Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Citrus Swallowtail Papilio demodocus.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Voting period ends on 27 Feb 2009 at 20:22:42
Info Everything by Muhammad Mahdi Karim -- Muhammad 20:22, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
Support -- Muhammad 20:22, 18 February 2009 (UTC)- Support Very, very nice.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:44, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support --Lošmi (talk) 23:18, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 00:19, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support Durova (talk) 03:00, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support --Böhringer (talk) 14:44, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 22:33, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support --Mbdortmund (talk) 00:35, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support Correct exposure, DoF and details. --ComputerHotline (talk) 10:23, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support --AngMoKio (talk) 12:08, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
Oppose I do not feel like every technically correct macro shot should be featured. I get no wow here. Even technically, this is not exactly a perfect shot. The light is flat. The bottom of the wing is out of focus. Guessing that the image was downsampled to barely pass 2 MP bar (it is 2.18 MP), the original would have even more blur there. Muhammad Mahdi Karim is an excellent contributor with so many macros of insects uploaded, and should be recognized. I just do not think this particular picture should be featured. Crapload (talk) 17:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC)- Support I agree with Crapload... Just nice. Nice enough. —kallerna™ 19:13, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose Fully agree with Crapload. Tiago Fioreze (talk) 21:45, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose I agree in each case too. Martin Kozák (talk) 03:12, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
- Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:51, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose is this image the "cream of the crop at Commons" and with "both extraordinary value and technical quality"? I dont think so... perhaps it should be nominated as a "Quality Image" instead. -- Dcubillas (talk) 03:44, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
- So many people cant be wrong. Its value can be demonstrated by the number of projects its being used in. Its quality is IMO, great. If you think quality is not perfect, perhaps you should pick your camera and show us an example. --Muhammad 04:54, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
result: 12 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. --Karel (talk) 08:55, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
