Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Uss saratoga cv3.jpg

USS Saratoga CV-3[edit]

Reason: a rare color view of the ship
Articles this image appears in: USS Saratoga (CV-3)
Creator: US Navy

Support as nominator DeltaDawn76 (talk) 22:27, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support The colors tell us about the materials of the ships of back then. 86.81.228.168 (talk) 10:04, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Moonlight567 (talk) it is good because there aren't many color pictures of the Saratoga.
Oppose. Poor digitizing, way too small, and color does not add value. The see is blue the ship is gray, big deal. --Dschwen 01:14, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There are better B&W photos already in the article. While this may be a rare color photo of the ship, its obviously a scan of a degradaded photo and doesn't really add any value to the article. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 04:36, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not historic enough to be this small.D-rew (talk) 04:56, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Dschwen Mfield (talk) 12:03, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Dschwen, except I think it's the sea that's blue. ;-) Matt Deres (talk) 14:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Noisy and artifacty, and it's just not a good-quality image. Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 23:55, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Despite the critiques of others the image size and noise is something I could live with due to the relative rarity of pictures such as this. Even if the ship itself is not particularly famous (compared to some I mean), due to the lack of colour photos from the period it should be allowed. BigHairRef | Talk 00:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There's noting particularly wrong about the photo, but I don't think that it meets the criteria as it's unclear and not very interesting. --Nick Dowling (talk) 09:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I find it very unimpressive. Mangostar (talk) 23:28, 6 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted . --John254 00:59, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]