Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Oklahoma city bombing

Reason: Arguably one of the most recognized images taken of the 19 April 1995 bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building, this image was taken two days after the bombing and shows the extent of the bomb damage to both the federal building and the surrounding area. Its large and has considerable historic value, and I submit it here for consideration for promotion to FP status.
Articles this image appears in: Oklahoma City bombing, Rhabdomyolysis
Creator: Staff Sergeant Preston Chasteen

Support as nominator --TomStar81 (Talk • Some say ¥€$, I say NO) 19:17, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - overexposed, blown highlights (not just the sky, but the burnt out cars as well), perspective issues and stuff cut off on top. It has historical value, but pushes it too far on quality for something that's only 15 years old. MER-C 03:57, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - If this nomination fails, it seems like it would do very well at valued pictures. Hello32020 (talk) 15:16, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I find that comment extraordinarily offensive; if had wanted to take the image to VP I would have done so in the first place. I do not need someone to inform me that I may have better luck somewhere else with my image; if my image "would do very well at valued pictures" then can do just as well -if not better- here, and if I fail then I know that I failed in the pursuit of the highest possible goal, not settling for some backward process that few people (any people?) care about, and for this reason, I would greatly appreciate it if you never mention the VP process as an avenue of approach for a picture I place here again. TomStar81 (Talk • Some say ¥€$, I say NO) 04:46, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Uhhhhhh.... Staxringold _talk^contribs 06:32, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The Valued Picture route is a very valid suggestion if it does not succeed here. I also suggest you look into it. --Torsodog^Talk 19:09, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per MER-C. Makeemlighter (talk) 05:45, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. Staxringold _talk^contribs 06:32, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Avala (talk) 20:02, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As per above statements. Labrat256 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.105.175.183 (talk) 04:56, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per MER-C's comments. Zulualpha (talk) 14:37, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --wadester 16 05:00, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]