Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Canna fruits.jpg

canna fruits[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2010 at 15:42:15 (UTC)

Reason: Good quality, EV, composition and is of high resolution. Image has been stable in article since April
Articles in which this image appears: Canna (plant)
Creator: Muhammad Mahdi Karim

Support as nominator --Muhammad(talk) 15:42, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The photo technically just fine. But the subject matter lacks color and the day isn’t sunny, which lends a *blah* note. I simply don’t find it eye-catching at all. This looks like the sort of thing I would shoot with my iPhone and go in and ask my wife “See this plant with spider webs on it? Is it a weed or something you want out there?” Ergo, lack of “stop, stare & click.” Greg L (talk) 04:44, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but a plant with spider webs all over it just doesn't really have much encyclopedic value. WackyWace ^{converse | contribs} 10:28, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- A plant with spiderwebs? You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. --Muhammad(talk) 11:15, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yeah, a plant with spider webs. WackyWace didn’t use the proper lingo when s/he used the term “EV” to cite the objection. Please don’t bite the newcomers just because you don’t consider them to be an insider who has not yet earned their Ovaltine decoder ring and can’t yet talk the lingo here. Clearly, WackyWace considers the spider webs to be a flaw significant enough to justify not awarding FP status to this self-nomination. For me, the spider webs were just one of the elements that made the photo look like an afterthought snapshot of a weed on a drab day. Greg L (talk) 12:59, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    - Next you'll be telling me a lioness' picture looks like a snapshot because her teeth are bloody, rabbit's picture is not acceptable if it has some grass stuck to it. These things are natural. I strongly oppose changing a natural scene, brushing off spider webs to take a picture. --Muhammad(talk) 14:24, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - I have no opinion on this image at this time, but, more generally, natural does not always mean good. Take parasites, or diseases, or dirt, or awkward posing- all of them can be natural, but all can prevent a photo of a plant or animal (or mushroom :P) from being as good as it could be. J Milburn (talk) 23:42, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      - I swept the pine needles off The sewer cover in front of Greg L’s house before taking its picture. Looks nicer that way. Greg L (talk) 03:10, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        The spider webs here aren't a problem, but sometimes it does make sense to make some scene modifications. Recent fungi pictures I've usually have a dig to expose the Volva, for example. I've also pruned plants (in my own garden), to allow the perspective I wanted etc. Noodle snacks (talk) 03:02, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm happy with the brightness and detail. --I'ḏ ♥One 15:17, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose - technically it's excellent (the "spider webs" objection is just weird to me), but I agree with Greg L that it's just not quite striking enough to make sense as a FPC. Tim Pierce (talk) 00:54, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose. I was gonna go against the flow and support this, but, looking at its use in the article, I'm not convinced. J Milburn (talk) 11:36, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 16:17, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]