Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/A-10 moving for attack

Original

Reason: When I first saw this picture, I was breathtaken. A stunning example of U.S. Air Power. The sun shining brightly on this Godly Warbird, the dark shadows on the wide, the mist over the ground, it's just stunning to me.
Proposed caption: An A-10 Warthog flies above cropfields, moving to attack Iraqi ground forces during the 1991 Gulf War.
Articles this image appears in: Gulf War
Creator: User:Bwithh

Support as nominator Cheers, JetLover ^(talk) 00:14, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
support--Mbz1 01:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)Mbz1[reply]
Oppose I agree, the image is very dramatic, and well-crafted. I really enjoy the image and think that its artistic value is top-notch, but I see the encyclopedic value is lacking. The image doesn't portray the whole aircraft, so it doesn't really do the job of helping readers understand the subject in the A-10 Warthog article. And in the context of the article Gulf War, which already has so many shots of D.S. airfighters (many of which show more planes and a heavier emphasis on environment), I don't know that it adds a substantial amount. Per FPC 5, I unfortunately can't support this particular candidate. SingCal 02:40, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
oppose Stunning, Godly subject is cut off, inky shadows obscure detail and are noisy. Debivort 02:57, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
oppose It would be a cool picture if so much of the plane wasn't cut off. I think that many of the images on the Warthog page are much better, for instance , , , and even more on Commons , . Cacophony 04:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That third image there is just totally bad-ass. I mean, technically speaking, of course. Spikebrennan 17:20, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ruefully oppose - Per above. I can't believe they're retiring these things. Their absolute bad-ass-ness puts my pinko commie pacifism to the test. --TotoBaggins 13:42, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 09:32, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]