Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/P-51 Mustang
Appearance
![](http://up.wiki.x.io/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5c/P-51_Mustang_Langley_AFB_2004.jpg/200px-P-51_Mustang_Langley_AFB_2004.jpg)
![](http://up.wiki.x.io/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3f/P-51_Mustang_edit1.jpg/200px-P-51_Mustang_edit1.jpg)
Very clear and bright picture of a classic WWII figter, shot from a rare head-on in flight;
- Nominate and support. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 18:40, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- I'll amend that to now support edit 1. - Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 04:43, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
- Support Great picture.--Mike
18:46, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Oppose I hate to do this to my favorite aircraft of all time, but it's a bit grainy, there are jpg artifacts in the sky, and the wings' leading edges are all blown highlights. --Bridgecross 19:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- "Still oppose all edits!" he cried weakly from the bottom of the pile :) --Bridgecross 16:38, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comment I wouldn't like to discard this remarkable picture too quickly. I don't care for the highlights but there are "finger-type" stains all over the image which don't look like jpeg artifacts. Alvesgaspar 19:36, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thats dust on the digital sensor. A common but rather annoying problem. Could easily be cloned out but the only real solution is cleaning the sensor! Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 19:42, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Weak Supportbecause of the grain. Not a bad picture overall, and I don't mind the blown highlights (it might even be the sun's reflection). Perhaps Fir could fix it. | AndonicO Talk | Sign Here 21:40, 22 November 2006 (UTC)Weak oppose. More likely, they're water spots on the canopy of the plane that the photographer is in (you can see part of the canopy in the lower left corner). But it's a very nice capture otherwise. howcheng {chat} 21:41, 22 November 2006 (UTC)- Support edit 1. howcheng {chat} 07:38, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Support Either edit. Amazing angle --Fir0002 23:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Did you seriously clone out hundreds of blotches?! That gets you an effort-support edit (the perferably the lightened one). --Dschwen 23:20, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Support Edit 1. Good detail, distinctive colours, exciting angle - the plane really looks like a proper fighter in a photograph like this. Bob talk 01:11, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Support: A good picture and a great background. User:Sd31415/Sig 01:12, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Support I like this picture, so I will not shoot it down. TomStar81 (Talk) 03:36, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Support Very nice!! --Midnight Rider 04:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Support edit 1 — Great photo, great edits by Fir. I oppose edit 2 though, as it seems to have turned out little too bright. ♠ SG →Talk 08:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Support edit 1. Alvesgaspar 09:20, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Support Edit 1. I love the angle, and the edits fix most of the quality issues. Edit 2 is a little too bright, however. NauticaShades 10:20, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Support either edit. I chaged my vote. It's just about perfect now. | AndonicO Talk | Sign Here 13:27, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Support either edit, though I think I slightly prefer edit 2. Great image of the greatest fighter plane ever. :-) « amiИa . skyшalkeя (¿Hábleme?) 15:08, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
- Support edit 1 - Mgm|(talk) 12:55, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
- Support Either edit! A great shot. Jellocube27 17:48, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
- Support edit 1 Edit 2 seems a little too light, so I'm sticking with edit 1. Jumping cheese
Cont@ct 23:12, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
- Support edit 1 per above --antilived T | C | G 04:24, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
- Strong Support edit 1 near perfect with the edits.
- Support edit 1, fantastic pic! - Mailer Diablo 19:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
- Support Edits 1 and 2 both work for me. ~ trialsanderrors 00:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
- Support edit 1 only. Edit 2 is too light for me. Good shot. --Tewy 04:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Promoted Image:P-51 Mustang edit1.jpg Raven4x4x 08:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)