Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sõrve tuletorn 2013.jpg

File:Sõrve tuletorn 2013.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Feb 2014 at 09:00:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Rutake - uploaded by Rutake - nominated by Rutake -- Rutake (talk) 09:00, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Rutake (talk) 09:00, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 09:31, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice, still, I'd crop the sky a bit, that would help IMHO the composition Poc o² 10:09, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Halavar (talk) 10:40, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
weak ~~Oppose~~ sorry but I'm not convinced. Lighthouses are a popular and rewarding motif for photography but I do not think this picture stands out especially. The light is not excellent (dark shadows on the tower), slightly unbalanced composition (I agree with Poco_a_poco). Clearly QI, but not FP imo.--ArildV (talk) 11:24, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Neutral new crop is better.--ArildV (talk) 19:30, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Unbalanced composition. -- Colin (talk) 12:09, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

SupportBetter now. -- Colin (talk) 17:44, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I see what Colin is referring to here. Too much sky on top and too much room on the right. The old rule of thirds might work better. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:12, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Here is a new crop. I hope it's better than the previous one. --Rutake (talk) 17:46, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support It certainly is improved. I might have chosen a different crop but I will chalk that up to artistic license. Saffron Blaze (talk)

Comment There's a problem here that the image crop has changed radically yet not offered as an alternative and those who voted on the earlier version have not been informed their vote needs updating. None of the votes prior to 17:43, 8 February 2014 are valid imo. It should have been done as an Alt. But since it hasn't, then at the least we need those who voted earlier to reconfirm/change their votes. -- Colin (talk) 17:44, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment It's a good trick to change your picture for the nomination and after it is prompted you revert it back to as it was. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 22:50, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have no intention to change my vote. In my opinion the image has improved. Kruusamägi (talk) 19:22, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Better indeed. (Soovitan alati nii teha, et algul esitad mittetäiusliku pildi, et siis "autoriteedid" saaksid sulle öelda, mida vaja muuta. Kui järgid nende näpunäiteid, siis nad tunnevad ennast tähtsatena ja toetavad. Aegajalt esita mõni jama pilt, et see maha hääletatakse. Siis on headel piltidel rohkem šansse.) --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 09:16, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like it! --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:53, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:04, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /J e e 15:05, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Towers