Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Mussels
Appearance
- Reason
- High EV. Some people eat these.
- Articles this image appears in
- Mussel, Mytilus edulis
- Creator
- Rainer Zenz
- Support as nominator --Sasata (talk) 08:46, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
- Comment Lacking EV, can you add it to the species article? ZooFari 17:59, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
- Comment I linked it on Mytilus edulis, seemed more appropriate for the species than the previous image of a shell on the beach. Not sure the quality is there though for a FP though. — raeky (talk | edits) 21:51, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
- Question: Can the uneven shading be fixed? At the top, the background is grey, but at the bottom, it becomes white. SpencerT♦Nominate! 18:46, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
- Support. How is this lacking EV?! --Dschwen 22:22, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
- Not anymore but I'm a little concerned about quality. Will think about it... ZooFari 22:29, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
- What do you mean not anymore? Either a picture is valuable or it isn't. --Dschwen 12:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- At the time, it wasn't in the species article. Now it is; now it has more EV. wadester16 19:02, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- Current usage shouldn't dictate EV, EV should be calculated on the image solely, not how it's used. — raeky (talk | edits) 19:11, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- EV term or not, it should have been in the species article in the first place. ZooFari 21:52, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- The "EV" featured picture criteria is "Adds value to an article and helps readers to understand an article." - how an image is used in article(s) is essential. 80.47.149.6 (talk) 16:32, 15 August 2009 (UTC)
- EV term or not, it should have been in the species article in the first place. ZooFari 21:52, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- Current usage shouldn't dictate EV, EV should be calculated on the image solely, not how it's used. — raeky (talk | edits) 19:11, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- At the time, it wasn't in the species article. Now it is; now it has more EV. wadester16 19:02, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- What do you mean not anymore? Either a picture is valuable or it isn't. --Dschwen 12:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- Not anymore but I'm a little concerned about quality. Will think about it... ZooFari 22:29, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose. It's noisy and blurred at full resolution. The detail and texture on the top left shell could (in particular) be a lot better. NotFromUtrecht (talk) 21:48, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- Support Lovely illustration, great EV, nicely lit, carefully laid out, sharp and properly colour balanced. I don't see any significant noise at all, and shading is exactly what you'd expect for a white b/g under this lighting. --mikaultalk 23:32, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
- Neutral: Ugh, now I remember why I don't eat mussels, :-/ Good EV, but image quality is lacking a little. Maedin\talk 18:47, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
- Support detailed enough to see what you need to see --Childzy ¤ Talk 15:24, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
Promoted File:Miesmuscheln-2.jpg --Shoemaker's Holiday Over 192 FCs served 10:45, 16 August 2009 (UTC)