Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Asaro Mud Man Kabiufa PNG.jpg

File:Asaro Mud Man Kabiufa PNG.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2012 at 14:47:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by User:JialiangGao - nominated by --Andrew J.Kurbiko (talk) 20:55, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Andrew J.Kurbiko (talk) 20:53, 26 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The face is too dark for me--Miguel Bugallo 01:36, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Rasism... ;D —kallerna™ 11:20, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment You could give your opinion instead of this kind of comment not photography-oriented, please.--Telemaque MySon (talk) 15:51, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You probably misunderstood him. The area of the eyes is indeed dark and lacks details, as well as the cheeks. Tomer T (talk) 16:26, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Tomer; only language problem. Jkadavoor (talk) 06:39, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I can't understand your words. I prefer not to vote. Sorry and thanks; but not QI to me--Miguel Bugallo 22:21, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to Jkadavoor. Now I can understand. The problem is the translation: In Spanish, Galician or Portuguesh, there are two verbs ("ser" and "estar"), but in English only one (to be). If I translate with a automatic translator "la cara está oscura" (= the face is underexposed), the translation can be "the face is dark" (="la cara es oscura", but also ="la cara está oscura"). On the other hand, "oscura", in spanish or galician language, is a shade of a color, never the name of a race. The hair or the skin can be "oscuros" (=dark) regardless of race. Sorry--Miguel Bugallo 21:51, 30 May 2012 (UTC).[reply]

The accusation is too strong for me. Without dialogue, Commons does not compensate me--Miguel Bugallo 22:03, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support To me the image is ok in all aspect of portrait photography. There is a glance, an attitude, genuine taken. The object carried also add a contribution for supporting the featurable aspect. --Telemaque MySon (talk) 15:51, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support  Richard  [®]  23:17, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jkadavoor (talk) 06:39, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support cool. like the contrast between the person's face to the mask. Zivya (talk) 11:27, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Almost too dark around the eyes, but great expression. --Avenue (talk) 12:53, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 17:18, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 19:52, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yann (talk) 20:01, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
OpposeNot well focused IMO. The focus seems on the hair and beard (sharp), but not on the face itself (unsharp). IMO, again.--Jebulon (talk) 08:25, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support As Zivya. --Vassil (talk) 17:26, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Jebulon, moreover the head seems a bit underexposed. Sorry, it's not FP for me. --PierreSelim (talk) 07:08, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:12, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People