Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/White Lion

White Lion

Reason: Clear and good quality image of an unusual animal
Articles this image appears in: Lion, White lion
Creator: Benjamint 10:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support as nominator --Benjamint 10:23, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I can see this at Valued Images, but not here. The composition is very plain, and the lighting and DOF choices are sub par. Probably to blame is the setting, but the grass and atrophy/emasculation of this animal couldn't make it more obvious that this is in a zoo (as the caption on one of the articles states, but please put it on the image page for others to use, esp. when translating). Compares unfavourably with other images at both lion and white lion. I can't help thinking this image belongs on animal welfare, but this would require us having more detailed information on how the animal is kept. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 15:50, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, I don't see anything wrong with it being a captive animal: "white lions remain rare in the wild ... The greatest population of white lions is in zoos where they are deliberately bred..." From the article it sounds as though they're so rare in the wild they may as well not exist. I can't see anything wrong with the DOF. It's definitely a better image than the others on the White lion article though: there's only the noisy shot of the face and OOF one of the cub. What is it exactly that my image "Compares unfavourably with"? Benjamint 06:46, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think quality is good showing an unusual animal in a realistic, if not natural, setting. I don't think the fact that it's in a zoo really detracts that much from its EV, given that apparently the majority of white lions are bred in zoos these days. Fletcher (talk) 02:29, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I find the composition could be improved but this is what we have and EV is definitely there. --Muhammad(talk) 04:21, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Agree with Fletcher and Muhammad. ~ ωαdεstεr16_«talk^stalk» 22:01, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, more or less per PLW. The composition especially strikes me as uninteresting. I think the majesty of this animal could be captured much better, even in another zoo shot. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:07, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose per PLW. Spencer^T♦^C 00:35, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose unfortunately a fairly obvious zoo shot. Noodle snacks (talk) 07:16, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 07:05, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]