In today's world, Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Rolling-thunder-cloud.jpg is a recurring theme that has captured the attention of millions of people around the world. Whether due to its impact on society, its relevance in popular culture or its influence in the professional field, Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Rolling-thunder-cloud.jpg has become a constant point of discussion. From its origins to its present day, Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Rolling-thunder-cloud.jpg has left its mark on different aspects of daily life, generating conflicting opinions and passionate debates. In this article, we will thoroughly explore the phenomenon of Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Rolling-thunder-cloud.jpg and analyze its most relevant aspects, seeking to understand its importance and its possible implications for the future.
Keep, again. Criteria 2 says: Exceptions to this rule may be made for historical or otherwise unique images, if no higher resolution could be acquired. - I certainly would call this "unique". --Janke | Talk08:30, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Rather awkward to prove a negative - the burden is on someone to show that we can get better. The previous nom included a discussion on this issue (as you know since you contributed to it), with no one able to proffer better, or to be honest anything close to the impact of this, regardless of licensing concerns. --jjron (talk) 13:12, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Keep The low resolution criteria is not enough reason to remove this picture, if not unique it depicts a non very common image with no know substitute so far.--Jf268 (talk) 13:00, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Strong delist, this simply doesn't meet my FP expectations at all. It's not just low resolution, it fills less than a quarter of my monitor and that doesn't help with being heavily artifacted and not sharp enough. People, we have technical requirements here, and this photograph is nowhere near fulfilling them! It has twice been on the Main Page, one can say that it has done its job already. It may have a bit of a "wow factor", but it's not really unique and it doesn't represent our best work at all. Todor→Bozhinov18:32, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Keep. It wouldn't pass today, but aside from size it stands up well to current standards. We should respect the judgments of past years' FPC contributors, to a reasonable extent.--ragesoss (talk) 21:27, 16 October 2008 (UTC)