Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2013.06.23.-08-Wesenberg-Rauchschwalben.jpg

File:2013.06.23.-08-Wesenberg-Rauchschwalben.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Mar 2016 at 07:29:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Hirundinidae_.28Swallows.29
Info All by me. -- Hockei (talk) 07:29, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Info ~~Hockei: If I'm not wrong this is your third active nomination. Please withdraw one --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:08, 27 February 2016 (UTC)~~ sorry, my mistake --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:09, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Hockei (talk) 07:29, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely birds, well captured. --Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:39, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I love the birds and the fact that none of the picture is blurred, but I'm not quite as sure about the composition. I'm wondering whether cropping just above the nails might make me like the picture more. I'm not going to try tonight, but perhaps someone else will. Right now, I'm finding this a bit borderline for a feature, and probably on the "high Quality/non-Featured" side, purely based on the way my eye would rather move around a cropped version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:35, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Info This is the natural environment where this species of birds breeds and rears his offspring. I see that as part of the composition. Also the spider web below. --Hockei (talk) 08:59, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Yes, I see that. But I'm not suggesting a crop of the image below the birds, only of part of the image above the birds. If the image were cropped above the nails, which important part of the birds' environment would be lost? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:23, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support Didn't think this would work, but it gets better and better the larger it gets. Excellent environmental shot of an animal. Daniel Case (talk) 07:20, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Request @Daniel Case: Your vote overlapped with my upload of the cropped version. Maybe you should take a second look if it still works for you. Thanks --Hockei (talk) 07:36, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's even better, actually. Daniel Case (talk) 19:27, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Info New cropped version. --Hockei (talk) 07:23, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but I don't see what you cropped, and yes, I looked at the file's history. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:55, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting cookies and restarting the browser should help.

--Hockei (talk) 10:49, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what's going wrong. I cleared my cache and even used a private browser. I'll try using IE instead of Firefox. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:27, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, still not seeing it. I was liking this photo better than before, but it looks like the same photo, when I compare it to a preview of the preedited file from an edit screen. Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:31, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support I like it really! --Hubertl 17:46, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:25, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support This would fail on the usual criteria of the background, but it really does work and is a 'natural' setting. I like the composition. Charles (talk) 12:51, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Medium⁶₉ ^{You wanted talk to me?} 12:53, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The background is not appealing to me, and it could be higher quality. --AmaryllisGardener ^talk 23:55, 4 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 23:52, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes