Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Intentionally blank page

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Intentionally blank page

Image:No test material on this page.png
Intentionally blank page as used in the SATs.

High resolution, catches the eye in its own unique way, and illustrates its article perfectly. Specifically, it illustrates the counter-refuting method used in the SAT. Rather than leave the page entirely blank (and leave the nervous student worrying that he got a defective test), and rather than add a self-refuting message like "This page is intentionally left blank", they chose an appropriate alternative.

  • Self-nom. - BRIAN0918 21:53, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Does not catch my eye, in fact, it blends in with the background. Alr 22:03, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Very crisp and high contrast, could use a little cropping though. No seriously, you've gotta be kidding! Here is another self-refuting message: I won't even dignify this one with an oppose ;-) --Dschwen 22:13, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Way too striking for me to support. It made me quiver with excitement the moment I saw it, such that I wanted to oppose. enochlau (talk) 23:17, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
  •  ! Strong Support
    • Whoops,  ! Strong Oppose
      • I mean, Neutral. Very brave, though. drumguy8800 - speak? 01:57, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I think this one is taking the "...illustrating article content particularly well..." concept a bit too far. Might as well have a a blank box, and link it to the article White. Sorry if that sounds too harsh. -JPM 04:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose What I want to know is if the College Board could copyright that page! ~MDD4696 05:40, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose, Due to mis-representation: that page is not blank, there's some text on it... --Janke | Talk 06:05, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose This is a joke entry, I assume - Adrian Pingstone 13:18, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose Crisp, clean and attractive image. Nice use of colours, there's just something that is bugging me about it...--Ali K 11:06, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose - no, it's not interesting. Surely this was done as a joke? --Thorpe | talk 19:20, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment: He might have been satirizing how people (myself inclusive) felt about this one, or other similar scenarios. - JPM | 23:36, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong, Strong Oppose You have got to be kidding me. Anchorage 12:09, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose per ugly font gren グレン ? 09:32, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
    • You don't find serif fonts sexy? enochlau (talk) 23:37, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Oppose, although it is something new on WP:FPC --Chris 73 | Talk 15:29, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Not promoted Raven4x4x 08:27, 31 January 2006 (UTC)