Commons:Featured picture removal candidates/Image:Kusama Tulips2.jpg

Image:Kusama Tulips2.jpg - Original nomination not delisted

The image just isn't very beautiful or special in my opinion. It's also not that easy to find out the actual size of the tulips, there's nothing to compare them to. --Conti|✉ 23:54, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delist . I wouldn't vote this if it were gunning for FP status as a new candidate. The fog is a downside, it doesn't enhance this image in any way. PS. image:Symbol keep vote.svg and image:Symbol delete vote.svg are useful in these kind of votes, use them. The X on left is 15px. --Lumijaguaari (моє обговорення) 00:14, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I am not in favour of frequent listings and delistings. This picture was featured recently (less than one year ago), so delisting it now would send a signal of shilly-shally. Morover, it is not so bad anyway. I only wonder how it could get featured with only four supporting votes. Maybe the rules were different then. Calderwood 11:48, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not really sure if "recently featured" is adequate on an image that was featured about 10 months ago in a project that was created about 18 months ago. --Conti|✉ 20:57, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist . Sorry, I think it's awful. In the thumbnail it looks just like some plastic tulips on a table so it's real size is hard to see. The compression artefacts don't make it better. (And the composition seems to simple to mee to really make it "weird" as someone said in the nomination process.) --SehLax 16:09, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I've just created the templates {{Keep}} and {{Delist}} and applied them here retroactively. Calderwood 16:19, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. per Calderwood Bertilvidet 19:10, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist . I've always wondered how this image was featured. -Quasipalm 20:23, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep LoopZilla 09:04, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's an interesting image - the ambiguity of scale and the fog make it more so imho. --SaulAlbert 11:56, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- User's second edit. --Conti|✉ 15:18, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep What is this delisting of perfectly good pictures about? Is there a canon evolving or something? Wierd can be good... Szczels 13:07, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- User's first edit. --Conti|✉ 15:18, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - So what? Roger McLassus 14:19, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Roger McLassus 14:19, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Tarquin Binary 05:20, 12 March 2006 (UTC) Nice change from all them endless blooming shots of small furry animals or large geological formations (National Geographic stuff in general)...[reply]
Delist I don't see anything special. --che 00:04, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is the only featured picture of contemporary art. I just looked through all the featured pictures and this is of reasonable quality by comparison. We have some truly dire featured pictures like Image:Euston Tower 2004.jpg though. Justinc 10:01, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist no question Darkone 18:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is a voting about the new symbols on the discussion page. MGo 14:44, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist gloomy, misty pic. -- Lycaon 11:23, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist bad pic FML ^hi 02:41, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist --Shizhao 11:36, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Result: 8 delist, 8 keep --> not delisted Roger McLassus 10:47, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]