An excellent photograph, which captures both the building and the sky well, and also illustrates its article, in addition to being one of the world's foremost examples of Gothic Revival architecture; it appears in Westminster Abbey, and was created by ChrisO.

• Nominate and support. - Jdhowens90 20:31, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: It is cut off at the top and the bottom, there must be better pics of Westminster Abbey to nominate.
  • Comment: To my mind, it is not necessary for the entire tower to be included in the picture. What matters, and makes this picture special, is its capturing of the stunning architecture from a dynamic angle, giving a genuine impression of the awesome scale of the building, and the detail of the Gothic Revival towers.
• Comment. Users may want to consider this past nomination. Enochlau 02:26, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose - I've seen better photos. JoJan 20:56, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose - I realise a photographer might be frustrated waiting for British weather to provide anything better than this flat grey lighting under a brooding grey sky, but even if you forgive that, this image is just too small. Sorry ~ Veledan • Talk ^{+ new} 20:15, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. I too feel there must be better photos of such an incredible building. I consider the angle haphazard, not "dynamic," and the frame very limiting. CapeCodEph 23:33, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose -- Too small and an uncomfortably high amount of the building is cut off chowells 06:08, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. 1. Size. 2. Cut off at bottom and more importantly, top. When taking pictures of soaring, vertically- imposing architecture, cutting off the peak seriously damages the composition, methinks.—encephalon 04:51, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
• I feel you're over-reacting a little about the top being cut off. I mean, it's just one of those little spire things, a very minor part of the structure I would think, and it's still half there anyway. Another five identical spires are also visable. It would be different if the entire left hand side tower was cut off, then I would agree with you, but as it is I don't honestly understand your reaction. However, I'll still have to oppose, as the image doesn't really grab me, and it's a little small. Raven4x4x 13:31, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Perhaps, Raven, but I don't agree. This is my first ever oppose vote on FPC, and the cut-offs at both ends impact it a lot for me. The spire that was cut is the highest and most prominent one from this angel. Pictures of architecture should never cut off a piece of it in this manner. When you consider that this could have been so easily remedied, it's apparent that this wasn't a well-executed shot, and is not a good FP candidate. IMO, only moving to oppose if the entire left side was cut off is setting exceptionally low standards for FP. I agree with your thoughts on size.—encephalon 10:48, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
• Too bad this might be too late support Richardkselby 19:48, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Not promoted Broken S 01:20, 1 October 2005 (UTC)