Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Lomatium

Lomatium parryi

 * Reason:Acceptable DOF, high quality macro, and distinguishable foreground.
 * Articles this image appears in:Lomatium, Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area, Flower
 * Creator:ZooFari


 * Support as nominator -- Zoo Fari  23:28, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. Durova Charge! 00:37, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak support - could benefit from a little sharpening. Stevage 00:39, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: this is actually Lomatium parryi not Lomatium bicolor, which doesn't occur in southern Nevada. Stan (talk) 14:19, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. I did further research and it appears to be that you are right. Just in case, I communicated with a tourist and requested varification. As soon as I get a reply, I will add it as a source.  Zoo Fari  22:55, 27 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Support Per nom. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 15:16, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Support Per nom - but I must say that it does have the 'wow factor' about it. - Fastily (talk) 07:09, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. It's a little concerning that supports are still rolling in despite the apparently valid doubts on species ID. I'd probably suggest this should be suspended until a confirmation on the species occurs (and I'm not sure "a tourist" is a reputable source for this). --jjron (talk) 07:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Species ID Confirmed by RRCNCA. Also mentioned that this umbel is still producing flowers, as it makes sense since I took the image early spring.  Zoo Fari  23:09, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Support--Avala (talk) 13:23, 5 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Support. Excellent quality.  Beautiful picture.   Spinach Dip  21:09, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Seriously, did anyone review this one at full size? If you did, you would see that it's full of JPEG artifacts, which were made worse/more apparent by the edits (also not mentioned here). MER-C 08:27, 12 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Back to the FPC page, this is a clear promotion to me -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:18, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Worth noting that the current file version and the one at the time of nomination are different, so the votes above don't really count. Noodle snacks (talk) 11:32, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Would you like to help adding the current version to the nomination? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:38, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Take a look at the file revision history. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/4/42/20090314030214!Lomatium_parryi.jpg was the file version at the time of closing. The file revision that MER-C closed was not the version that everyone voted on, going by the dates above. Noodle snacks (talk) 11:45, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose and Speedy Close Technical quality is far below standard, MER-C's original closure was correct in the circumstances IMO --Fir0002 14:05, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Images shouldn't be reviewed at full sizes only. Downsampled to around 1500px, are the artefacts still visible? If not then the picture shouldn't be opposed. --Muhammad (talk) 16:30, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose what Fir said. Not that it makes it ineligible, but this is a VP now, so it's not like ZooFari's feelings are hurt or anything. wadester16 | Talk→ 19:07, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - Relisting this picture was a mild and civilized way of dealing with a gross closing mistake. After this agressive striking action, the question is: shall we continue with the poll or just promote the picture, as it should have been done before? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:56, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Stop the presses. Strongly object to the strikethrough of my previous support. That action (as well as, probably, other strikethroughs) was taken without permission or notification and creates a false and prejudicial impression of massive withdrawal of support.  This present FPC is therefore tainted and invalid.  Please do not make a bad situation worse by creating further problems in what is already a procedural nightmare.  Durova Charge! 20:50, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Although I still have concerns that unauthorized strikethroughs prejudiced this relisting, the removals are appreciated; thank you. Durova Charge! 23:05, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Fir. --jjron (talk) 03:59, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

The behaviour of do the original votes count yes-no-yes-no has ruined any chance of this having a fair run anymore. Per talk page, provisionally promoting per original votes, but listing as a delist nom. --Shoemaker&#39;s Holiday (talk) 15:51, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Please play fair. wadester16 | Talk→ 16:53, 25 May 2009 (UTC)