Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Fish Cleaning Station

Fish Cleaning Station

 * Reason:Fascinating, underwater image taken in a wild and showing a really interesting, rarely photographed behavior. The image is very educational.
 * Proposed caption:A Dragon Wrasse, Novaculichthys taeniourus being cleaned by Rainbow Cleaner Wrasses, Labroides phthirophagus on a reef in Kona, Hawaii.You could see the both cleaners inside the gill of the dragon Wrasse.
 * Articles this image appears in:cleaning station,Wrasse
 * Creator:Mbz1


 * Support as nominator Mbz1 02:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Nice shot, educational as you say. However, unfortunately - the main subject is too small, the composition is lopsided (the fish at left spoil it). Cropping probably won't help, even at this size we see a slightly fuzzy Wrasse. --Janke | Talk 06:45, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Please notice that in my opinion the subject of the image is not only a cleaning action, but also a cleaning station itself. I've seen a cleaning action with only one fish being cleaned, but this one was really a cleaning station with many fishes lined up to get cleaned. So, cut fishes in the left (convict tangs) and a fish behind the corals, as well as the corals themselves are part of the subject. Maybe it will be a good idea to add that image [[Image:Cleaning station parot.jpg|64px]] as the other version of the cleaning station?--Mbz1 13:04, 21 September 2007 (UTC)Mbz1
 * Support. Composition is slightly off, but quality is good, especially given the shooting conditions - quality underwater shots aren't easy to get. As Janke says, the main subject is a little small in the image, but overall the value to me outweighs the concerns. Species identification of Novaculichthys taeniourus appears to be correct; a species ID on the cleaners would be good, too, I suspect Labroides dimidiatus, though they're a little fuzzy. BTW it's a great photo of Novaculichthys taeniourus as well, just a shame there's no article on it. --jjron 08:09, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I wonder if this wouldn't also be useful in cleaner fish. And also Bluestreak cleaner wrasse if that is indeed what the cleaners are. --jjron 08:49, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I just found out that the cleaners are Rainbow cleaner wrasse, Labroides phthirophagus, so I'm going to change the caption.--Mbz1 13:04, 21 September 2007 (UTC)Mbz1
 * Weak support. It's a nice photo certainly, and I like that the two wrasse are picking the gills, a behaviour that is remarkable given how vulnerable a fish's gills are to damage. So it shows the degree of trust involved quite well. But the image isn't as sharp as it might be, and oddly having two cleaner wrasse in identical but mirrored poses makes them look much less obvious. It takes a second to understand the image. If there's a similar picture with one wrasse or the two wrasse spread out more unevenly, I think I'd prefer that image. Neale Monks 13:28, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Edit -- For what it's worth, I like image 2 rather more. Less confusing, and the host fish has an interesting expression on its face. Neale Monks 16:10, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose Doesn't look right. 8thstar 16:45, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I wish I knew what does not look right and how many fish cleaning stations user 8thstar have seen before he saw the nominated image. Maybe I should have asked user  8thstar to be a litlle bit more specific and explain what does not look right? Well, I guess I just let go on it. The only thing I'd like to add: I do consider user Janke oppose a valid one (I disagree with it, but I understand the user concern). I consider the user  8thstar  oppose invalid one. --Mbz1 16:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC)Mbz1
 * Support, I thought it was just a regular picture of a fish at first, I didn't read the nom lol 8thstar 20:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I feel an appropriate crop of the second image would be more likely to succeed. I feel this scene is not rare enough for us to lower our standards. 82.71.48.158 17:50, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment A tilt would also be beneficial, I think. I already tried with the first image, but then the other fish were (of course) tilted. – sgeureka t•c 20:00, 21 September 2007 (UTC)


 * I did the crop of the second image, still the picture was taken underwater (strong currents) with 2 megapixels point and shot camera and the quality of the crop could be not enough for FP picture. It is for you to decide, but I'm glad that the image evoke some interest. I'm not very good with photo shop, so, if somebody wants to work on the images, please, go ahead.Thanks.--Mbz1 20:55, 21 September 2007 (UTC)Mbz1
 * Oppose It's certainly very illustrative of a cleaning station, but I don't think it's technically impressive enough.  I'd also like to mention that imagery of cleaning stations is not uncommon.  As an undergraduate, I took some Super8 video of cleaning stations, and was dissapointed that my images weren't nearly as good as the fantastic stills the dive shop had posted on their walls.  Any scuba diving tourist in a tropical coral reef with an excellent underwater camera (an oddly common occurance, as people who have money like to do things like dive in the tropics) can, and often does, take an images of cleaning stations.  I LOVE that we can actually see the gills in both of these images, but it doesn't override the technical considerations, and it is certainly a repeatable shot.  Enuja  (talk) 22:37, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Enuja. Cacophony 07:21, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose The quality isnt good enough of a subject/ scence that isnt exactly rare --  Chil dzy  ¤  Ta lk  10:10, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I still insist that 2 cleaners (even one cleaner) photographed inside a fish's gill is relatively rare picture (it probably not a rare scene, but very few people ever seen it and even fewer took a picture of it and the only one uploaded it to Wikipedia with a free licence) lol.  Still I'd like to thank everybody for their votes no matter "support" or "oppose" ones.--Mbz1 12:39, 22 September 2007 (UTC)Mbz1
 * Support any, preference for the third image as the cropping makes it the easiest to see what's going on. Spikebrennan 13:27, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose original, oppose image 2: Content is pretty good, but the first image is technically not good enough. The second one isn't apparently isn't that unique, and given the poor quality, not good enough for FP status. -- snowolf D4  (  talk  /  @   ) 12:11, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your vote,Snowolfd4, and for adding the word "apparently" in the discraibing the uniqueness of the image. The nominated images are not unique, but they are rare and they are underwater. In my opinion very few people ever heard about fish cleaning station leave alone ever seen it. After all how many people are diving in tropical oceans? I'm sure, some of the ones, who did see it, had no idea what they were looking at. That's why in my opinion the image should get FP status for educational purposes, if for nothing else. Still I understand opposers concern about the quality of the image. Thank you all for your votes.--Mbz1 16:42, 26 September 2007 (UTC)Mbz1

MER-C 08:43, 28 September 2007 (UTC)