Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Botanischer Garten Berlin-Dahlem 10-2014 photo13 Parrotia persica.jpg

File:Botanischer Garten Berlin-Dahlem 10-2014 photo13 Parrotia persica.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2014 at 12:34:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Botanischer Garten Berlin-Dahlem 10-2014 photo13 Parrotia persica.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Botanischer Garten Berlin-Dahlem 10-2014 photo13 Parrotia persica.jpg

•  Info all by A.Savin Proposed FP category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
•  Support --A.Savin 12:34, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose Just one of many well-done but insufficiently wowing photos of autumn color we get from the upper temperate Northern Hemisphere at this time of year. Sorry. Daniel Case (talk) 19:37, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
•  Support I Like --LivioAndronico talk 19:56, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
  •  Comment Dear LivioAndronico, you may like it but do you really think this is one of the very best images Commons has to offer? Please think twice. --Kreuzschnabel 09:01, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
    •  Comment Dear Kreuzschnabel , I have never said that the image is the most cool of the world , I said "I like it",i Like the composition. It looks like a hug between two trees.If you don't think you can Oppose as your right, but I don't see why this whole story. --LivioAndronico talk 10:27, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
      • You’re right, I apologize for putting it this way. I am just a bit afraid that this forum of picking the very best images on Commons might go down to a „nice picture“ voting, collecting "Like"s as if we were on Facebook. Just "liking" an image is IMHO not enough for an FP support, I expect an FPC to be outstanding in some way, be it composition, lighting, impressiveness or technical execution. I didn’t get you’re supporting this one for composition (and yes, it is nice). --Kreuzschnabel 19:57, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
• strong  Oppose Poor JPEG quality (artifacts in twigs against sky), unfortunate light (a lot of leaves look blurry and/or overexposed), nothing special in composition – did you really mean to nominate this one? --Kreuzschnabel 09:01, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
  •  Question What should the last part mean? If lots of other people including yourself nominate low-wow images for FP (I *very* rarely see real wow on FPC these days), so why shouldn't I be free to do the same? Some animals = more equal than others? --A.Savin 20:16, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
    •  Comment I agree that real wow is rarely seen here, but do I take it right from your answer that you deliberately nominated a lo-wow pic just to lower the level even more? This is becoming a sharade. Sorry for my ugly nominations, it won’t happen again in the near future, I’m out of this. Have fun together. --Kreuzschnabel 23:50, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose sorry, the image quality isn't ok for an FP-image for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 19:45, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
•  Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 19:04, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
•  Neutral It will be better (much more WOW :)) if you crop all the grass at bottom IMO, I'm even sure. I agree that there is some sharpening artefacts around line foliage/sky, also the light is harsh. Thus I will stay neutral even with a crop. The subject and this kind of composition can be good IMO and can work for me. -- Christian Ferrer ^{Talk / Im. / Fav.} 20:30, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- Nothing special about this image, boring composition, unattractive colors, it does not appeal to me. Jules Grandgagnage (talk) 16:41, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- Ram-Man 02:16, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /— revi_msg 14:45, 12 November 2014 (UTC)