Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Catedral de Segovia
- Reason
- Too small (800x600).
- Nominator
- Noclip
- Delist — Noclip 23:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delist Until a larger version. --Arad 00:56, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delist. Too small, minor artifacts. Amphy 02:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Deslist. per nom. Witty Lama 22:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment I don't understand why a good (though small) picture such as this receiving no complaints for its nom of "too small" whereas comments on recent nominations and this debate seem to show that people want to give the benifit of the doubt to smaller existing FPs. I just don't understand what rules we're playing by are anymore.... Witty Lama 22:22, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
- Not knowing exactly which other noms you have in mind, it could just reflect who has voted and who hasn't yet... Some people care a lot about size as a sufficient reason to delist, some don't? Debivort 17:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- There's not gonna be a larger version if no one informs the photographer of the nomination. I've contacted the photographer. No one bothered with that yet and not doing so violates delisting procedure. - Mgm|(talk) 08:53, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. It fulfilled the criteria when it was promoted We shouldn't delist an image just because the criteria changed. - Mgm|(talk) 08:56, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
- Woah, hold on there... what's that!? I know that we have different approaches to delisting when it comes to older FPs, but ignoring changes to FP stringency all toghether? That's going too far surely! Doesn't the first line of the instructions say: "Here you can nominate featured pictures you feel no longer live up to featured picture standard"? Wouldn't your comment imply that the only way to delist an FP was if it was errantly promoted in the first place? Witty Lama 09:23, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delist per nom. J Are you green? 18:08, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delist. Res too low. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 10:19, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
Delisted. --KFP (talk | contribs) 10:21, 17 May 2007 (UTC)