Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Gelabi

Jelabi

 * Reason:Good quality image showing Jelabi, an Indian food
 * Articles this image appears in:Jalebi
 * Creator:Original uploader was Haroldandkumar at en.wikipedia


 * Support as nominator  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 22:54, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Oppose Way too blurry, very noisy, and the flash is awful. And again, it is not an FP worthy subject. Juliancolton The storm still blows...  22:56, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Can you please tell me what you point out by saying "blurry" and "noisy"?  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 22:57, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Blurry means the image is blurry. Noisy means it is grainy, or there are spots on the camara's lense, or something similar. The word Noise implys unwanted or excess'. Juliancolton The storm still blows...  23:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * "Noisy" never means there are spots on the camera's lens. Nor does "noisy" imply "excess," though for FPC purposes it is undesireable. Dust or spots on a camera lens are much too far outside either focal plane to show up as such in the photo.  "Noise" is non-image data, typically, a characteristic side-effect of many image sensors. That said, I agree this image is flawed and not FP-worthy.  -- Moondigger (talk) 00:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I am sorry. I can not call myself an expert at imagery, and you know better than I do what the term implys. Juliancolton The storm still blows...  00:20, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * How you are saying this image blurry?  Otolemur crassicaudatus  (talk) 23:02, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Its hard to explain. If you look at the image, it is "blurry" around the edges mostly. I don't know how else to explain. Juliancolton The storm still blows...  23:30, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I thought you were making a DOF statement, refering to the fact that the subject isn't all in sharp focus.


 * Oppose I could go on, but the worst part is the amount of flash reflection.D-rew (talk) 23:42, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose on technical grounds. Oversaturated, blown highlights, etc. -- Moondigger (talk) 00:10, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Óppose- 19 failing nominations should be a clue here. Please stop nominating things until you understand the criteria. It is pretty clear that you don't at the moment. pschemp | talk 00:38, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose - poor composition, obtrusive flash; not of a high technical standard. TSP (talk) 02:17, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Moondigger. Cacophony (talk) 05:57, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Close no chance of promotion. Muhammad (talk) 06:38, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose per all above. Please please please browse through some of the current feature pictures.  Try to get a sense of their clarity, artistry, and encyclopedic relevance.  --Bridgecross (talk) 17:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Close As per speedy above Booksworm Sprechen-sie Koala? 20:29, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose per above. —αἰτίας •'discussion'• 22:31, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Close As per speedy above. Dengero (talk) 22:38, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose D\=&lt; (talk) 01:19, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC)