Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Surface waves

Surface waves

Self-nomination. Used in the article Wave

Nominate - Roger McLassus 14:16, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, blurry. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 15:05, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose. Also seems kind of noisy in the dark areas. howch e ng {chat} 17:19, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose We can only see the central part of the wave system, I would want to see more of the concentric waves as they spread (but a very attractive picture, well done) - Adrian Pingstone 17:22, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support This one is on the borderline for promotion due to unsharpness and some noise. But the composition and the theme are great. I also like the metallic look of the water, like mercury. - Alvesgaspar 18:26, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose. I can't really tell that it's water without an explanation, i.e., I dislike the blown highlights and purple fringing, or whatever that is. And as others have pointed out, there's some distracting grain. It's fairly a attractive photograph, though. --Tewy 23:25, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Visable noise but I still like it enough not to oppose it SOADLuver 00:43, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - beautiful, I believe would definitely entice the user to read the accompanying article--The world salutes the Rising Star...Try to be One 04:08, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support It should be centered, but it's good. | AndonicO Talk 10:43, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - delicious composition. -- CountdownCrispy ^{( ?} 14:37, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Not very good quality for a very common subject. NauticaShad e s 20:25, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. A bit of noise, a bit blurry, would make a pretty wall paper but falls short on encyclopedic value. --Dschwen 18:29, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --NauticaShad e s 15:59, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]