Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Black-faced Woodswallow

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 May 2021 at 14:25:33 (UTC)

Original – Black-faced Woodswallow, Sturt National Park, New South Wales, Australia
Reason
Was seen on Commons FPC last month, where it was featured unanimously.
Articles in which this image appears
Black-faced woodswallow
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator
JJ Harrison
image.jpg

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 15:24, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • I am contesting the non-promote close. The uncropped (nom) version was stable following its insertion in the article and prior to this nomination (no objection by article editors). And now after this nomination, there is consensus for it being FP, i.e. Wikipedia's best, for its use in the article (as infobox image). We go by consensus (not by one editor). I put the uncropped version back in the article. Pinging the closing editor @Armbrust: and participants in case they choose to comment: @MER-C, TheFreeWorld, Charlesjsharp, Modussiccandi, Buidhe, and Basile Morin:. Bammesk (talk) 02:46, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bammesk just reverted use of the cropped version in the article claiming the non-cropped version has consensus. Well, it doesn't. No one in this discussion, besides me, weighed in on which version was better to use in the infobox. (t · c) buidhe 02:50, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Infobox image should present the subject as much detail as possible. Cropping out extraneous areas that aren't the subject increases the amount of detail that can be shown to the average reader, which adds encyclopedic value, regardless of what some editors think about the artistic merit of certain crops. Applying these principles to improve the image used in the infobox is in no way "disruptive". (t · c) buidhe 04:00, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is a way to do it without disrupting the nom process. Look at the 3 examples, look at the time lines (the edit histories), look at who replaced the images in the articles, and when. There is a right way. Bammesk (talk) 04:14, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Last time I checked, our WP:PURPOSE as an encyclopedia is to create content that is useful for readers. Therefore, I focus on improving reader facing content, rather than prioritizing an internal process. If Wikipedia articles can be improved by changing crops, switching images, etc., that should not wait for FPC. This is not "sabotage" of anyone's nominations. (t · c) buidhe 11:03, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • You have created content that is less useful for readers who wish to download an image. Changing an image mid FP nomination is sabotage in my opinion as you nullify all previous votes. Do you think your vote is better than everyone else's? Just behave like everyone else and simply oppose the FP nomination please. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:07, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Black-faced Woodswallow 1 - Sturt National Park.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 21:47, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]