Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Building in Paulista Avenue 09.jpg

File:Building in Paulista Avenue 09.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Feb 2016 at 13:37:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Building in Paulista Avenue 09.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Building in Paulista Avenue 09.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
•  Info created and uploaded by The Photographer - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:37, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Alvesgaspar style. ;) -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:37, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
•  Support - Fun. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:43, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:57, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:03, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:43, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose - Depressing architecture. Owain Knight (talk) 18:15, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
  • @Owain Knight: It's a typical facade of buildings in downtown São Paulo, the largest city in Brazil. So, what's to be expected? This architecture is very common. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:44, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Almost abstract in its form and symmetry. Daniel Case (talk) 20:18, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment - Yes indeed. It reminds me of Mondrian. It's great how the air conditioners provide a rhythm to the picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:41, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

•  Support --Hubertl 23:24, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
•  Comment interesting to see that no one opened the image... its not sharp, but as I'm prohibited to oppose this volunteer, it's just a thought. And Arion, it's not, this is 70s, and not that commons architecture specially in centre that are normally older building. -- RTA 22:54, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment - Where do you get off making such a bizarre claim? I certainly did look at the image at full size, as I assume most of the reviewers did. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:52, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

• Just looking at full size and seeing that no one complained about the sharpness... -- RTA 17:42, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

• In this kind of effectively abstract composition, a very slight haziness at full size is of no great importance to me, and I suppose probably not to most others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:33, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

•  Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 13:36, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:54, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture