Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Face of a Southern Yellowjacket Queen

Face of a Southern Yellowjacket Queen

 * Reason:Brilliant resolution, brilliant colour depth, amazing detail, unique to wikipedia and very useful on the Yellowjacket page
 * Articles this image appears in:Yellow Jacket
 * Creator:Flicker user |Opo Terser


 * Support as nominator 23:56, 17 June 2009 (UTC) -- 23:33, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Nominated by Labrat256. Note user has only 8 edits, 5 of which were creating this nom. --jjron (talk) 07:23, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose The out-of-focus leaf in the bottom left is very distracting and cuts off the antenna, detracting from EV. The (wasp's) right leg is also cut off.  Otherwise a great photo though - it's a shame the composition isn't better.  Time3000 (talk) 17:19, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Pause for a second and think about what would be involved in posing a wasp. I'm not saying it isn't a shame that the tip of the foot and antennae are slightly hidden, I'm just saying that there biological factors that might add to the difficulty of the shot. I wouldn't get this close to it. Sabine's Sunbird  talk  05:04, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Support - Yes, the leaf is blocking, but just a little. In the other hand, what an astonishing resolution and detail! This photo is not only good for the resolution and high EV, but also, I think, taking this kind of photo of a wasp could not be that easy. - Damërung  ...ÏìíÏ..._ Ξ_         .   --  07:21, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Likely the result of a focus stack. Must try reversing my 50mm without another lens. Noodle snacks (talk) 10:34, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Neutral (might oppose later) - I'm not sure what to think about this nomination. An amazing detail and sharpness, most probably the result of a careful focus satcking (the animal being dead or sleeping) together with a clumsy framing and cropping ruining an otherwise excellent picture. Was it the work of a specialist or a lucky shot from a beginner? Or maybe the original picture was cropped? I will not support the promotion as I find little excuse for those flaws. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:45, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose Certainly a high quality shot. But composition and limited EV keep this from being a support. Makeemlighter (talk) 22:08, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Striking, accomplished shot with stacks of EV. Check his Flickr page, this is no one-off fluke and I seriously doubt there's too much PP involved, just great lighting & technique. Nothing wrong with composition either. --mikaultalk 03:53, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Some minor shortcomings but details and wow make up for it IMO --Muhammad (talk) 07:34, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Support - omg, stunning. I assume the 'oppose' votes for a tiny fragment of leaf were just kidding. Stevage 08:08, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Support As mentioned above there are some minor flaws, but a great shot regardless --Fir0002 11:39, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Consensus seems clear. -- wadester 16  15:57, 25 June 2009 (UTC)