Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bananaquits.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Bananaquits.jpg[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2014 at 19:55:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created by Leon-bojarczuk - uploaded by Tom-b - nominated by Arion -- 
ArionEstar (talk) 19:55, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Support FP in English Wikipedia -- ArionEstar (talk) 19:55, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Comment With its 2.25 Mpixels, just barely scrapes over the 2 Mpixel minimal resolution requirement. The file page could benefit from a proper {{Information}} template and a geolocation. I think the photo as such is very good, with a good timing. Focus is soft on one of the birds, but I think excuseable. Some concerns were raised about the authenticity of this photo in its EN:WP nomination back in 2009. It appears they were not completely resolved. I am in doubt if this gets over the bar for FPs of birds nowadays. --Slaunger (talk) 20:33, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
- Partial
Done@Slaunger.Added description and location -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 14:57, 28 July 2014 (UTC) - Partial Done@Slaunger.Indicated the probable author page(is not a Commons page) of the photography, see note on talk page -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 17:12, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you. --Slaunger (talk) 18:39, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Info@Slaunger.I loaded a new image with larger size, based on the original as the quality of the original photo is good was possible to recover details and not just make a large copy devoid of value, please rate, if you disagree I revert the image. Please understand this issue as good faith, not dominate commons rules, do not know if I break something. -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 19:36, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Comment@Lauro Sirgado: See Commons:Overwriting existing files. It is very good that you have uploaded a photo of higher resolution, and it is certainly uncontroversial for this nomination as no-one has actually voted yet. It is a bit more controversial because the same file is promoted to featured status on both the English and Turkish wikipedias. However, as I see it it is clearly an improvement in this case and thus should not cause any problems with regard to the previous promotions. Overwriting an image with one of larger resolution is also mentioned explicitly as allowed, although one is cautioned when it comes to images with assessments that not other alterations are done at the same time. --Slaunger (talk) 20:05, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Thank you. -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 20:38, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Partial
Question Since the creator is available for questioning: In the nomination at the English Wikipedia, an editor raised a concern/question if this was actually a staged shot? He also mentioned that the background appeared artificial. Could a little more details be revealed about the conditions of the shot on the file page (if this is still recallable, it has been some years :-) ) to shed some light on this? --Slaunger (talk) 20:12, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Comment@Slaunger: Do not know the author, and do not feel comfortable doing any inquiry, although we are geographically close. In the original I noticed a discontinuous and undefined boundary between the background and the motif, but does not progress on areas of detail of the barb of feathers, can be the result of image compression, but that's just a guess. -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 21:13, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Neutral OK, thanks for all your hard work. I like the photo, but I am not fully convinced regarding the technical quality. --Slaunger (talk) 21:17, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
- Comment@Slaunger: Thanks for comments, : ) -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 14:23, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Oppose The colour of the fake green background is too big a contrast to the birds I think. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:29, 29 July 2014 (UTC)- Oppose The technical quality is not good and that branch on the foreground.. –Makele-90 (talk) 15:47, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination ArionEstar (talk) 17:39, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
