Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Natural Love.jpg

Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2009 at 19:36:01

Info created by Calum.redhead - uploaded by Calum.redhead - nominated by Calum.redhead -- Calum.redhead (talk) 19:36, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Calum.redhead (talk) 19:36, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Info - You should indicate the species, otherwise the chances of success are almost nul -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:03, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Info Unaware of species becuase I simply took this photograph of a flower that was growing in my garden. Would love some help from anyone to find out what type of flower it is. --Calum.redhead (talk) 20:23, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For now. No identification, poor - respectively no image description. Geo location would be great. Here is a example of a good/ideal image description, regards --Richard Bartz (talk) 13:05, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Is Geo information really necessary for a shot like this? I mean it does not add that much value to a close up flower. Amada44 (talk) 17:38, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Where's info? —kallerna™ 15:05, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Info Info and license added. Yet to find species. Request FPX removal. --Calum.redhead (talk) 14:46, 8 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, the species is not identified and there is no licensing information. MER-C 08:33, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Info it is Dicentra sp. I've got answer here [1]. It looks like Dicentra spectabilis
Support Basik07 (talk) 01:07, 11 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. --Karel (talk) 14:56, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]