Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/CirrusField-color.jpg

Cirrus Field

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2012 at 12:42:30 (UTC)

Reason: Low quality, Small size (336 KB), Unsuccessful Candidacy in Commons
Articles this image appears in: Cirrus cloud
Previous nomination/s: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Cirrus Field
Nominator: Kasir ^talk

Delist — Kasir ^talk 12:42, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is representative for this type of cloud. Besides, it was delist candidate about one month ago and the result was: KEEP. Featured picture candidates/delist/Cirrus clouds--Monfie (talk) 12:54, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep. I have trouble understanding why you would want to delist a picture that you wanted to promote just yesterday! Needless to say that all of us (two above users + me) come from the Persian Wikipedia and all of these games originate from there (FP nomination page). I think this issue—deciding about if this image is a featured one here or not—should be left for editors of the English Wikipedia rather than Persian Wikipedia! so I propose a Speedy Keep. 4nn1l2 (talk) 13:56, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- If you believe you shouldn't be voting, it's rather odd that you choose to vote. J Milburn (talk) 23:12, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delist I think this is showing its age, and would never be promoted nowadays. Blown highlights, overprocessing, and small size (for a landscape especially!). --99of9 (talk) 13:15, 20 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delist: Very replaceable and so subpar. Julia\^talk 21:56, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Saffron Blaze (talk) 23:26, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sure, the quality is not what we would expect today, but I see no reason for its delisting. Some of these featured pictures should be kept for historical purposes, to show how featured pictures have progressed over time. Dusty777 02:48, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I voted after this had run out of time. *Delist, per Julia. I find the claim that "some of these featured pictures should be kept for historical purposes" absolutely ludicrous. Should we do the same thing with featured articles? J Milburn (talk) 23:12, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Featured articles are a little different then pictures. Articles have to put up with vandalism, the listing of incorrect information, vandalism, and link rot. Pictures never change. What I really should have said, is pictures nominated from a few years ago, should not be judged by today's standards. Dusty777 02:38, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And, again, I ask whether you would say the same thing about a featured article? "Ok, so it's not good enough to pass today, but it did pass years ago and hasn't changed much. I guess we'll just ignore the fact that the criteria have changed." That's ridiculous. We're trying to write an encyclopedia here, not keep a museum of how an encyclopedia was written several years ago... J Milburn (talk) 13:00, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kept --Makeemlighter (talk) 00:50, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No consensus to delist. Perhaps worth re-evaluating in 6+ months. Makeemlighter (talk) 00:50, 3 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]