Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Taj Mahal Sunset.jpg

File:Taj Mahal Sunset.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2012 at 14:35:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Taj Mahal Sunset.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Taj Mahal Sunset.jpg

•  Info c/u/n by Muhammad Mahdi Karim -- Muhammad (talk) 14:35, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Support -- Muhammad (talk) 14:35, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Abstain I see my nomination on the same subject has competition :-). Commons wins. -- Colin (talk) 15:24, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
  • No competition. Different timings, different sides, different views --Muhammad (talk) 15:59, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
    • You are right, of course. It's just an expression. Best of luck! Colin (talk) 16:20, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Glad to see Muhammad started contributing original files instead of the low resolution ones. :) -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 16:11, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose Stitching error at the bottom. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:45, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Please annotate on image so I can fix --Muhammad (talk) 19:40, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
    • It has already been annotated. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:26, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
      • Thanks, error fixed --Muhammad (talk) 20:47, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
    • Hmm, this is the first time I realized that annotations on the nomination page are not the same as annotations on the image itself. My annotations are on the file description itself. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:28, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
•  Comment Impressive! what about removing the ugly bird @the top? --93.144.87.135 19:00, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
  •  Done --Muhammad (talk) 20:47, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
    • I just noticed this, but could you also get the dust spots? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:30, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
      •  Support Excellent now. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:05, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Just wonder if u shouldn't compress a bit more - Benh (talk) 19:43, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

• See the "competition" as stated above. :) -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:52, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

•  Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 10:04, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Tomer T (talk) 16:51, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
•  Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 14:25, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Excellent quality! -- MJJR (talk) 20:45, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
•  Comment "The GFDL is not practical for photos and short texts, especially for printed media, because it requires that they be published along with the full text of the license. Thus, it is preferable to publish the work with a dual license, adding to the GFDL a license that permits use of the photo or text easily; a Creative Commons license, for example. Also, do not use the GPL and LGPL licenses as the only license for your own works if it can be avoided, as they are not really suitable for anything but software." See Commons:Licensing. More opinions? -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:39, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose License not suitable for a picture. Yann (talk) 08:07, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Please discuss at Commons talk:Featured picture candidates#Proposal: Change to FP criteria for new nominations: disallow "GFDL 1.2 only" single licensing as it is not practically free for images. Colin (talk) 14:56, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose because the image is GFDL 1.2 only. I don't like people use this space for their own publicity and to promote their own business with such a poor and restricted license and try to resit any oppose by revenge votes. -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 05:10, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
•  Support because the image is GFDL 1.2 only. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 19:37, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
•  Neutral when someone use a crappy licence to prevent commercial use and sell his photos, Commons has not won anything. I'm voting neutral because this fact might biased my opinion, however I don't like the distortions (especially on the columns). --PierreSelim (talk) 06:32, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

• But "we" got lot of publicity from various Wikimedia projects and can be converted to $$ because we cleverly placed the links where our more high quality copies are available for a price. Who need Commons win? :) -- Jkadavoor (Jee) (talk) 06:42, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:07, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

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