Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Mahuri.svg

Anime character

 * Reason:A free, user-created typical anime character is hard to find. Plus, it's in SVG format. It has also attained Feature status in both Wikimedia Commons and Spanish Wikipedia, plus considered a Quality Image in Wikimedia Commons.
 * Articles this image appears in:Anime
 * Creator:Niabot from the German Wikipedia


 * Support as nominator  howcheng  {chat} 05:18, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Cacophony (talk) 06:33, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Conditional support, looks like a good depiction of an anime character, made far better by the fact it is SVG, but I would like to hear the opinions of someone who is a little more familiar with anime than me as to how well it actually does depict an anime character. J Milburn (talk) 12:40, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * As someone who's watched a fair bit of anime I can say with some confidence gradually fading confidence that the image is a good representation of an archetypal female "amine-style" character and I wouldn't be suprised to see a character matching the image in any number of anime series. Guest9999 (talk) 14:19, 22 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Support Not that I'm an anime expert (far from it), but this definitely is a good representation of the style. Well done. faithless   (speak)  19:49, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Sure. Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday (talk) 20:15, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The tree and window in the background look like clip-art. Also I don't like the pattern on her coat, and suspect that it's so overly geometric because it's unnecessarily SVG. There's a lot of very high quality anime drawings out there, and this one's freeness and SVGness doesn't give it a free pass. D\=&lt; (talk) 04:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Support Great Picture. Something new for Wikipedia's featured pictures. Rj1020 (talk) 05:00, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I must disagree with the nominator -- A free, user-created typical anime character is NOT hard to find.  Nothing special about this one.  Nicely polished up though.  99boy (talk) 05:08, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The nominator's reason for nominating this seems a bit poor, as many others have said there are many free anime illustrations out there. However, just because the image is not unique in that respect doesn't mean it isn't a very good representative image.  §  I'm unsure of what Froth means by the geometric pattern on her coat; it looks as though it's solid red with folds/ripples in it.  (My) firefox's SVG renderer butchers the image but it looks nice in Inkscape or with WP's renderer.  -- atropos235 ✄ (blah blah, my past) 19:14, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Support -- Laitche (talk) 19:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Nothing special -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:58, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The eyebrows are shown on top of the hair. Is this normal for Anime? Mahahahaneapneap (talk) 00:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I think it varies, often the hair over the face/eyebrows is translucent so that the detail beneith can be seen. I have just noticed the way the hair cuts off above the right eye - I'm pretty sure that's not normal, although my knowledge is far from comprehensive. Guest9999 (talk) 00:45, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I've seen it fairly often. It depends on whether they draw the eyes on top last I guess. D\=&lt; (talk) 04:13, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the correction. Guest9999 (talk) 16:09, 25 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose Nice, but not FP; also a very strange-looking posture: neck and spine don't line up... --Janke | Talk 09:30, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Support very well made generic representation of a genre. --293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 04:56, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose per :D\=< and Janke. ---Yamanbaiia(free hugs!) 20:38, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yess.. score one! D\=&lt; (talk) 11:24, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose Agree with :D\=<. This is nothing particularly outstanding.Lmaowitzer (talk) 09:56, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Voting Compromised!! http://zip.4chan.org/a/res/10533685.html --293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 10:19, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Huh? Please explain... --jjron (talk) 13:50, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * That's a 404 now.  howcheng  {chat} 16:26, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Seesm 4chans mods were quick to delete that thread. Thought it did have alot of....."questionable concerns" about the pic above. --293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 10:46, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Oh, so much better than poor old wikipe-tan. It looks pretty skillfully done, the only thing that detracts is that the blur filters don't render properly for me in full-size. Also, the eyes don't seem to have the white highlights in the thumbnail size. I don't know much about this style of art, but it looks like a good example to me. I might support if rendering problems were fixed. Jeff Dahl (Talk • contribs) 02:16, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

MER-C 08:40, 31 March 2008 (UTC)