Support Powerful image with lots of relevant EV. Lycaon (talk) 19:47, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Anyone else reminded of this picture? With regard to the present nom, I point out that the image was just added to the health section of the Poverty article today-- I'd recommend waiting a bit to see whether the image is stable where it's been placed, and whether there is consensus about its EV. Out of curiosity, was there image manipulation (the concrete looks lighter near the right leg than anywhere else) or was that the actual lighting? Spikebrennan (talk) 21:12, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that a requirement similar to the one in VPC should be in force here. But that is not the case right now. As for possible manipulation I very much doubt as I can't see the purpose of it Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:32, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Doesn't show enough for strong EV. Just an apparently homeless pair of legs. Noodle snacks (talk) 00:14, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Noodle Snacks. ZooFari 00:45, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Have to agree with the above. Additionally looks to have a clockwise tilt. Sorry. --jjron (talk) 07:35, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Who wants to look at just a homeless persons legs? BUC (talk) 08:55, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, not really particularly encyclopedic. J Milburn (talk) 11:47, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support - I think this image is very exceptional in resolution and standard qualities. I also think that it has some enciclopedic value (maybe not much, but some), I was going to give a support vote, but I gave a weak support because I may not be enough objective in this case. - Damërung...ÏìíÏ..._ΞΞΞ_. -- 00:38, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose EV is diminished by only showing the legs. Cacophony (talk) 03:59, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Its not a homeless person, it's a homeless person's legs - Adrian Pingstone (talk) 17:14, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support I guess the people who opposed this picture don't think art should be allowed on Wikipedia. I like how there is no caption necessary to know exactly what this picture is about. Tennis_52 (talk) 17:23, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We are determining if it meets the featured picture criteria not judging it on its artistic merit. It could be the most beautiful shot in the world, but unless it provides a significant contribution to the encyclopedia article, it should not be a featured picture. Cacophony (talk) 04:55, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This does not give a striking and identifiable illustration of homelessness-it's a pair of legs.Without the caption,it's not even obviously a homeless person-it could be a miner or a poor person resting on a bench Lemon martini (talk) 13:11, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
