03:04, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - There are several featureworthy images [1] of this particular event. This is not one of them though.--Deglr6328 07:25, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose. It's that kind of shot that captures the moment, as noted above. However, I note that the blown out sky and the blurred hand at the front detract from the image. enochlau (talk) 15:09, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Does it not say at the top of the nomination page that as far as technical quality goes, exceptions can be made under extenuating circumstances? This photo was taken in Iraq on the day of watershed elections that will only happen with such significance once. This is a great photo of Iraqi elections that doesn't have to "speak for itself" as Dschwen says; it's supposed to accompany and support the content within the article. Let's step away from the current obsession with technical quality and look at the merits of the event itself. -Vontafeijos 16:44, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, blown sky. —Cryptic (talk) 21:37, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, poor background quality. Neutrality^talk 00:08, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
User:Kilo-Lima/Oppose There are better elsewhere. --Kilo-Lima 16:21, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted Raven4x4x 00:57, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]