Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Caerulea

White's tree frog

I saw this picture when I was checking out the FAC. I think it looks great and has potential of becoming an FP.

Nominate and support. - ZeWrestler ^Talk 15:24, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The first time I consider a frog to be cute, but I'm sure some people are going to be bother by the size. Is there a larger version? - Mgm|^(talk) 10:03, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Unfortunetly, I couldn't find a larger version. I looked first before posting it. If someone wants to contact the original editor who posted the picture, maybe he might have something. --ZeWrestler ^Talk 15:16, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment There's Image:L_caerulea2.jpg, but that's a different image, and the frog is looking away. ~MDD4696 (talk • contribs) 02:37, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral: the size detracts from it somewhat, but I don't like the branch sticking in front of the frog. Flcelloguy (A note?) 19:43, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
( − ) Oppose Too small res --Fir0002 23:24, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Too small. Enochlau 01:01, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Too small, little color variation. - JustinWick 00:48, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Support Little color variation is desired in this type of photo. Remember, animals often have camouflage techniques suited to their environment -- too often, I feel animal pictures are taken out of context. I'm okay with the size (though a large one *would* be nice). Janet13 04:27, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Perhaps if the background was burned? I think that would increase the color variation and make the frog more obvious. -Vontafeijos 16:18, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose too nice an image to only be available in such a low resolution. I'd support a higher resolution version of this image were one available. --Gmaxwell 07:03, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice pic but just too small for FP. Leave the colour and background contrast as it is, though. Changing it for aesthetic purposes would severly misrepresent an important point of interest regarding this frog (its natural camoflage). ~ Veledan • Talk 22:29, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted Raven4x4x 06:39, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]