Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Peugeot 206 WRC.jpg

Image:Peugeot 206 WRC.jpg, featured edit

Info created by Christopher Batt, uploaded by Prolog, nominated by norro
- Question The description says this is a Flickr image. Is it confirmed that this is the same as User:Rotkraut? ~ trialsanderrors 18:15, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sorry, I mixed up the information of this nomination template with the information of the one below. Thanks for your hint. --norro 23:48, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --norro 00:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support per discussion at en.wiki. ~ trialsanderrors 00:48, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice --Digon3 02:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is what I would call strong mitigating reasons for resolution. --Digon3 14:01, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose resolution too low, otherwise nice pic --Simonizer 07:51, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Although I would have liked a higher resolution. --Atoma 09:17, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --WarX 14:03, 28 February 2007 (UTC) Great, but on this resolution I can use it only as wallpaper, but I don't use wallpapers on my computer[reply]
Oppose Great picture, but I have to agree with Simonizer here, thats just too small. --startaq 14:09, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ac WarX --Lestat 16:29, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose too small for commons Lycaon 17:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support (if the resolution was right, some would oppose since it's not svg. ;P No, just trolling.) // tsca [re] 17:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support 1024x768 ought to be enough for everyone. Nikola Smolenski 10:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment please read Guidelines for Nominators which state: At least 2 million pixels (e.g. 2000 x 1000) seems reasonable right now. Images of lower resolution are typically rejected unless there are strong mitigating reasons.. This picture is less than 40% of the required size!!! Lycaon 13:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I read them umpteen times. Don't you see the strong mitigating reasons? This is a shot you get once in a lifetime, even if you watched thousands of rallies. But against great odds it's sharp and very well composed. For me the embodiment of FP. --norro 14:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this, but the smaller the pic, the stronger the mitigation should be. Here it balances negatively for me (no pun intended). Lycaon 23:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

- Comment You are right, but the last sentence of Guidelines says: … and remember.... all rules can be broken :-) --Packa 22:10, 2 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Support Big enough and real woow effect. Yann 16:12, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too bad I really like this image, but the resolution is just too low :( /Daniel78 19:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support agree with Norro. --AngMoKio 20:03, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support strong O_o effect Chabacano 21:11, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support It could be a better resolution, but it is balanced with the excellent impression of movement --Packa 22:10, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Jacopo86 19:46, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --This size problem is the most annoying part of FPC and is discussed zillion times without sucess. --Arad 20:34, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Too bad about the resolution, but the quality of the picture itself is good enough for a support from me. Husky ^{talk to me} 23:24, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - the 'resolution' demanded by the guidelines is not resolution, but dimensions. Please see Commons talk:Featured picture candidates#Recommended resolution guidelines - MPF 12:33, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support great picture!--Karelj 22:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support, great. --Tone 10:07, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Clear in spite speed's car. Stephane8888 22:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Awesome photo, notwithstanding the low resolution. --Mkimberl 05:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per norro. Amazing shot! - gobeirne 19:54, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support as exception to the rule - looks good. I'd be proud to have taken it. Ben Aveling 10:16, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose VERY low resolution (not even 1 MP). The burst of snow under the car is blurry, all of the background is extremly blurry. Nice shot besides, but not enough high quality in the shot itself.--Vox Rationis 20:55, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support this one is worth to make an exception on size. --Jeses 20:06, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose resolution. Cary "Bastiq▼e" Bass ^demandez 13:31, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The resolution is too low, unfortunately. Otherwise, I'd gladly support. --MichaelMaggs 23:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

result: 20 support, 9 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer 08:04, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]