Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Mokoia Island

Mokoia Island

Storm clouds gathering over Mokoia Island in Lake Rotorua, New Zealand

Okay, so it's a self-nom, but I'm pretty pleased with this image. It captures the broodiness of the storms that can quickly form over Lake Rotorua and the odd colour of the caldera's sulphurous waters. It's used on the articles for both Lake Rotorua and Mokoia Island.- Grutness|^hello? 06:53, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Nominate and support. Grutness|^hello? 06:53, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. Jonas Olson 10:01, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose image is copyrighted and far to low-res, otherwise very nice --Bricktop 10:07, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: would support the high-res version, but only under a free licence. Sorry. --Bricktop 23:59, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. Non-commercial use licenses are non-free, and aren't suitable for Wikipedia at all. While this isn't a big problem, since Grutness can relicense it, the image is still a bit on the small side (though "far too low-res" is an exaggeration), and overall sharpness isn't feature quality. —Korath (Talk) 10:54, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: It's a very similar res to the previous nomination on this page, which is receiving support votes. If needed I can upload a larger version, but at the time I uploaded this image I believed that 90 k was the maximum allowable for a picture upload. It is free use for any non-commercial purpose, but for legal reasons licensing it for commercial use is out of the question (I am a professional photographer and artist, and this particular picture is in use elsewhere in commercial applications). Since Wikipedia is a non-commercial enterprise, it is free for Wikipedia - the only time this license should come into consideration is for third-party users. Ah well, at least it's prompted me to upload a higher res copy of the picture. Grutness|^hello? 12:35, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • I think the max allowed on Wikipedia is 5MB. I upload images that large all the time. (see User:Brian0918/Free images). If you uploaded a much larger version (with low jpeg compression) I'll support it. --brian0918™ 20:22, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose - sorry, out of focus - Adrian Pingstone 12:58, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. Bad license. Neutrality^talk 22:04, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)
• Support. There's a bit of motion blur, but it is in focus, admirably straight, and has excellent contrast and vivid color. The sunny water/dark sky is what does it, I think. Matthewcieplak 06:14, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. Bad license. Junes 13:51, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. not valid license for featured pic. Cavebear42 00:09, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Not promoted +2 / -7 -- Solipsist 16:07, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)