Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:CH.GR.Arosa Tschuggen-Grand-Hotel 2220 16x9-R 16K.jpg

File:CH.GR.Arosa Tschuggen-Grand-Hotel 2220 16x9-R 16K.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Apr 2023 at 00:10:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Switzerland
Info Spa at Tschuggen Grand Hotel in Arosa, Switzerland · created by Roy Egloff - uploaded by Roy Egloff - nominated by Augustgeyler -- August Geyler (talk) 00:10, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- August Geyler (talk) 00:10, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice architecture and good quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:33, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 05:27, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's a nice photo, but is it a problem that we can very clearly see identifiable people, or should they expect to be photographed, since they are in a building without shades or shutters? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:00, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support, though I do share similar concerns as Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:11, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment We don't downsize, but this might be an exception, though it's too late now. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:57, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really very nice mood, one of those rare shots that make me "want to be there right here & now". And I don't see any problems: clearly COM:De minimis which of course applies for people too, otherwise we had to delete nearly all street photography. --A.Savin 22:10, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Well, you nominated a bunch of street photographs for deletion on the basis that people walking on the street had a right to privacy, but that was in Germany, so perhaps Switzerland has different laws. Anyway, if you're OK with this photo, I guess it's fine, and none of the people shown in the photo are naked. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:43, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Those photos are close-up "hidden camera" shots of identifiable people, taken on purpose, quite obvously. Disappointing statements of yours. --A.Savin 14:19, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why disappointing? I'm saying if this photo that also shows several obviously identifiable people who are not walking on the street but inside a spa and viewed through glass is OK with you, that's probably enough of a reason to feel that it's fine. I get the distinction you're making, though, which is between individuals as the subject of photos or as part of a picture of a building. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:12, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Basile.--Ermell (talk) 22:43, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 06:31, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Finally somebody making good use of the wonderful GFX100S. --Aristeas (talk) 07:44, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 12:29, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:49, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:54, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 12:33, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:27, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 06:13, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 08:32, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm sure that, at some point in the future, this will be used in a Bond film or something like it as the top-secret facility or villain's lair that the hero(es) has/ve to break into. Daniel Case (talk) 17:18, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:04, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Switzerland