Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Elephant Beetle Megasoma elephas Male Side 2699px.jpg

Image:Elephant Beetle Megasoma elephas Male Side 2699px.jpg, not featured edit

Left Version, not featured edit

Info created, uploaded, and nominated by Ram-Man. 02:18, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Info An Elephant Beetle (Megasoma elephas) feeding on sugar cane in Costa Rica.
Support This is a special shot of a beautiful insect. -- Ram-Man 02:18, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MichaelMaggs 07:23, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral 50/50. Nice object, technically good but boring composition --Bergwolf 11:33, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Let's raise the bar. Boring composition --Bergwolf 22:17, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Makrofreak loves bugs. --Makro Freak ^talk 12:53, 30 June 2007 (UTC) I dont support interactive remixing. --Makro Freak 08:08, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- What do you mean? -- Ram-Man 11:38, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - I had that same with Alvesgaspar. Why improving pictures during a nomination? --Makro Freak ^talk 12:18, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - I didn't improve the picture during the nomination. Someone else added another version! The rules don't allow me to do anything about other nominations, so please don't hold it against me. I can't believe you'd withdraw your support for my picture just because someone else wants a different version. If you don't want the other versions, oppose them individually. -- Ram-Man 12:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - Suddenly i dont know which version is better. (Now) The moody original or the brighter one with less detail. Untill i found this out my vote remains like it is.--Makro Freak ^talk 16:21, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wiki mouse 18:14, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Joli mais terne. --J-Luc
Oppose Looks like a staged image--Mbz1 05:18, 1 July 2007 (UTC)Mbz1[reply]
Oppose - Agree with Bergwolf. I think it is the time to raise the "Flower & insect" FP bar a little. - Alvesgaspar 13:13, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I thought a simplistic composition was ideal. It's got an ideal non-distracting background. The foreground is great because it shows the insect well and shows a food that they eat. It's not like it's just any old boring stick. We have tons of insects on flowers, but nothing like this. It is not a flower which I suspect is the real reason it is found to be "boring". Not colorful enough. -- Ram-Man 13:25, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support--João Carvalho 14:01, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Composition works for me --MichaD | Michael Apel 21:04, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Question Is this bug dead? It looks kinda dead. Is it dead? Looks dead. --Digitaldreamer 21:29, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Nope. It's feeding slowly on the sugar cane. They're most active after dark, so they'll move much slower in the daytime when this picture was taken. -- Ram-Man 21:59, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support - very sharp and detailed beetle. --typhoonchaser 03:37, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, I just can't get over that initial impression of a dead bug. If it actually is alive, it's a very unfortunate posture. --Digitaldreamer 14:22, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Might be a shame if neither of these pictures go through to become an FP... --typhoonchaser 13:19, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The vote was split by the unfortunate introduction of a second version. Losing two or three support votes may kill its chances. Instead of voting for both pictures and "may the one with the most support votes win", people only vote for one and let the other one die. It's a shame, because those support votes were made under the impression that the picture was good enough for a FP. The picture didn't change just because another version was introduced, but somehow it's no longer good enough. The FP process is getting too wearisome. -- Ram-Man 16:46, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Wearisome? Why should every poll be straight for you, everytime. Thats democracy. --Makro Freak ^talk 21:03, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - You missed the point. There are 3 versions and people are not willing to support multiple versions and let the one with the most votes win. As a result, none of them are successful. When evaluated on its own merits, it would be successful. The problem isn't that the picture isn't good enough or that we need to raise the bar, the problem is the split vote. There are too many good photos that no one can agree on which one is best, so the result is none will be featured. Some people like this version, some like the one below, and you like the one you linked. This is rediculous. Under this system, I'll have to upload photos one at a time so my own photos don't compete with each other. If I nominate the one you link, chances are that it wouldn't be supported because other versions are preferred. This is wearisome and almost not worth the effort. -- Ram-Man 22:50, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jina Lee 17:06, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
OpposeI like this version more Lets raise the bar! --Makro Freak ^talk 21:03, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I nominated it for a FP, but I doubt it will be successful for the reasons stated above. Either you or I will be right. Time will tell, but of course by then it will be too late for this one that was really the best one of the three. -- Ram-Man 23:01, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:09, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right Version, not feartured edit

Comment Felt this badly needed a little PS work, so I've uploaded an edit --Fir0002 www 23:54, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MichaelMaggs 06:28, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support I prefer the original. The sugarcane in this version loses detail, but I suppose this will do. -- Ram-Man 11:39, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support // tsca [re] 20:35, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wiki mouse 17:39, 3 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oversaturated --Makro Freak 20:17, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral - the body looks brighter but the sugarcane looks a little too bright. --typhoonchaser 03:41, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The sugarcane loses too much detail and it looks a bit oversaturated. --Digon3 ^talk 15:24, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oversaturated --Digitaldreamer 14:18, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It does look dead--Mbz1 00:09, 10 July 2007 (UTC)Mbz1[reply]
Comment This is not my nomination, so can't technically withdraw, but it is my photograph and it has no chance of success, so I'd prefer it withdrawn. -- Ram-Man 11:32, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 21:07, 11 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]