Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Zebras in Ngorongoro.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Zebras in Ngorongoro.jpg, not featured
[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2010 at 19:12:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info c/u by Muhammad Mahdi Karim -- Muhammad (talk) 19:12, 5 September 2010 (UTC) Nominated by User:George Chernilevsky George Chernilevsky talk 21:20, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Support -- Muhammad (talk) 19:12, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, it is the third nomination of this user, I'm sorry... --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 19:22, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- I had completely forgotten about that rule, sorry. Now that George has kindly nominated it in my place, would you reconsider the oppose? --Muhammad (talk) 05:40, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- There is a {{FPD}} template for such situations. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 23:07, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- support as nominator I agree with reason of kaʁstn. However it is very nice candidate. I give my limit or nominations for this candidate. It is my nomination now -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:14, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks George :-) --Muhammad (talk) 05:40, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support Per George. I don't at all agree with the new rule, and this is a very good picture! --The High Fin Sperm Whale 23:07, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Zebras are unfortunately glued together. Lycaon (talk) 00:20, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support - don't think the 'gluing' is a significant mark-down MPF (talk) 00:22, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Lycaon. A thousand apologies, Muhammad, because otherwise it's really a great photo. Wolf (talk) 07:42, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support The lighting is very special and the unsharp secondary zebras give the image depth. --Ikiwaner (talk) 12:22, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose per Lycon. Unlucky bad composition. Sorry, it is really nice image and colours. --Chmee2 (talk) 13:00, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Comment The touching part is very small yet so many opposes. You must understand that in the wild you can't always move or get the best position. Animals are not always predictable and minor problems like this should be expected --Muhammad (talk) 15:26, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- I'm very much aware of the impossibility to freely choose your subject when photographing wild animals. Here however the white and black very unfortunately almost seamlessly merge the two zebras. Nice as a gimmick but disturbing IMO for an FP image. No qualms with the image otherwise. Lycaon (talk) 15:42, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Maybe they are conjoined twins ;-) MPF (talk) 19:48, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- I'm very much aware of the impossibility to freely choose your subject when photographing wild animals. Here however the white and black very unfortunately almost seamlessly merge the two zebras. Nice as a gimmick but disturbing IMO for an FP image. No qualms with the image otherwise. Lycaon (talk) 15:42, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose The composition and lighting make the image interestingly surreal, but is better when their front parts are glued. --Elekhh (talk) 21:48, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support Very nice!Great use of DOF--Mbz1 (talk) 22:48, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
- Oppose per Lycaon. Otherwise a very good shot of zebras in the wild. --Petritap (talk) 05:10, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
- Could you add a description above please? Yann (talk) 14:14, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
- Support--Avala (talk) 10:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky talk 19:57, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
