Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sturnus vulgaris in Napa Valley 1.jpg

File:Sturnus vulgaris in Napa Valley 1.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2010 at 00:14:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Sturnus vulgaris in Napa Valley 1.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sturnus vulgaris in Napa Valley 1.jpg

•  Info created and uploaded by Mbz1 - nominated by Jebulon -- Jebulon (talk) 00:14, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
•  Support -- Jebulon (talk) 00:14, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Thank you for the nomination.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:07, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --The High Fin Sperm Whale 01:16, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Kooritza (talk) 02:57, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Very impressive -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:59, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment This picture was already a Featured Picture candidate in Nov 2009. --Petritap (talk) 09:08, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

No, this one was not. I uploaded a new version over an old one.--Mbz1 (talk) 12:46, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

•  Support I also like the old version. Very impressive and it's a daily image (and a problem in the cities of Galicia (Spain)). Useful image--Luis Miguel Bugallo Sánchez (talk) 13:38, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --Muhammad (talk) 14:35, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Good catch. --Elekhh (talk) 21:31, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose it is a random composition of birds, nothing special.. you can not see details of the birds. Ggia (talk) 23:18, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, right. BTW this "random composition of birds" is also calls flock, and it is not to see the details (it is impossible for such image), but to see the behavior.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:53, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

For example this image [1] and this [2] are more nice.. non comparing megapixels-noise etc but as general image concept-composition.. Ggia (talk) 00:03, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

•  Support - Appropriately rampageous. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:02, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Interesting subject, poor composition. Steven Walling 22:33, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Steven. Lycaon (talk) 16:24, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
• A quote to share: "Without retaliation, evils would one day become extinct from the world."--Mbz1 (talk) 17:20, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
  •  Comment -- This kind of poisonous comment doesn't add to the discussion and is unworthy of this forum and its participants. If you can't restrain from personal attacks please shut up. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:36, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
    • Not at all. The "the poisonous comment" was that one. So at that point I have no other options left except to show how lycaon is involved with me , and why he should stop voting on my nominations, as I do not vote on his. There was no personal attack in my comment, there was in yours like "shut up" of course.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:14, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Ggia. Random, huge, mob-like flock, can't even see what one looks like. Maybe this was tremendous in size and resolution so that at full-view you could clearly make them out it'd be a double-whammy educational of the species and of flocks in general, but this doesn't impress me much. --IdLoveOne (talk) 14:46, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

This image was taken from inside the flock, and it shows some birds are close to me, while others are farther out. It is nice to get the whole flock in a frame, which was all but impossible in my situation, but this image is different and definitely also illustrates a flock behavior.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:01, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

•  Support J Milburn (talk) 10:39, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- I don't like the composition and the image quality is not up to FP standards, as most birds are too dark and show no detail. Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:19, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

There's impossible to show details in such an image, it is not a close up portrait of a bird, and you should know that.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:33, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

•  Oppose - While many of the birds are Sturnus vulgaris, fairly sure some (particularly towards the right) are not, probably being Molothrus ater and/or Euphagus cyanocephalus; but quality of pic is not good enough to identify them with certainty, and therefore opposing. - MPF (talk) 08:31, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Not bad, but as per Giga the composition is not convincing enough for me. --Ikiwaner (talk) 13:29, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:01, 15 September 2010 (UTC)