Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/F-106 unmanned landing

F-106 unmanned landing

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2011 at 19:37:52 (UTC)

Original - F-106, number 58-0787, landed in February 1970 almost intact in a snowy field after the pilot ejected.

Reason: unusuall, historical image (not reproducible), decent quality
Articles in which this image appears: Convair F-106 Delta Dart, Belly landing, Cornfield Bomber
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Land
Creator: US Air Force

Support as nominator --Nergaal (talk) 19:37, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support if only for the rarity... gazhiley.co.uk 00:22, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I know that it has landed in a cornfield, but shouldn't it be categorised in Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Air instead? Purpy Pupple (talk) 01:35, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- But it was riding through the field in this pic. Nergaal (talk) 03:26, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - But it's an aircraft... Aaadddaaammm (talk) 21:09, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    - Despite my support above I agree this needs to be in the aircraft section... gazhiley.co.uk 21:11, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      - ps: the land category proposal was really a joke! Nergaal (talk) 21:21, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        why is it still in that catagory then if it is a joke? gazhiley.co.uk 12:27, 19 January 2011 (UTC) [reply]
Opppose. Sorry, I'm not convinced that the EV is high enough to compensate for the very ordinary quality. If we had an article on this particular aircraft, or the particular incident... J Milburn (talk) 22:53, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment We do have an article on this incident: Cornfield Bomber, as listed in the nomination. Cowtowner (talk) 23:05, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I do apologise, oppose struck for now. That's certainly the article in which the image has the highest EV, I would say... J Milburn (talk) 00:59, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Whilst the event was pretty rare, plenty of photos seem to be available. The large areas of blown highlights and low resolution suggest to me that we need a better scan of this image. Whilst I'd imagine this image is in the public domain, I wasn't able to spot any evidence of this at the source website. If it is indeed in the public domain, then it should be possible to find or request a better scan from somewhere. JJ Harrison (talk) 11:02, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose After noodling about this one, I realize that Wikipedia needs a WP:BITI (boy is this interesting) feature. When I first saw this picture here, I read the caption and found it quite interesting; a plane that landed itself. Nevertheless, WP:FPC isn’t, in my opinion, the proper venue for this picture as it simply doesn’t appear to me to represent excellence in photography in any particular regard. It isn’t even particularly eye-catching since, at first blush, it looks like a plane that ran off the end of a runway or an incident where the pilot had to ditch his aircraft after a bird strike at 40 feet. One has to read the caption to understand the significance. Greg L (talk) 00:51, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:ODD is good for that. J Milburn (talk) 20:07, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - OMG; Wikipedia is a big place! No matter what, there’s an app for that. Greg L (talk) 21:36, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 21:37, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]