Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Antonio Dixon

Antonio Dixon
Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2011 at 02:01:56 (UTC)
 * Reason:Excellent image, great portrayal of the game of American football.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Antonio Dixon, 2010 Philadelphia Eagles season, History of the Philadelphia Eagles, List of Philadelphia Eagles players, Chris Johnson (running back)
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Sport
 * Creator:Philadelphia Eagles


 * Support as nominator -- Eagles   24/7  (C)  02:01, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose I find this photo confusing and I disagree that it's a good portrayal of American football. It might work as one image among many portraying the game. For a single image, I think Wikipedia can do better.  Pine (was GreenPine)  talk 07:14, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose Sorry, but I have to agree with GreenPine, the image is confusing. Please don't be discouraged, come back and nominate another image as often as you like. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 11:25, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I actually really like this picture. It's just not clear enough who the people are and what's going on. Makeemlighter (talk) 01:52, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Is that in regards to the caption?  Eagles   24/7  (C)  02:18, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
 * No, the caption is good. I just meant that the picture is a little busy to be a clear depiction of the athletes. Like I said, I really like the picture; it's just not the best image for an encyclopedia. Makeemlighter (talk) 22:36, 12 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Support Comment. I'm a bit unsure of some of the reasons for opposing here. Yes, it might not be clear immediately what is going on, but it doesn't take long to realise that the big guy in green is trying to tackle the little guy in blue, whilst another guy in blue is trying to stop him. (This is my feeble understanding from the other side of the pond, having only watched the superbowl now and again). In terms of a depiction of american football, well of course it's only one part of it, but no single image could convey all of the game, so I don't think that is a problem. What it does convey (to me at least) is the frenetic nature of the game; the physicality, particularly the size difference between defensive and running players; and a particular play (running through the scrimmage). For an action shot it looks very sharp, but I'm not an expert on that sort of thing. Maybe it would benefit from a crop of the player on the right, but then again that shows that he's trying to run through the gaps between players. All in all I think the EV is high and quality is high. Polequant (talk) 11:28, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Having read the other comments again, I can see the point that the current use of the photo is not all that great. I still think it is a good image, but its quality is in showing a particular play. Maybe if it was on a page on american football strategy, or one where the positions are described it would have more impact and satisfies criteria 5. Polequant (talk) 11:25, 11 August 2011 (UTC)


 * No, it isn't a good portrayal of American football, but it's not being presented as a high EV image for American football. The nominator is saying it's a good picture for a few articles about one particular team, the Philadelphia Eagles so I'm not concerned with that at all.
 * OK, so in my not-very-knowledgeable-about-photographic-qualities opinion, it's nice and sharp and crisp and has nice colors and everything, but I'm just not feeling it for the articles it appears in. For the lead image of Antonio Dixon it's okay-ish. We can't see his face, but at least it shows him doing what it is he's notable for. As the lead image in Chris Johnson (running back), it's pretty poor. If he's the one with the ball, all we get to see of him is his right side and back as he runs away from the camera. In History of the Philadelphia Eagles it's being used as decoration, as neither Dixon nor the game against Tennessee Titans is mentioned inline. In 2010 Philadelphia Eagles season, neither the tackle or Dixon is mentioned in the section, and the image is placed so far away from the relevant section that it loses all impact. So, it's possible that it's of high technical standard, but I feel it misses the mark on WP:FP? criteria 3b and 5, and that's why I'm opposing. Matthewedwards : Chat  20:16, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 02:10, 14 August 2011 (UTC)