Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/File:Neon.JPG

File:Neon.JPG (delist), not delisted

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2019 at 10:54:10

•  Info Featured in 2007. No longer meets FP criteria of todays standards imo, 4 megapixel resolution, for a static object, not very sharp. A large portion of the image is empty. More detail in the tubing would've been visible with different camera settings, see File:NeTube.jpg showing more detail. Category:Neon signs files are not hugely different in quality to this. (Original nomination)
•  Delist -- BevinKacon (talk) 10:54, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
•  Keep I do not see that much better neon images, there is something visually pleasing in this one. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 12:42, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
•  Keep BevinKacon, feel free to nominate any images you think are better, but I'm not seeing anything so wrong with this that suggests our featured collection of neon signs (or any signs or lights) has left this one looking weak in comparison and no longer worthy of the badge. Sharpness looks fine and I don't think more megapixels would add any more detail to a sign that is meant to be looked at from some distance. Btw, I'm aware that the white light requires an argon-mercury filling, rather than a pure neon filling (which would be red or orange), but according to Wikipedia, this sort of light tube technology is still called a neon lamp. As a work of art (which this sign presumably is) it has its own value rather than being used as a sign for some shop or entertainment venue. The composition, with the light fading to black on the edge of the frame is nicely done. So, I don't think this is merely a QI of some random neon sign. -- Colin (talk) 15:42, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
•  Keep The compo and meta qualities of it are still ok. --Cart (talk) 20:16, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
•  Keep Quality is fine. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:28, 25 August 2019 (UTC)
•  Keep What is wrong with this picture?--Boothsift 05:37, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
•  Keep --Pudelek (talk) 12:27, 27 August 2019 (UTC)
•  Weak keep per Colin. Daniel Case (talk) 20:30, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Result: 1 delist, 7 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. --A.Savin 18:32, 3 September 2019 (UTC)