Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/OREOS!!!!!

OREOS!!!!!
Voting period ends on 30 Mar 2017  at 01:28:25 (UTC)
 * Reason:I think the title says it all :)
 * Articles in which this image appears:Oreo, Sandwich cookie, List of cookies
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Food and drink
 * Creator:Evan-Amos


 * Support as nominator – TomStar81 (Talk) 01:28, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:42, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose – too saturated and sugary. Bammesk (talk) 03:32, 20 March 2017 (UTC) . .  Support – but as a picture. Bammesk (talk) 03:36, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose – This image (or versions of it) has been in the infobox at Oreo for years. How does it now "add significant encyclopedic value" to the article? Underwhelming. Sca (talk) 15:02, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't quite understand the first argument. What does an image being nominated following years of stable usage (which surely indicates EV) have to do against it being FP-worthy? --Paul_012 (talk) 20:47, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * It is indeed no reason for an oppose, and indeed stability (especially for an easily photographs subject such as this) is actually a sign that an image is recognized as having good EV. Sca has, for almost three years now, applied his own criteria to judging images, and become confrontational when asked to stick to the criteria. I can't see him changing any time soon. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:33, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * In this usage, Mr. Crisco, anytime should be one word. – Sca (talk) 15:08, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Tell that to The Times and The Washington Post. Or, even better, use your time to read, take to heart, and learn to apply the FP criteria rather than waste time debating grammar when your behavior is questioned. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:03, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I concede that some sources identify anytime as an Americanism (dating from the 1920s), and as such it's apparently eschewed in Britain/UK, etc. However, I would point out that any time can convey the negative, as in "he didn't have any time to waste," whereas, per Webster, anytime soon means in the near future, as you intended – or as a certain U.S. politician intended Friday in commenting on the failed health-care bill. Sca (talk) 15:33, 25 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Weak oppose. I'd much rather prefer an image that showed some shadows, like File:Amplang from Kotabaru, South Kalimantan 2015-05-23 01.jpg. --Paul_012 (talk) 20:47, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Different photographer, different approach. Evan Amos has never used a shadow in the years that I've been enjoying his photography. I prefer to have at least some shadow in my own photographs (though I'm out of practice; I haven't done product photography since my son was born). Others, like Colin, may use a "floating" approach, or may have a reflection of the item (see Clothes iron) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:33, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Fair points, but to me floating Oreos still somehow feel stranger than floating video game consoles. Not sure why. --Paul_012 (talk) 13:16, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment - Some sense of scale would be nice, like File:Amplang from Kotabaru, South Kalimantan 2015-05-23 01.jpg, but it's not worth opposing over that, it's a fine picture otherwise. Mattximus (talk) 20:57, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * open the image and click this link, then lemme know if it helped :) TomStar81 (Talk) 22:25, 20 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Oppose Per other - Jobas (talk) 22:46, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Support, oh yes. Clear and candid. Brandmeistertalk  22:37, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * A candid cookie? Is that like a bluff biscuit? Sca (talk) 15:00, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

--Armbrust The Homunculus 06:32, 30 March 2017 (UTC)