Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Yellow-legged gull in Rome, Italy 2.jpg

File:Yellow-legged gull in Rome, Italy 2.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jul 2023 at 13:20:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Yellow-legged gull in Rome, Italy 2.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Yellow-legged gull in Rome, Italy 2.jpg

499

775

3370

3175

6016

4000

Yellow-legged gull (Larus michahellis)

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes#Genus_:_Larus
•  Info created, uploaded & nominated by 多多123 -- 多多123 13:20, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- 多多123 13:20, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

   Comment; critique accepted and appreciated. 多多123 13:22, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose Common bird in an urban setting does not appeal for FP; whites are overexposed and the lighting is not ideal (harsh light from middle of the day if the time clock is accurate). Camera used constrains technical quality. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:50, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

  I do not agree with "urban does not appeal for FP", consider the following FP File:Seagull July 2014-2.jpg, is the lighting fixable? 多多123 20:52, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

  (If needed I can nominate #4 instead, File:Yellow-legged gull in Rome, Italy 4.jpg, with the appropriate edits.) 多多123 21:19, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

  And here is an FP of a ring-billed gull with no "wow factor", File:Ring-billed gull in Red Hook (42799).jpg. 多多123 22:13, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

•  Comment The urban setting is more attractive to me, than a flat neutral background. And I don't need that wow criterion, either. But here, quite a big part of the bird's breast is just blown white. No feathers recognisable. --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:06, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

  @Palauenc05: It would be a compromise but... if the overexposure is too bad, I have File:Yellow-legged gull in Rome, Italy 3.jpg which doesn't include the feet, but has more recognisable feathers on the breast. 多多123 15:45, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

•  Comment Sorry, but IMO none of them will succeed in FP. --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:08, 8 July 2023 (UTC)
•  Weak oppose per Palauenc05. --SHB2000 (talk) 03:29, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Very busy background. Daniel Case (talk) 04:38, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 12 July 2023 (UTC) -- Radomianin (talk) 21:23, 12 July 2023 (UTC)