Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Portrait of a cat

Portrait of a cat

Reason: Encyclopedic and high quality image of a common cat, comparing favourably with the existing pictures of the subject
Proposed caption: Portrait of a street cat (Felis silvestris catus), showing a common relaxed posture, probably taken after one of their frequent naps. The three-coloured coat pattern (dark grey, light grey and brown) is typical of a tabby she-cat.
Articles this image appears in: Cat, Tabby cat
Creator: Joaquim Alves Gaspar

Support as nominator Alvesgaspar 23:13, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Shaizakopf 11:42, 5 August 2007 (UTC) 11:41, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose Quite a good looking image, but I find the fact the subject is cut-off too much of a flaw to vote support - however, if you this picture could be retaken to show the full cat, I would gladly change my vote to Support, if not Strong Support. BlackArk 14:33, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For such a common subject to qualify as a FP, I would say that it has to be pretty much the best possible picture of the subject. This picture, which does not depict the entire cat, is not the best possible picture for the purpose of illustrating the cat for encyclopedia purposes. Spikebrennan 17:45, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The idea was to show the head of a cat the best poosible way, hence the title of the image. If there are FP portraits of a tiger, a racoon, a giraffe, a monkey and even of some people, why not of a cat? - Alvesgaspar 19:35, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Overall i think it should show more of the cat, all we see is the head and though it is a great picture it is not FP standard because cats are known for their climbing, jumping, balancing skills etc. So for it to be a FP it should really be illustrated in this way. Fir0002's pic of the cat in the tree is a better image --Childzy ^{(Talk|Images)} 22:41, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Opposing this is like balancing intangible good qualities against tangible downsides and essentially giving precedence to the tangibles. In my opinion this image is reasonable; it is detailed, attractive, and it has caught the cat's expression exquisitely. Chris.B 10:40, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reluctant Oppose - The photo has a lot of good qualities, but unfortunately, having half the subject cut off reduces its encyclopedic usefulness. Might I suggest trying to get it featured over on Wikimedia Commons, where it'll be judged on its quality alone, and not how it'll fit into any particular encyclopedia article? GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 16:42, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- It already is. thegreen J Are you green? 17:30, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I have a few cat portraits which I think are at least equal to this, but there's no way they'll get featured. howcheng {chat} 22:25, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- It is the problem with common subjects in general. Everybody has few images and how to decide which one should be FP?--Mbz1 02:25, 9 August 2007 (UTC)Mbz1[reply]
Support I like it a lot its stylish, well presented and encyclopedic --Hadseys 10:42, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For a subject as common as a cat, a better pic can surely be taken. Rather boring and the subject is cut off. Sorry. Jumping cheese 06:25, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 02:59, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]