Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Torre de Belém por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (2).jpg

Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2026 at 19:22:27 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#Portugal
Info created and uploaded by Rodrigo.Argenton – nominated by ★ -- ★ 19:22, 22 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ★ 19:22, 22 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dull lighting, unnatural perspective. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:47, 22 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Why unnatural? ★ 06:10, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
concordo plenamente com o Joaquim, necessária uma correção de perspetiva, algo relativamente fácil de fazer. Além disso, acho que o monumento está demasiado em cima; tenderia a acrescentar um pouco mais de espaço Wilfredor (talk) 13:50, 23 July 2026 (UTC)I inadvertently violated the IBAN rule; I didn't notice the author. I apologize. --Wilfredor (talk) 14:45, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Vc sabe que vc não podia estar aqui, né? Então tá bom, só pra constar. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton^m 14:12, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Because this is not what we really see when looking at the monument, due to perspective correction. Better take the shot a little farther, or leave the verticals as they were captured by the camera. Please take a look at this picture, whihc is not even a QI. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:10, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
You want a straight shot in every picture... The perspective increases the power of the edification.

It's kind of sad and concerning, this posture. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton^m 14:11, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Question Enlighten me, please. Why can't Wilfredor make a comment, what is the IBAN rule? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 15:01, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Please see en:WP:IBAN. They are not to interact with the user in question. Further questions can be taken at the user's talk page. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 15:11, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry. Good quality but given that this is a very commonly photographed subject I don't think the light or composition are impressive enough to distinguish it for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 15:10, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I can't see any problem in the image. ★ 15:58, 23 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao20. //shb (t • c) 03:48, 24 July 2026 (UTC)[reply]