I,User:Jidanni took this picture in 1989 from an airplane of this unbelieveable Kowloon_Walled_City slum. Won't be flying back in time soon, so only copy I got.
Nominate and support. - Jidanni 04:49, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose terrible image quality. chowells 05:05, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very cool subject, but sorry image is too small and low quality. -Ravedave
Oppose Too low quality to become a FP. However, the picture illustrates very well the article in which it is included, but Jidanni just put a link to it at the bottom of the article. I took the liberty to enhance its visibility by displaying it at the top of Kowloon Walled City. -Glaurung 06:01, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose however, as a HongKonger, i'm much drawn to this pic. The drab atmosphere kills me. It's amazing that you were able to capture that image on plane.--K.C. Tang 06:14, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Terrible quality. Mikeo 06:24, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Edit Ok it's too small and fuzzy for FPC, but I edited it anyway: Stevage 10:04, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your edit is interesting, for it improved saturation, but it unfortunately gave an impressionist painting look to the picture when viewed at full size. The original picture is already blurry due to some movement, and your edit causes more details losses. The original picture has therefore more encyclopedic value and I restored it in the article. Glaurung 05:57, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I suggest someone just does some basic levels or something to improve the contrast, and possibly crop it a bit. Stevage 07:40, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Are you sure it's taken in 1989? The surroundings look unbelievably barren for that time. deadkid_dk 10:14, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I know nothing but the article says it was destroyed in 1993. What year do you think? Stevage 12:48, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Being a Hongkonger, I say it's more like the 1970's. Because HK is too developed in the 80's to have barren land in the middle of Kowloon. The quality of the photo also speaks against the year being 1989.deadkid_dk 01:03, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Very intriguing subject, but the photo quality is extremely poor. -- bcasterline • talk 12:19, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly Oppose. Very poor quality. Looks like it might have been a GIF at some point. —Vanderdecken∴∫ξφ 13:07, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, are you serious? Honestly, images like this are an insult to some of the great pics that have to be rejected here because of minor issues. Phoenix2 23:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There is no reason to make comments like that. -Ravedave 06:09, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Technically, he's right - the tecnical quality of the image is very low. However, the photo itself is great - it's a really good angle of a very interesting subject, with the added bonus that the thing has now been destroyed. Just a pity that with the aeroplane window and all getting in the way, and the low res scan it fails our other criteria. Stevage 07:39, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Its perfectly fine to think a photo isn't good and state reason why, but there is no reason to put it like that. Please remember WP:BITE -Ravedave 14:54, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Totally agree, was just trying to find middle ground and explain Phoenix's comment. Stevage 15:00, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry guys, I meant no harm by the comment, sorry if it appeared that way. I just think people should more closely adhere to the criteria for featured pictures. Phoenix2 03:57, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, Phoenix is so right, the picture is awful. Max.pwnage 15:19, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Is this a joke entry? Sorry, there's no way I can be kind about this one. Colour and focus are appalling - Adrian Pingstone 20:11, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Guys, we're already all agreed that the quality isn't good enough, please be civil and don't bite the newbie (?). Stevage 22:33, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Stevage, and i guess the norminator didn't mean the normination a joke, the pic is not qualified, but has its own charm.--K.C. Tang 01:31, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Opppose great subject but poor resolution/size. savidan(talk)(e@) 10:24, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this pic but I would LOVE a high quality photo of Kowloon Walled City. --Golbez 15:33, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I took that on 19890327 just like I always name my photos. Jidanni 13:37, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. No way Swollib 08:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Not promoted Mikeo 19:49, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Very poor quality. Looks like it might have been a GIF at some point. —Vanderdecken∴∫ξφ 13:07, 23 May 2006 (UTC)