Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Town hall Großbottwar

Town hall Großbottwar

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Jan 2011 at 16:31:57 (UTC)

Original - The town hall of Großbottwar, Baden-Württemberg.

Edit 1 - brightened shadows

Reason: nice light, good quality, interesting view
Articles in which this image appears: Großbottwar
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: Felix König

Support as nominator ---- Felix König ✉ 16:31, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
'Oppose'Weak SupportSupport ~~too small for a FP. Sorry.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 16:35, 24 December 2010 (UTC)~~[reply]
- Please be a little more specific. If by 'small', you're talking about resolution, the image is 1,450 × 2,700, which is well above minimum FP requirements (1000px on longest side). Jujutacular ^talk 18:44, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yeah, I also don't understand. I think a resolution of 4MP is enough for FP and a lot bigger than the requirement. -- Felix König ✉ 17:45, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - I think GreatOrangePumpkin is talking about the size of the article. The article itself doesn't seem like the photo would have very much EV. --AmericanXplorer13 (talk) 22:42, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - I don't see any issues, why the perspective of this image should not be normal, not edgewise. And yes, forgot to mention, that this pic has too less EV, showing only a mansion somewhere in a district, somewhere in Ludwigsburg, somewhere in Germany, somwhere in Europe, somewhere in the Earth. This is my oppinion. Sorry again. Regards.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 15:27, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Sorry to change my comment so much. But I support now. The reason for the changing is, that my computer spinned yesterday and two days ago: If I clicked this picture double times, the size was the same as in wikipedia. But now I see, that it is very large and absolutely OK to become FP. Regards.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 12:18, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'll Support, but there does need to be more information on the page it's from to show it has good EV. I do like the picture though. Anoldtreeok (talk) 22:58, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support iff article is significantly expanded with translation from corresponding german article. The picture itself is quite good, with a lot of intriguing detail. I couldn't tell if the bird on the left side of the round clock is real or not. Purpy Pupple (talk) 06:23, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, I've got very little time at the moment. I tried to expand the article a bit, and it is now twice as long as before ;-) But I know it's still not very much. -- Felix König ✉ 11:47, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The article has recently been considerably expanded [1], and I would interpret this as satisfying your request unless we hear from you again on this matter. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 12:48, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm not quite sure about the contrast here. It seems a little bit on the dark side to me. – SMasters (talk) 06:21, 27 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support Contrast is fine to avoid overexposure of white inserts. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 18:03, 28 December 2010 (UTC) Prefer edit. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 11:58, 31 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments on the edit, please. Makeemlighter (talk) 22:26, 2 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prefer edit. Purpy Pupple (talk) 04:56, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Edit better lightning-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 10:45, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Rathaus Großbottwar neu edit.jpg --Makeemlighter (talk) 15:07, 3 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]