Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:ComputerHotline - Fort de Bourlemont (by) (8).jpg

File:ComputerHotline - Fort de Bourlemont (by) (8).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2010 at 15:11:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:ComputerHotline - Fort de Bourlemont (by) (8).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:ComputerHotline - Fort de Bourlemont (by) (8).jpg

•  Info created by ComputerHotline - uploaded by ComputerHotline - nominated by ComputerHotline -- ComputerHotline (talk) 15:11, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support -- ComputerHotline (talk) 15:11, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Neutral This picture is good quality, but I don't really see anything special about it. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 18:19, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Neutral per The High Fin Sperm Whale --Pjt56 (talk) 18:35, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --Aqwis (talk) 19:04, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Nice lighting especially. Steven Walling 00:42, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --патриот8790 (talk) 05:08, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support - Jonathunder (talk) 15:07, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Albertus teolog (talk) 21:35, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment: Is this tilted a little to the left? It looks like that to me. Rotating it clockwise a degree or so could be an improvement. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 17:34, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
  •  Comment I've processing it in ShiftN, it's not titled. --ComputerHotline (talk) 18:10, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support - Nice lighting. Tiptoety ^talk 01:52, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Distortion. The verticals are vertical, but the horizontals are not horizontal. Compare the base of the arches where the side passageway intercepts. Both the front and back bases are tilted per Ilmari. --99of9 (talk) 10:45, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Sperm whale, except that I oppose. No special = no featured to me. Benh (talk) 17:55, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Please reduce potential confusion by avoiding "ComputerHotline" in the file name. Snowmanradio (talk) 09:43, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
  •  Comment: I'm pretty sure we don't have any policy, even unofficial, against including the author's name or username in the file name, and I've seen other prolific contributors do so regularly. Indeed, I've seen it recommended to avoid filename conflicts. Perhaps putting one's username at the beginning of the file name isn't the most convenient way to do it (though others might reasonably disagree), but that alone still doesn't seem like a very good reason to oppose. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 11:10, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
  •  Comment I agree with Ilmari. Having a user-specific substring in a file name is also quite effective to look for use of own photos outside wikimedia projects as a lot of reusers do not change the file name when using a photo on their sites. Quite often this helps spotting breaches to the license (lack of attribution or mentioning of the license) or you can get positively surprised seeing your photos used in another context that what you had expected. In the specific case the username is such that the file name gets a little confusing - you expect to see some kond of hotline operator, and I would recommen to sticking to the real name as I have seen done before by the creator and append it to the file name describing the subject instead of having it as the first part of the file name. At the end of the day the main purpose of the file name is that it should be a unique identifier. --Slaunger (talk) 11:03, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --Pudelek (talk) 16:29, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
•  Support -- Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 10:09, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 3 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:18, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

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