Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Hurricane Wilma 21 oct 2005 1625Z.jpg/archive2

Hurricane Wilma Eye
Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2012 at 00:21:45 (UTC)
 * Reason:I submitted this image a few days ago; the nomination ended with one support. Hopefully I can get more votes this time and it will be promoted.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Hurricane Wilma
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena/Weather
 * Creator:Good kitty


 * Support as nominator --– TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 00:21, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Oppose. It's nice encyclopedicity and a decent shot.  But we have a lot of very similar looking pics of this kind featured already.TCO (Reviews needed) 06:46, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Don't take this the wrong way, but if it meets the criterion of a Featured Picture, shouldn't it be listed as such even if there are similar ones? – TropicalAnalystwx13 (talk) 19:55, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It's fine. Some people look at it as pass/fail. I think we are making a series of qualitative judgements (how much is a blemish a blemish), giving weight to pictures that contribute more, etc.  that's just the way, I call it.  Others can be different.  I mean if we had 10 of the same storm, would they all be FPs?  (even if technically good?)  Similarly, given the actual value of the pic is not that much (it is just "another hurricane) vice a picture of a specific person or building or animal where the visual illustrates detail characteristic of the subject.  I mean that storm was changing all the time.  And realistically having the photo is not illustrative in the sense of recognition.  Anyhow...you don't have to see it that way...but I do.TCO (Reviews needed) 20:25, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I do give you some credit for it being an important storm at least. Peace.TCO (Reviews needed) 20:26, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment This has come up time and time again, the ONLY criteria we need to look at is if this image contributes SIGNIFICANTLY to the article(s) it is in not if we have hurricane pictures already as FP. If we have FP's of this specific hurricane already then you have a valid point to oppose on those grounds, but if we don't have FP's of THIS SPECIFIC HURRICANE then it's NOT a valid oppose on those grounds. Otherwise you can equally say, we have to many car FP's so we don't need to promote any new cars, or we have to many birds so no need to promote anymore birds. The policy is we evaluate the picture for it's quality AND how it contributes to the article(s) it is in, not if we already have similar content. We ONLY look at similar FP's if the similar FP's are of the EXACT SAME THING AND used in the EXACT SAME ARTICLE(s). *sigh*. There is absolutely no reason why we couldn't have a featured picture for every single tropical storm that is notable enough to have an article here. Same reason is there is no reason why we can't have a FP for every single bird we have an article for, or every single building we have an article for, or every single person we have an article for... Extended too no reason why we can't have a FP for every single article we have. This isn't a picture gallery we're collecting, so what is already a FP or not has little concern. — raeky  t  13:42, 7 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Maybe, one thing I wonder thought is that at least a picture of a person or of a species is identifying. A picture of a storm is not.  The storm changes all the time.  And the storm looks the same from storm to storm.  So an illo serves less purpose.


 * Also, if all we care about is technical aspects, how do we motivate creation of the most needed pictures? How do we ensure what is put on the front page is interesting to readers? Maybe we could just hand out FPs to any technical well done photo, but reserve the POTD for photos that are not too much the same subject and give preference to the topics of more note?


 * Anyhow, I really am sensitive to only being a disruptor and how my votes get sidetracked away from the submission of the photographer. Am thinking about not participating any more.TCO (Reviews needed) 14:11, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The FP process we're participating now, has nothing to do with the front page. FP is NOT a front page thing. It's a side project to put featured content on the front page, not the purpose of identifying featured content. What does or doesn't go up as the FP of the day isn't something this process decides, and we promote usually far more per day than can be displayed so not all will show up there. You're welcome to participate but learn from the experiences when you derail votes. — raeky  t  09:46, 8 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak Oppose Without being able to recognize any of the landforms, I don't see how this image adds anything to the article. There are 3 other photographs of the hurricane in the article, 2 of which look very similar to this one. What does this image actually convey to the reader other than what a large hurricane looks like (which they already know from the other images)? Kaldari (talk) 06:35, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

--Makeemlighter (talk) 01:17, 10 January 2012 (UTC)