Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/File:SakuraHealed.png

Reason: massive digital editing, to the point where it is obviously an unrealistic representation of the tree. Author explains process at the image's file page. Also, technically illegal promotion becuase while there was support consensus, it was promoted by the image creator. Finally, questionable EV on the articles where it is placed.
Previous nomination/s: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Magical Sakura
Nominator: Nezzadar ^[SPEAK]

Delist — Nezzadar ^[SPEAK] 23:47, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Just on the "technically illegal promotion" aspect, the generally accepted notion that creator/nominator/voter shouldn't close (note that it's not actually a rule as such even now) didn't really exist back then and has only gradually evolved since as a potential COI, and nonetheless this was a non-controversial promotion. Other points are valid. --jjron (talk) 03:46, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
keep I am against delisting in the first place .,, it is like rerwriting history. GerardM (talk) 11:48, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then you should abstain, as your voting skews the process. I don't think "I don't like the process" holds up that well anyways. Nezzadar ^[SPEAK] 20:20, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delist. Clearly doesn't meet FPC - particularly point 9 digital manipulation. Note: FPC was merely an incipient draft at the time of the 2005 FP promotion. Elekhh (talk) 22:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
"Please leave a note on the talk pages of the original creator/uploader and/or FPC nominator to let them know the delisting is being debated." Thanks. Makeemlighter (talk) 03:50, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delist This looks like an example of HDR just going wrong.-- mcshadypl ^T ^C 06:50, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delist we have a HUGE amount of Sakura images at Commons, 334 in that catagory at this time, there is plenty that would better illustrate Sakura than this stylized image. This has no EV for Sakura and it's not a remarkable or anyway great digital manipulation to give it EV for creative photography or digital editing. — raeky ^{(talk | edits)} 07:53, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delist. --Silversmith Hewwo 09:15, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per nom. --KFP (talk | contribs) 20:48, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delist. Clearly too manipulated. Gerard, the list of featured pictures is not static. You could just as easily argue that we should not feature any new pictures because doing so 're-writes history' too. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 14:20, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delisted --Zoo Fari^{Thank you Wikipedia!} 23:00, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]