Wikipedia:Picture peer review/First web server

First web server edit

Do you think that one of these might be featured? They obviously have great historical importance and high resolution but may not have high enough quality.

Nominated by: -- þħɥʂıɕıʄʈ^ʝɘɖı 09:22, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

I'm afraid they don't come close to the standards expected of FP, even given the historical value. Although they're both sharp, the second one has particularly poor composition, lighting, scan quality & pretty much everything else (shot behind glass?) while the first is miles better from a composition POV but the very noisy, artifacted scan again precludes it from FPC. Very interesting but fatally flawed, unfortunately.--mikaul^talk 13:49, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seconder: