Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Whipcord Cobra Lily.jpg

Whipcord Cobra Lily

Original - Whipcord Cobra Lily Arisaema tortuosum

Reason: To my current knowledge, picture of this species is not available on wikipedia.
Articles this image appears in: ~~No article in this name is created~~ Arisaema tortuosum, Arisaema
Creator: Aniruddha Raste

Support as nominator --Aniruddha.Raste (talk) 04:38, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It should be in an article. Regardless, The plant is out of focus an needs some sharpening. The composition isn't hot either; the carnivore is obscured, decreasing the encyclopedic value. There are thousands of similar carnivorous plants, but this one is missing its main identification features. A photo showing the entire plant would be a better target. Zoo Fari 04:48, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Info --Aniruddha.Raste As far as my knowledge goes this plant is not a carnivore. —Preceding undated comment added 07:35, 22 July 2009 (UTC).[reply]
- Ah, well it looked like it but I realized it wasn't a nepenthes. Zoo Fari 17:45, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy close not in an article. MER-C 08:16, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lacks the sharp focus required for a featured picture. Nonetheless, thank you for the image of this interesting plant - I have just made a short article for it. Melburnian (talk) 08:32, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - OOF, noisy, poor composition, odd straight lines on the LHS. MER-C 08:46, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Thank you for the image (since it fills in a gap in coverage). The view is really too tight for much encyclopaedic value. Something like [1] or [2] is closer to ideal in my view. Noodle snacks (talk) 10:09, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It does have EV for it illustrates a part of the plant well, but as an overall representation of the plant it's not the right crop/view. I can't support it as a FP because of that. — raeky ^{(talk | edits)} 17:40, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose - An unsharp image. - ☩Damërung ☩. -- 22:18, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted --Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 15:44, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]