Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Santuário Dom Bosco 2.jpg

File:Santuário Dom Bosco 2.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Mar 2021 at 18:32:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Santuário Dom Bosco 2.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Santuário Dom Bosco 2.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Brazil
•  Info created and uploaded by Francisco Willian Saldanha - nominated by W.carter -- Cart (talk) 18:32, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support I've liked this ever since it first popped up at WLM and now it's #9 of the international winners. It's serene, almost abstract, and to me, the sheer wow of it outweighs any technical shortcomings. -- Cart (talk) 18:32, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support--Seven Pandas (talk) 21:39, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support per Cart --IamMM (talk) 21:53, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:12, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment I would appreciate a perspective correction to get the verticals straight --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:11, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

• Sorry, it's an awarded photo so per COM:OVERWRITE we can't alter it now. Anyway, the photo is all about the impression of light and color, not architectural accuracy. --Cart (talk) 08:21, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Support Wanted to make the same comment as Uoaei1, but Cart is right; this is more an “impressionist” (or even “expressionist”?! ;–) photo. Reminds me e.g. of some cathedral pictures by Lyonel Feininger or Otto Nebel. --Aristeas (talk) 10:43, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:20, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 14:29, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support This is beautiful, almost made me wol. It certainly is different from what we normally see here, but that is a big plus for me in this case. --El Grafo (talk) 16:03, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Request After taking a closer look, I think this needs some work regarding copyright. I'm not sure if {{FoP-Brazil}} applies here, would be great if someone with a bit of experience in Brazilian law could have a look. In any case, it seems clear that the original author of the artwork (windows) would need to be credited. --El Grafo (talk) 16:12, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

• Ok, I've added info about the designer and creator of the windows in the description. --Cart (talk) 16:35, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Support --Ermell (talk) 23:01, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Weak support Very nice subject and lighting but the quality could have been better RolfHill (talk) 13:39, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:17, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Looks like a VFX software image. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 19:26, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:10, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Very sublime ... looks like a scifi movie set. Not totally perfect—there is some CA on the open sections—but it's almost unnoticeable and to use it as a reason to oppose would be downright churlish. Daniel Case (talk) 15:00, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support.--Vulphere 17:50, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:55, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Brazil