Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/South Dakota State Quarter

South Dakota State Quarter

I was looking through the Mount Rushmore article (which is AOFD), and I saw this picture, which I thought very eye-catching. It is a high-res photo, at 2000x2000, and doesn't have any quality problems that I can spot. It's similar to the penny FP, but much more interesting because there are more things to look at then just Lincoln. It was taken by the US Mint. There is also a png version here, in case that would be better.

Nominate and Support | AndonicO ^{Talk | Sign Here} 13:53, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Here is the penny I mentioned, and here the American Buffalo coin. Comparisons might be useful. | AndonicO ^{Talk | Sign Here} 14:42, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment ...and here is the failed quater FPC nom that he forgot to include. TomStar81 (Talk) 15:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment No, actually, that was nominated just two days after my first edit; I didn't know it had been nominated. Also, it's not the same coin. | AndonicO ^{Talk | Sign Here} 16:20, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Impressive, I agree, but I am not so sure it adds signifigantly to the article. TomStar81 (Talk) 15:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- What about to 50 State Quarters? (This is the only one of those images to be so large.) —Cuivi é nen 16:32, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I disagree and propose that this image is vital in displaying the design of that state's quarter Rtcpenguin 21:37, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't like these images that are aggressively modified photos - the black and white "shiny field" background is a total photoshop fabrication, and sloppily masked in some places. Given this decrement to the encyclopedicity, I would like to see something else redeem the image, such as an array of all such state quarters. Debivort 17:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Although it's a great image, you cannot just expect one of the quarters to get FP status while the other ones do not. They are a group of images, and shouldn't get featured status separately. → JARED ^(t) 20:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose If this becomes featured then all other 49 state quarters have to be featured is well. Sure, this may be larger, but others are sharper and overall the amount of information in the photos are similar. A collection of all those individual coins would be better. --antilived ^{T | C | G} 23:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - It is a nice image, but not really special. Also, the enc value doesn't seem extraordinary. Alvesgaspar 08:58, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. But you may wish to consider bringing 50 State Quarters for featured article status, though. - Mailer Diablo 09:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it might be good, but they won't all be minted until 2008 (look at the article, some pictures are missing); we might be able to take them by the year they came out though. | AndonicO ^{Talk | Sign Here} 11:56, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Not unique to the other state quarters. --Tewy 04:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. Jumping cheese ^Cont@ct 08:52, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above comments and previous discussion of these modified images. Also, I think a third US coin would start to make our collection of monetary FPs appear a little biased, no? --YFB ¿ 00:07, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Sharkface217 19:34, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --KFP (talk | contribs) 21:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]