Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Hildebrandt's Starling in Tanzania

Update: ~~Alternative 1~~ is my preference. Snowman (talk) 10:58, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, the term 'alternative' is used when a different image to the orignal is presented for voting (which is usually discouraged as it confuses voting). 'edit' is the prefered term for when a change is made to the original nominated image. Not a major issue, but it helps to use the appropriate terms. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 13:44, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I suggested this as a possible FP, I think it is a stunning shot that really does a great job of showing off the structural colour of this type of starling. Possibly a little blurred when you zoom in really close but I don't think that detracts too much from the quality overall. Sabine's Sunbird talk 19:31, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Edit - ~~slight~~ strong preference for the uncropped version (over over-tight new version of edit 1)~~. Sabine's Sunbird talk 21:55, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The tight crop version has been an error, original version now restored. Please reconsider your vote accrodingly. Elekhh (talk) 02:32, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
back to slight preference for uncropped version. Sabine's Sunbird talk 02:46, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Sabine's Sunbird. Mostlyharmless (talk) 01:34, 19 February 2010 (UTC) Duplicate; Mostlyharmless updated vote below. Maedin\^talk 13:21, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~Support Original- wow, looks very good. Crop in Edit 1 is too tight from above. It moves the attention from the eye to the neck or top of the wing. I don't mind the idea of cropping but it should not be just removing as much useless background as possible. franklin 04:19, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I also agree that the crop displayed now is too tight. When I voted for the crop it was for the previous version. See my comment below. Elekhh (talk) 01:59, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The tight crop version you voted on has been an error, original version is now restored. Please reconsider your vote accrodingly. Elekhh (talk) 02:32, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Now you will really hate me I find this one a tiny little bit long from below. I really support either. It is just that when things look so good the choice is has to be made according to smaller things coming close to the ridiculous. franklin 02:40, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support- very nice, plenty of detail, very good composition. Maybe a slight crop on top and/or bottom could further improove it. Elekhh (talk) 05:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When I nominated it I thought a crop might help, but I did not want to risk "spoiling" the image. Snowman (talk) 10:58, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it is a nice background anyway, but the format and size of the crop are more efficient for Wiki articles. Prefer Edit 1. Elekhh (talk) 19:58, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support either - preference for crop. Great portrait and sufficient detail, although very soft at 100% (almost seems upsampled, although I guess not if it were taken with the 5D Mk II). Looks like Muhammad has some Tanzanian competition? ;-) Ðiliff «» (Talk) 10:13, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- The photographer is probably a tourist so I doubt the competition but it's nice to see something from Tanzania that was not taken by me. --Muhammad(talk) 13:44, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support ... and nice colors. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 10:14, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment ~~Alternative 1~~ cropped from the top and bottom is now available. Snowman (talk) 10:58, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support, composition is brilliant. J Milburn (talk) 12:12, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do you prefer the original version or the cropped version? Snowman (talk) 12:18, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support prefer crop. A little fill flash would have helped with the bright background. Noodle snacks (talk) 22:06, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support either, slightly prefer the uncropped version. -- Avenue (talk) 12:41, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support either, no great preference. Mostlyharmless (talk) 05:26, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I am confused now by the existence of two different crop versions with the same file name: one on commons and the one here on Wiki. Elekhh (talk) 00:59, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for that - the other crop was made for main page (DYK) purposes only; the tight crop was to square the picture. Restored. Materialscientist (talk) 02:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. It was nominated for a FP on the German wiki and at least one additional version was made for that nomination, which are nothing to do with the nomination here. Snowman (talk) 19:30, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Lamprotornis hildebrandti -Tanzania-8-2c.jpg —Maedin\^talk 21:39, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]