Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Crocodile bank chennai MZ7 0618.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Crocodile bank chennai MZ7 0618.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2016 at 02:00:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
Info created by Mano8in - uploaded by Mano8in - nominated by Mano8in -- Mano8in (talk) 02:00, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Support -- Mano8in (talk) 02:00, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Question - Mano8in, why do you think this should be a Featured Picture? I could guess, but you might help your cause by making an argument. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:17, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, of insufficient image quality (noise, details)--Uoaei1 (talk) 13:09, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- Question When was this FPX? I think that perhaps we should make a rule that FPX pictures can't be renominated. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:39, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- Ikan Kekek: It has not been nominated before. It was FPXed by Uoaei1 on this very nomination page, and then FPX contested by Lošmi in the subsequent edit. -- Slaunger (talk) 07:25, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks for clarifying that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:10, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
- Support I don't agree that the image is technically insufficient. --Lošmi (talk) 18:29, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose I find it is overprocessed with too high saturation, contrast and perhaps sharpness. I tried to improve the very general categories. Work still needed on the very general Chennai category. Maybe it can actually be removed. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:31, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Comment Side point here, but removing a category for a city is an extremely bad idea. [Edit: Hold it. Do you mean removing the category of Chennai from the photo? That's different. What would you propose to substitute?] As an admin on Wikivoyage, I very often look for city categories to link in our sidebars and trawl through such categories for Featured, Quality, Valued and otherwise useful pictures. I always find it unfortunate when there is no Commons category for a city, town, park, island or what have you (and I sometimes create missing categories) but removing a category for a huge city like Chennai would be just unforgivable, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:04, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
- Ikan Kekek. Originally the photo was categorized to Crocodilia and Chennai. These are very general categories, which have many sub-categories. Categories used on file pages should be as specific as possible to avoid overpopulating the very general categories, that were originally selected. On Commons, categories do not work as keywords as in many other photo storage sites. So I changed Crocodilia to the much more specific Madras Crocodile Bank Trust on the file page. That category is again a sub-category to, e.g., Animals of Chennai, which is again a sub-category to Nature of Chennai, which is again a sub-category to Chennai. So actually that one specific category covers it all, as you can navigate to there from both of the very general categories Crocodilia and Chennai. Of course, I do not think the category Chennai should be deleted from Commons, but only from the file page as it is over-categorization (In fact I have done that now, that I have investigated the current categorization tree). -- Slaunger (talk) 07:17, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
- Well done. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:24, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Uoaei1 & Slaunger. INeverCry 02:37, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose - I still would like to see Mano8in's argument for why this photo should be featured, but to me, a photo that is fairly clear on part of a crocodile's face but is otherwise a bunch of ugly, unsharp green water and very blurred bokeh is not a great photo. Better than a snapshot? Yes. But that's not the standard I think we should be judging by. This just isn't close to being one of the very best pictures on this site, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:18, 25 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose per opposers above --Cayambe (talk) 08:44, 26 March 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 02:16, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:42, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
