Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:A man carries a huge hammerhead through the streets of Mogadishu (edit).jpg
File:A man carries a huge hammerhead through the streets of Mogadishu (edit).jpg, featured edit
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2018 at 19:22:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
- Info Original created - uploaded by Marco Gualazzini - edited version - nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:22, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support Very impressive image with a quality more than acceptable. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:22, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support --Basotxerri (talk) 19:52, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Unusual subject, and the setting shows this war-scarred city. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:24, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Comment Certainly unusual, but why should we suspend our normal technical quality standards? Charles (talk) 20:39, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Precisely because it's so unusual, per the similar argument you make about difficult-to-shoot animal photos. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:55, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
SupportSlightly different argument as this is an opportunistic photo Ikan Kekek, but quite special. I think I've seen it in The Times. Charles (talk) 10:32, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose I didn't realise stuff had been cloned out. Thanks Peulle. Charles (talk) 14:35, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support Now there is something you don't see every day. Thankfully, since seven of the nine hammerheads are on the endangered list. Wow + powerful image wins over quality. Plus we recently promoted a bug that was downsized to 3,000 × 2,171 pixels and everybody just ignored that. If this was downsized to the same size, the quality would look ok. --Cart (talk) 22:02, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:41, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
- Strong support Awesome subject, impressive background and excellent composition. Just a bit of noise, but overall very striking image, per Christian -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:08, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support per others. Not technically perfect of course, but an improvement over its predecessor. Daniel Case (talk) 05:19, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:49, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support wow :) - Benh (talk) 07:16, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
* Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:40, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support -- KTC (talk) 10:49, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Comment I don't really care whether the flatten metal tin (?) get put back or not for Commons' purpose. I prefer the edited version. -- KTC (talk) 20:53, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 11:05, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose I'm not at all satisfied with this edited version. Firstly, the quality (such as the noise) of both images can be criticized, which means that the subject matter (the "wow") is what carries the most weight. Given that, I see no reason why an edited version should be nominated instead of the original. Secondly, touching up some shadows might be fine, but when you go to such lengths as cloing out litter from the street (again, for what possible reason?), effectively changing the scene, it gets a hard 'no' from me. Frankly, I'm astonished none of the professionals supporting above have pointed this out.--Peulle (talk) 14:24, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- I'm a little confused with how cloning out some trash here is different from cloning out two birds in a previous nom (supported by Peulle and Charles). Here the cloning is declared with a {{retouched}} template, while that is not the case on the bird photo. --Cart (talk) 15:40, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Don't put words in my mouth. I did not support the cloning out of those birds, as you can clearly see in the conversation I even considered removing my support of the photo entirely, but it would have passed anyway.--Peulle (talk) 15:52, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Ok, just asking since you didn't remove it. --Cart (talk) 15:58, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose Because the destructive edition cited by Peulle. I preffer the original version without any color or scene alteration. I added a selective noise reduction to the original version --Photographer 17:03, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Comment - I'd agree with putting the litter back in the photo, since it's part of the scene in this war-scarred city. I'm not really seeing destructive edits, though. What's more than minor? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:06, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- In my opinion, there could be made some minor improvements like shadows and highlights, but since the quality isn't primarily what is being judged here, why not jut nominate the original instead? That's my main beef anyway.--Peulle (talk) 20:02, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Oppose I don't think any kind of editing is acceptable for photo reports. Subjectively I also find the tonal touch ups less than desired or needed. -- KennyOMG (talk) 19:27, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support I prefer this version with the recovered highlights on the stones on the right and brightened shadows on the left. The removal of the trash on the left is fine for me: It is disturbing the balance of the image, and there's plenty of trash left in the picture so that removal of this single piece does not affect the picture's integrity. It's a much stronger image without it. Similarly, removal of that white piece of building (?) in the background it totally fine for me as it is distracting, is not identifiable, and in reality would be covered by trees as well had the camera been positioned a little bit more to the left or the trees grown a little bit more. Imho, this is exactly how a reputable professional photojournalist would edit this. --El Grafo (talk) 09:45, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support Very good. --Moahim (talk) 16:53, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
Alternative : original version edit
- Info @Basotxerri: @Ikan Kekek: @Charlesjsharp: @W.carter: @Michielverbeek: @Basile Morin: @Daniel Case: @Agnes Monkelbaan: @Benh: @Martin Falbisoner: @KTC: @JukoFF: @Peulle: @The Photographer: @KennyOMG:
- As it seems that my edition do not unanimously, I nominate the original version as alternative. Feel free to keep your vote, to change your vote, to support both, or to oppose the both images. Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:03, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:03, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support Works too. --Cart (talk) 20:11, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:23, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:02, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:49, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:38, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support--Ermell (talk) 08:41, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support Good decision. Charles (talk) 09:15, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support for the subject matter.--Peulle (talk) 11:20, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support --Photographer 17:23, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support --Basotxerri (talk) 17:30, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support. --Gnosis (talk) 18:02, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support better --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:45, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support -- KennyOMG (talk) 21:29, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support Poco2 18:27, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support Because of the subject matter. MartinD (talk) 13:01, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
- Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 15:41, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 00:35, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People
The chosen alternative is: File:A_man_carries_a_huge_hammerhead_through_the_streets_of_Mogadishu.jpg