Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Papilio ulysses

Papilio ulysses
Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2012 at 12:05:44 (UTC)
 * Reason:Good EV, high quality
 * Articles in which this image appears:Papilio ulysses
 * FP category for this image:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
 * Creator:Michael Gäbler


 * Support as nominator --Tomer T (talk) 12:05, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment: as this is illustrating the species article, I find it a bit distracting to have copulating adults. However I don't know anything about the subject area, is there EV in seeing this particular species copulating? Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 19:56, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I would also like to know the answer to that question before casting a vote. -- WingtipvorteX  PTT   ∅  21:26, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
 * A photo of the copulating pair is good to highlight the difference between the male and female including the size difference. For butterflies, most look similar but the female will be bigger and brighter/duller in colors. -- Jkadavoor (talk) 08:45, 23 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Here I'm not very happy with the tight crop on left and the part of leaf below. -- Jkadavoor (talk) 08:45, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Support Good details and clarity. Brandmeistertalk  11:22, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Support. I don't see the issue with showing them mating. It's part of their behaviour, unique or otherwise. &#208;iliff    &#171;&#187;  (Talk)  09:24, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak Support. EV is there, showing the difference between male and female, as Jkadavoor explained. The tight crop is not a good situation. Picture is good otherwise. -- WingtipvorteX  PTT   ∅  15:32, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Additional Comment the caption should state which is the male and which is the female, otherwise an uninformed reader won't immediately see the EV. -- WingtipvorteX  PTT   ∅  15:37, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The big one above is the female. Note the coupling too :) -- Jkadavoor (talk) 07:27, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The caption in the article should explain which is which, as the image needs to contribute in that fashion in the article in fact as well as on paper. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 19:01, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I disagree with you there, I think it should also be in the image description. -- WingtipvorteX  PTT   ∅  17:57, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, my point was that it is not immediately noticeable, so the caption might help in the identification. -- WingtipvorteX  PTT   ∅  17:57, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Edited the article and file description and informed the author about this who is not a regular here. -- Jkadavoor (talk) 04:10, 27 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Support Jkadavoor (talk) 04:10, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Support -- George Chernilevsky  talk 06:02, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Support as creator --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:31, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

--Julia\talk 10:00, 9 September 2012 (UTC)