Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Dendrocygna bicolor - Nantes 2.jpg

Image:Dendrocygna bicolor - Nantes 2.jpg, not featured

•  Info created by Peter17 - uploaded by Peter17 - nominated by Peter17 --Peter17 (talk) 18:49, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Peter17 (talk) 18:49, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Info Composition seems slightly unfortunate to me, and the dark triangle at the top right is distracting; did you consider cropping the image a little bit as to remove the triangle and de-center the subject? Rama (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support I am not sure that the picture will become better if the subject is de-centred. It's leaning a little, enough for me. I like its look... I'm sure he follows me... Sémhur 14:58, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose Nice duck and composition, but no wow. Crapload (talk) 16:58, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose Good composition and sharpness, but the loss of "wow" makes I rather would say this is a QI. Leo Johannes (talk) 14:13, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose No WOW factor. Bidgee (talk) 13:10, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose No wow, and that little plastic thing on the leg is not very nice. --S23678 (talk) 15:04, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose that plastic thing on the leg ruins it. Alvaro qc (talk) 08:51, 6 August 2008 (UTC) voting period was closed -- Benh (talk) 22:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  •  Info it is a bird ringing thing, I don't see why it is a problem. It has nothing to do with the good/bad quality of the picture. Peter17 (talk) 18:42, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Quality is one out of many aspects we judge for FP. Subjective arguments about the color, shape, composition, volume, and about the subject itself are entirely valid, and are actually what separates QI from FP. In this case, IMO, the bird ringing, by it's color, size and location, becomes the "highlight" of the picture, which is not good (IMO, again). --S23678 (talk) 19:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

result: 2 supports, 4 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 22:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)