Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Upland Sandpiper

Upland Sandpiper
Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2010 at 12:32:22 (UTC)
 * Reason:All the obvious checkmarks are there - high resolution, not overly manipulated shot in sharp focus under a free license. I think it's encyclopedic, and adds significantly to its article since the only other shot was a very low res pic where the bird was crowded out by grass. I also think he's rather an attractive little bird, and well captured.
 * Articles in which this image appears:Upland sandpiper
 * FP category for this image:Animals
 * Creator:johnath


 * Support as nominator --Johnath (talk) 12:32, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Support, nicely done. It may benefit from a crop (I'll leave that to people better at that sort of thing than me) but the focus is good, the pose/composition is nice, and this adds well to the article. At first I thought this may be a young one, but after looking at some other pictures, they all seem to have that petite look. J Milburn (talk) 13:13, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Prefer crop. J Milburn (talk) 11:27, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Support Nice work. Noodle snacks (talk) 00:18, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Support I like it, but I think some cropping around the sides and top wouldn't hurt, the background is blurred and not very important to the image other than just being nice green colors. --I′d※&lt;3※Ɵɲɛ (talk) 00:32, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I see J Milburn already beat me to that thought. --I′d※&lt;3※Ɵɲɛ (talk) 00:34, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep, cropping makes sense - I've added a cropped version and replaced the version in the article since, to my eye, this is unambiguously better. --Johnath (talk) 01:36, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm with you, I'm supporting the revised version more now, I love how bold the bird now looks and how the eye is drawn to it. --I′d※&lt;3※Ɵɲɛ (talk) 03:03, 4 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Support crop — raeky ( talk 03:31, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Support crop. Twilight chill  t   07:44, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Support crop Gut Monk (talk) 22:44, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Support crop.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.63.109.92 (talk) 16:38, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Support crop. Love the background colour and how it compliments the bird without overwhelming. Amphy (talk) 04:32, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the kind words - and for the support, everyone. First time through the process here, but so far so good. --Johnath (talk) 16:00, 5 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment Why isn't this in the William Bartram article?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:50, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I expect that with time, since Bartram was a noted illustrator, illustrations will be judged to be more relevant than photographs, even if this particular bird was effectively dedicated to him by Alexander Wilson (René Primevère Lesson is given credit for the actual genus name, so it seems the reference to Bartram was in non-canonical usage until 1831; note though that Wilson's death (1813) precedes Bartram's (1823) - assuming the latter was still lucid, he would seem to have been appreciative of the gesture). If you do add the image to the article, make sure you spell out why it's relevant. Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 21:19, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I assume your instructions on adding the imagee are to the nominator and not me.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:44, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Be bold. Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 11:46, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Or not. --jjron (talk) 16:34, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * In your case, presumably. Papa Lima Whiskey  (talk) 19:33, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think Tony needs any encouragement to be bold in placing images in articles. :-) --jjron (talk) 04:37, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

-- Jujutacular  T · C 13:10, 12 July 2010 (UTC)