Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image:Rolling-thunder-cloud.jpg

Rolling Thunder Cloud

Reason: It doesn't meet the 1000px size requirements, and it has a couple of artifacts.
Nominator: TheOtherSiguy

Delist — TheOtherSiguy 23:17, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delist That cloud has smoother lines than a G35 coupe. But it's far too small in resolution.Puddyglum 23:24, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep--Mbz1 00:52, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Exceptions can be made to the 1000px size requirement if the image is unique, and I think this one is pretty unique. CillaИ ♦ XC 02:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Also, FWIW, this has been nominated for delisting before (here and here). CillaИ ♦ XC 02:37, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep on list We are becoming way to stringent about the rules. Haven't you guys read WP:IGNORE? This is a rare picture and a good one--Phoenix 15 22:07, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:IGNORE states: "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it." How would the quality of Wikipedia be degraded if this picture is no longer featured? Cacophony 06:00, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delist A stunning composition, but just not enough detail. Storm clouds are not infrequent and they're often spectacular as a glance through the internet illustrates. Yes, this storm was a specific 'unique' event, but no more so than all the other unique storms that rage around the world. I understand Phoenix 15's arguments, but IMO we're going too far the other way - FPs should be the very, very best; maybe we need a "Good Picture" designation for pictures like this (and the ground squirrel above) so that we can recognize that they're above average pictures that are encyclopedic, but not quite at the very pinnacle of the picture material we have. 99.236.51.219 23:50, 5 October 2007 (UTC) Sorry, that was me; I've removed the strikethrough Matt Deres 13:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IP users do not have suffrage. Cacophony 06:00, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

However, the comment is relevant. MER-C 08:39, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well stated. TheOtherSiguy 00:59, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delist Not because of the resolution, but the technical quality is low, there are a lot of compression artifacts because of low file size, besides it looks like the buildings are leaning towards the center from both ends (lens distortion?) Atomsgive 00:48, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per Atomsgrove. Cacophony 06:00, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep again, per my reasons on the delist nom in July last year. --jjron 09:01, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I like it. ^8thstar 20:41, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delist again. The subject is impressive and the composition is good but the quality is just far too bad, I think (compare with with the quality of this cloud image, for example). Also, the image is not used to illustrate any particular storm or other event... --KFP (talk | contribs) 07:53, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delist One of my favorite pictures, but is not featured quality. At least not anymore. NyyDave 13:13, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep --Vircabutar 06:51, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per KFP. thegreen J Are you green? 00:13, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No consensus MER-C 07:30, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]