Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Citizen SLD-100NR calculator.jpg

File:Citizen SLD-100NR calculator.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2023 at 13:51:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Citizen SLD-100NR calculator.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Citizen SLD-100NR calculator.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects#Machines
•  Info created by LoMit - uploaded by LoMit - nominated by LoMit -- LoMit ^talk 13:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- LoMit ^talk 13:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
•  Support. =) --Brateevsky {talk} 15:13, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
•  Support - Mr. Rasel Hasan (talk) 16:45, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ★ 17:29, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Per Basile. ★ 14:03, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose No wow, sorry. The quality is acceptable as QI, but the resolution is small (only 1,636 × 2,466 pixels without the frame, from a camera that records 6,000 x 4,000 pixels). Considering that all FP are future POTY candidates, I would like the label to be awarded to images that are a little more special than just "brand new product, simple shot" -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:49, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

•  Comment Are we evaluating the sensor of camera or the picture itself? This picture is sharp, the subject is well lighted. And there are other FPs which present "ordinary product", for example: 1 2 --LoMit ^talk 10:50, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

• Almost all modern equipment allows you to take high-resolution photos. If a picture is small, there should be mitigating reasons. Crop necessary due to long-distance for example.

Our guidelines state: "A bad picture of a very difficult subject is better than a good picture of an ordinary subject". And here it is an average picture of an ordinary subject, in my view.

The two examples you give were highly controversial (7-3 and 11-4) and I think both were more interesting with natural shadows, more original products, special angles of view -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:41, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose per Basile. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:04, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Irrelevant motif to me. --Palauenc05 (talk) 12:29, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:15, 11 November 2023 (UTC)