Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Euprotomus aurisdianae: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→Euprotomus aurisdianae: Oppose |
|||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
:*Typo obvs. The image is clear enough if you zoom right in but I do think it's unsubtle, looks crude at normal scale. EV no doubt but I don't think it's a good image. [[User:ProfDEH|ProfDEH]] ([[User talk:ProfDEH|talk]]) 09:48, 14 January 2022 (UTC) |
:*Typo obvs. The image is clear enough if you zoom right in but I do think it's unsubtle, looks crude at normal scale. EV no doubt but I don't think it's a good image. [[User:ProfDEH|ProfDEH]] ([[User talk:ProfDEH|talk]]) 09:48, 14 January 2022 (UTC) |
||
* '''Support''': I think I see ProfDEH's point, though. This seems a bit harsher than most of the black background molluscs, but it's also incredibly encyclopædic. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 7.5% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]]</sub></span> 08:49, 14 January 2022 (UTC) |
* '''Support''': I think I see ProfDEH's point, though. This seems a bit harsher than most of the black background molluscs, but it's also incredibly encyclopædic. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 7.5% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]]</sub></span> 08:49, 14 January 2022 (UTC) |
||
* '''Oppose''' - I agree with ProfDEH on this. The drop off between the shells and the black background is too sudden to the point of being distracting. [[User:GrantHenninger|GrantHenninger]] ([[User talk:GrantHenninger|talk]]) 18:43, 14 January 2022 (UTC) |
|||
<!-- additional votes go above this line --> |
<!-- additional votes go above this line --> |
||
{{clear}} |
{{clear}} |
||
Revision as of 18:43, 14 January 2022
Euprotomus aurisdianae
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2022 at 05:00:30 (UTC)
- Reason
- Quality lead image of this sea snail endemic to the Indo-Pacific region.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Euprotomus aurisdianae
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Molluscs
- Creator
- H. Zell
- Support as nominator – Bammesk (talk) 05:00, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
- Tentative Oppose – Black background is distracting and looks like photoshop rather than photographed on a black background. Silhouettes are tenting to be lost against the background, shells look too dark. ProfDEH (talk) 08:26, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
- It's a mistake to disqualify half of the encyclopedic photos in the Molluscs category just because of the background. For inanimate specimen (particularly a multi-view collage), a flat background (photoshopped or not) is fine, if done well. @ProfDEH: what does "tenting to be lost" mean?! Is it a typo? Bammesk (talk) 00:37, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Typo obvs. The image is clear enough if you zoom right in but I do think it's unsubtle, looks crude at normal scale. EV no doubt but I don't think it's a good image. ProfDEH (talk) 09:48, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
- Support: I think I see ProfDEH's point, though. This seems a bit harsher than most of the black background molluscs, but it's also incredibly encyclopædic. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 7.5% of all FPs 08:49, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose - I agree with ProfDEH on this. The drop off between the shells and the black background is too sudden to the point of being distracting. GrantHenninger (talk) 18:43, 14 January 2022 (UTC)