Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Frigate Bird Male

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2011 at 22:19:09 (UTC)

Strong Support as nominator --Benjamint 22:19, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support There is some slight oversharpening visible around the edges of the bird. Image size is acceptable, but not particularly large. There is some vignetting. Bird's right wing (left in image) appears to have some chroma noise. Otherwise, it is an okay image and encyclopedic value is very strong especially with the female and juvenile to compare with. I suggest rotating this picture to look consistent compared with the pic of the female and the juvenile. Purpy Pupple (talk) 01:16, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This image easily meets the IQ benchmark for in-flight FPs Benjamint 07:18, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, used only in a gallery. J Milburn (talk) 21:47, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(only replying to this one for the sake of clarity) I know we normally follow that rule but which passage is it in the criteria that actually states that? I would argue that it would be outweighed in this case anyway: we have three images which collectively have pretty high EV but would clutter the article if placed outside. If that's not mitigating I don't know what is. Placed them below the gallery with larger thumbnails, anybody have a better idea to integrate them into the article? Benjamint 22:52, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've put this image in Frigatebird. I think many would be more likely to see these in flight than when landed. For birds, I'd argue that if a good field guide would picture something, then the EV is most likely good. JJ Harrison (talk) 23:06, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support I think this is the best of the three and has high EV. The article just needs work. JJ Harrison (talk) 23:04, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 23:05, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]