Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Muscu Domestica
- Reason
- It was blurry at first, but than I went to improve it with GIMP.
- Articles
- Fly
- Creator
- Markturney
- Support as nominator --December21st2012Freak Talk to me at ≈ 05:20, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose. I'm afraid I'm not certain of the technical term (are they jpeg artifacts?), I'm sure someone else can clarify that, but this really doesn't seem to be up to the standard of our insect pictures. Additionally, very little of the subject is in focus, and the resolution isn't massively high. Additionally, the image is only used in a gallery on the fly article, meaning it is not eligible. J Milburn (talk) 14:19, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- I dont think this is Musca domestica. Waaay too hairy --Muhammad(talk) 14:20, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
- December, I have reverted your upload back to its original state. Your work is much appreciated, but the original one is bar better than your edit, only because it doesn't have artifacts. the original is not FP material either, thus I'm going to have to say oppose. --ZooFari 06:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose per above. I've removed it from the article as I believe the id is incorrect. Noodle snacks (talk) 10:55, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Not promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 03:32, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
- Per WP:SNOW plus it's no longer used in article. Makeemlighter (talk) 03:32, 11 February 2010 (UTC)