Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Panther chameleon (Furcifer pardalis) male Montagne d’Ambre 2.jpg

File:Panther chameleon (Furcifer pardalis) male Montagne d’Ambre 2.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2019 at 05:04:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
Info created and uploaded by Charlesjsharp - nominated by Boothsift -- Booth sift 05:04, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Booth sift 05:04, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support, but it should be noted that File:Panther chameleon (Furcifer pardalis) male Nosy Be.jpg (more colorful) is already an FP and File:Panther chameleon (Furcifer pardalis) male Montagne d’Ambre 3.jpg (not as sharp) was not promoted to FP. Also, I believe I recall correctly that there was a different species of chameleon with a photo with a curled-up tail like this one that was promoted. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:44, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support but I agree with Ikan that we should keep an eye on the number of similar photos, even those of different species. The first effect is that the bar is raised for such images, as we have seen with church interiors.--Peulle (talk) 09:01, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Eatcha (talk) 09:40, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose While the animal is clear and sharp, the overall composition is somewhere between "deer in headlights" and "argh, you caught me, get that third degree spotlight out of my face". I feel for the poor chameleon. --Cart (talk) 11:14, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose Basically per Cart, the leaves in the background where a shadow is cast are distracting as well. I'd clone them out. – Lucas 16:33, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support: --СССР (talk) 02:01, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support:Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:56, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 08:46, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:29, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cart and Lucas. Daniel Case (talk) 20:24, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Very interesting colors and subject, but the composition seems plain. --Pine (✉) 21:06, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry Charles, it’s a wonderful photo but I don’t see the need for it to be featured when we already have a very good FP of the same species. If we had a male and a female I’d be open to supporting both, but this is another male, the same as the other one. (Before anyone asks, I’m aware there’s plenty of examples on Commons where two similar pictures have both been made FP, but I don’t think that’s the way it should work. FP should be about rewarding the best output in a given scope, and this image isn’t different enough from the other one, and is worse in some ways as Lucas points out) Cmao20 (talk) 22:48, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I wasn't going to oppose it, but that's why I didn't nominate it Cmao20! Charles (talk) 07:08, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed, Charles, and I also saw that you didn’t vote for it yourself. My apology was purely to you as the author of the picture, not the nominator of course. Cmao20 (talk) 12:22, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Per the opposes. Maybe this will get a renomination in the future--Booth sift 05:21, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:11, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]