| Revision as of 20:16, 7 January 2005 editSolipsist (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users17,504 edits not promoted← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:07, 7 January 2005 edit undoSolipsist (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users17,504 edits rewordedNext edit → | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
| *'''Oppose'''. ] ] 08:32, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC) | *'''Oppose'''. ] ] 08:32, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC) | ||
| * '''Oppose''' Much too blurry to give me any pleasure - ] 11:14, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC) | * '''Oppose''' Much too blurry to give me any pleasure - ] 11:14, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC) | ||
| ** '''Not |
** '''Not retained as a featured picture: +5 / -7 ''' - ] 20:16, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC) | ||
| <br style="clear:both;" /> | <br style="clear:both;" /> | ||
Revision as of 23:07, 7 January 2005
London ISS
This image was previously a featured picture and was renominated as it never went through the featured picture candidates process.
- Oppose. Lovely image, shame about the clouds. ed g2s • talk 03:04, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Oppose. Sadly, though. It'd be a really nice image if it weren't so darn blurry over more than half of it. grendel|khan 09:18, 2004 Dec 22 (UTC)
- Support. Keep it. You're still able to make out many interesting features from it. Enochlau 10:21, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Oppose Sadly tooo blury ] 12:17, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Oppose--ZayZayEM 00:51, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Support -- it is striking how much this resembles fractured glass. --Elijah 05:50, 2004 Dec 24 (UTC)
- Support - Though not perfect its interesting. I also don't like the blurred elements and scan lines, but it is still more real and direct than the Earthlights composite. - Solipsist 11:20, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Support. -Lommer | 08:53, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Oppose. Neutrality 06:53, Dec 27, 2004 (UTC)
- Support. Nice Dmn / Դմն 00:19, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Oppose. James F. (talk) 08:32, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Oppose Much too blurry to give me any pleasure - Adrian Pingstone 11:14, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Not retained as a featured picture: +5 / -7 - Solipsist 20:16, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)