Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Dead man's fingers

Dead man's fingers
Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2012 at 18:01:15 (UTC)
 * Reason:Good quality and EV
 * Articles in which this image appears:Xylaria polymorpha
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Fungi
 * Creator:Michael Gäbler


 * Support as nominator --Tomer T (talk) 18:01, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose I'd prefer the other pic in the article except that it has focus problems, so I oppose both. Pine✉ 19:47, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Support Great quality. Before even reading the title, I immediately thought "Dead man's fingers" upon looking at the picture. Very good illustration of the subject. -- WingtipvorteX  PTT   ∅  19:52, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Per J Milburn's comments below (atypical specimen, atypical habitat), I am changing my vote to Oppose. -- WingtipvorteX  PTT   ∅  22:16, 20 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Support Jkadavoor (talk) 05:35, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose. It's no secret that I love fungi, but this is not a good illustration for this article, for the following reasons: Firstly, there is very little by way of size reference. Secondly, the colouration and shape of this specimen is very atypical; this just doesn't look like Xylaria polymorpha. From oldest to youngest (yanked from the first page of results from Mushroom Observer) I'd expect them to look like this, this, this or this. The fact that this specimen looks atypical (if it is not completely misidentified) is backed up by the article and a field guide I've just pulled off my shelf. Further, I do not like the vibrant green background for a dark fungus typically found on rotting logs or detritus-rich soil. That's almost misleading- like photographing a seal on grass. This is a common species (and one I've photographed myself- much more tyical specimens on a much more typical background, though somewhat younger) and so I'd want to see a much stronger photo for featured status, and, frankly, if I was to rewrite the article (which I'll look into- it needs some love) I would be removing this picture. Sorry. J Milburn (talk) 17:03, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the expert (or very knowledgeable enthusiast, your choice :p ) views. Makes a lot of sense. In this case, the other pic in the article is a better illustration, although a poorer picture.-- WingtipvorteX  PTT   ∅  22:16, 20 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Withdrawing my support per J Milburn. This nomination was opposed by the subject expert Citron at Commons too although he didn't question the ID. So I think this is the super macro of the top part of the specimen as the contributor explained in the file description. A picture of a full specimen with information on the environment of this fungus and how it grows may be more suitable for the info-box (per Citron). Jkadavoor (talk) 05:20, 21 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Oppose Quite an impressive breakdown Milburn. Dusty 777 17:09, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Withdraw per J. Tomer T (talk) 18:07, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 23:58, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn by nominator. Makeemlighter (talk) 23:58, 21 September 2012 (UTC)