Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Young hedgehog.jpg

File:Young hedgehog.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period ends on 13 Oct 2009 at 04:39:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created, uploaded and nominated by User:Tony Wills -- Tony Wills (talk) 04:39, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Info Ok, it's not another bird, but it will grow up to like eating bird eggs if it can ever find any. Young and cute, and innocent enough to be out in broad daylight. --Tony Wills (talk) 04:39, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tony Wills (talk) 04:39, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 09:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Mbz1 (talk) 13:08, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Darius Baužys ^{→ talk} 14:10, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:37, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Bad quality, photos of same subject with better quality have been declined. —kallerna™ 19:54, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry Juvenile_Erinaceus_europaeus_kallerna.JPG, Siilipentu_kallerna.JPG, Erinaceus_europaeus_3.JPG got declined, but perhaps the composition here is better? --Tony Wills (talk) 22:20, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support I absolutely agree with Tony Wills. Jacopo Werther (talk) 22:27, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Im sorry but the composition is not there for me. Too centered and not enough space around. There is also the distracting grass in the foreground, especially the out-of-focus one spoils it for me. And the cute little nose is not fully shown. --Korall (talk) 23:37, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He is pushing his way through the grass, and snuffling long the ground - I like to see something happening in my photos rather than simple profile shots etc - I'm not sure whether I'd remove the grass even if I could :-). Again I wasn't aiming for centred, but to get the eye near an intersection when divided into thirds (see image note lines), perhaps your eye is more naturally drawn to the cute nose? --Tony Wills (talk) 00:18, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Lacks crispyness and the colours in the background look washed out. --NEUROtiker ^⇌ 06:10, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support, even if just for its cuteness Airwolf (talk) 08:04, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree this is a better picture than those you mentioned in your reply to kallerna, but still I don't consider this to be FP-material. -- Petritap (talk) 11:20, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good composition, acceptable technical elements, cute pose, would make a nice FP. ++Lar: t/c 14:10, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aqwis (talk) 18:31, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 20:09, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Petritap.--Paris 16 (talk) 11:18, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As Kallerna. --Karel (talk) 20:38, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't mind the centered composition or the distance from the subject, but the grass in front is annoying. /Daniel78 (talk) 21:26, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not bad but no wow. MadGeographer (talk) 18:46, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albertus teolog (talk) 13:07, 8 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support Deserves FP as the picture is just perfect and besides, it's cute! Ter890 (talk) 11:40, 10 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't agree with Kallerna, but i vote oppose cause of grass in front of subject D kuba (talk) 20:08, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 9 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 10:23, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]