Reason: The lighting and the camera angle are very interesting in the photo for one. Also, the picture shows details of the terra cotta exterior of this building which is one of the famous points of this building.
Articles this image appears in: Mid-Continent Tower
Creator: CPacker

Support as nominator --Sogospelman (talk) 19:21, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for noise and purple fringing (more visible at the sides), and sky is overexposed. Also this type of perspective, while aesthetically impressive, prevents one from getting a sense of the building's shape and size relative to the surrounding city, which makes it less encyclopedic. Fletcher (talk) 19:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not very informative about the structure which detracts from its EV. 88.163.48.104 (talk) 22:01, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - unsharp, blown sky. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξ φ 14:22, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per the points mentioned by Vanderdecken above. Overall technical quality is very weak. Sorry. —αἰτίας •discussion• 17:05, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There must be a view which gives a better overall view of the entire building and its environment. However, does this type of perspective have a specific name and article? If so, then I feel this would be much more appropriately used as an illustration for that Lemon martini (talk) 11:36, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 10:10, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]