Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Comma (2nd nomination)

Comma (2nd nomination)
Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2011 at 06:53:30 (UTC)
 * Reason:Seems like FP had a lapse in activity for a while, and this nomination (originally nominated by User:Jujutacular) slipped through the cracks with no opposes, but unfortunately only 4 supports. I am re-nominating (with the original closer's blessing) because I definitely would have been the 5th support if I were around: fantastic EV and very good quality. (original nomination)
 * Articles in which this image appears:Polygonia c-album
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
 * Creator:Quartl


 * Support as nominator -- Running On Brains (talk) 06:53, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak support I'm less convinced of high EV but the quality is great.  Pine (GreenPine)  t 07:07, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak support. Love the angle of this shot, but unsure if this is really an important butterfly.TCO (reviews needed)  08:10, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Why would it have to be an important butterfly? J Milburn (talk) 09:58, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * If we are going on the front page in purely a queue-based system than I advocate some form of affirmative action for photos where the over-represented subjects have higher hurdles. If the species is very non-notable, and the image only illustrates that one species, and we have a lot of butterflies in general, then that reduces EV to me.  If it is just gold star, but not about the front page queue, then I agree this image is great as a descriptional ID photo (well except you can't see the comma, but still this is the part most people will see).  I guess more notable article, more EV.TCO (reviews needed)  13:57, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I've said this before, and I'll likely have to try and make this point again, but, the front page is not FPC's issue. POTD is a separate project. Opposing, or supporting, an image because you think it deserves to be in the queue before or after another kind of image is not a valid criteria to evaluate the image on. If you think that there should be an alternative system for selecting Today's Featured Picture talk about it with Howcheng at POTD. Cowtowner (talk) 02:02, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Consider it notability then.  I think there is more EV in a photo of the moon landing than of  (what I got when I clicked random article).  A "vital article" has more EV than a stub on something with 20 views per day. you don't get a photography pulizer for something non-notable.  (I know many people disagree with me on this...but many people agree.  Leave it as a point of view.)TCO (reviews needed)  02:15, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Support. EV and quality seem to be of FP level. J Milburn (talk) 09:58, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Support as before.  Jujutacular  talk 12:47, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Support. Cowtowner (talk) 02:02, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Support. Hariya1234 (talk) 06:58, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment(s) First of all, thank you for nominating and considering one of my images here. I just found this page per accident. Let me remark a few things on the notability of the pictured species:
 * As mentioned in the original nomination, the hyphen in the latin name is very unusual. Actually, all diacritics are forbidden in the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, with just one exception which applies here. When a single latin letter describing a feature of the taxon is joined with some further description, both have to be separated with a hyphen (Article 32.5.2.4.3). In this case c-album refers to the "white c" visible on the underside of the wings. Besides this species there are a few more cases where this exception applies (two more in the genus Polygonia), but there are very few.
 * The Comma is one of a select group of butterflies called Anglewings which are characterized by their jagged wings which together with their cryptic underwing coloring aid their concealment especially in winter. Actually, the specimen shown in the picture is of the summer generation (forma hutchinsoni) which show brighter colors and a less jagged outline than the hibernating generation.
 * It is one of the species profiting from climate change and has been extending its range northwards in the last decades. However, the northern boundary of its distribution fluctuates strongly, as has been observed in Britain.
 * There are many more notable facts about this butterfly, if you are interested just read the featured article in the Dutch Wikipedia. This probably applies to all species once enough is known about them. Each and every one is special in its own way, so you shouldn't worry too much about their non-notability. The article here could be improved, though.
 * Btw., is there a reason why there are actually two articles (Comma (butterfly) and Polygonia c-album) on the same species here?
 * Best wishes, --Quartl (talk) 20:09, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * How about staying en-Wiki and editing here? Our gain and Holland's loss.TCO (reviews needed)  20:17, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not Dutch, so no loss for them ;-). --Quartl (talk) 20:33, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Good point about the duplicate article. The Comma (butterfly) article was only created less than two months ago, but strangely the creator (who at a quick look appears to be a regular editor of these types of articles) simply duplicated the content of the Polygonia c-album article with no explanation as to why. He clearly knew about the existing article, so I don't get why he'd knowingly create a duplicate. I've done a merge and redirect on the Comma article. --jjron (talk) 13:58, 20 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose wrong focusing --kaʁstn 22:17, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak Support I think it just about meets the 8 criteria. TehGrauniad (talk) 00:22, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 04:33, 28 July 2011 (UTC)