Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hamandir Sahib (Golden Temple).jpg

File:Hamandir Sahib (Golden Temple).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Dec 2010 at 16:02:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Hamandir Sahib (Golden Temple).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hamandir Sahib (Golden Temple).jpg

•  Info created by Oleg - uploaded by Oleg - nominated by Oleg -- Oleg (talk) 18:21, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Support -- Oleg (talk) 18:31, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --The High Fin Sperm Whale 20:49, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Support nice one. consider increasing sharpness and adjusting levels. regards, PETER WEIS TALK 20:55, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Support –hoverFly | chat? 00:43, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Support A great picture Breawycker (talk) 14:42, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
•  Support – Very nice image. MC10 (talk) 04:32, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

* Support great picture Please log in to vote. Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:18, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

•  Support--Jebulon (talk) 23:23, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Очень хорошо! --George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:34, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- Yes, the temple is beautiful but the image quality and composition are not up to FP standards. The subject is tilted (or distorted), a little overexposed (which affects contrast) and not sharp enough. The compositon seems a bit random to me. Alvesgaspar (talk) 12:55, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

 Comment I have reduced exposure and increased sharpness as you have asked. Thanks. Oleg (talk) 02:38, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

A lot better now, thanks! But the geometric distortion still needs to be corrected. The tilt of the buildings at left is disturbing. Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:05, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

•  Support --Pudelek (talk) 13:10, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Very busy composition that deemphasizes a striking and important subject. Not FP quality. Steven Walling 02:02, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Awesome! Very nice quality. Plus good composition and most importantly the subject itself is awesome! Thanks. APTOC (talk) 03:26, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Sockpuppet -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 09:32, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Great subject, but composition and angle are not FP standard IMO. It feels cramped to me, and much of the main dome is obscured. --Avenue (talk) 13:08, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:46, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

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