Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Priapus statuette

Priapus statuette

Original - Bronze statuette of the Roman fertility god Priapus, made in two parts (shown here in assembled and disassembled forms). This statuette has been dated to the late 1st century C.E. It was found in Rivery, in Picardy, France in 1771 and is the oldest Gallo-Roman object in the collection of the Museum of Picardy. This figurine represents the deity clothed in a "cuculus", a Gallic coat with hood. This upper section is detachable and conceals a phallus.

Reason: Fascinating piece of artwork. Wouldn't this be a nice front page image. http://www.scholarsresource.com/browse/work/2144598506 is my source for it being made of bronze.
Articles this image appears in: Priapus
Creator: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:Vassil

Support as nominator Spikebrennan (talk) 22:05, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I should point out that the image apparently consists of crops and copying from this commons image. Spikebrennan (talk) 15:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support Durova^Charge! 22:20, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support Oh wow. The Fat Man approves.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back (talk) 22:36, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - The phallus is not as sharp as it should be ... for a controlled shot like this one -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I was going to support this despite the blur on the phallus - there are overpixels after all, but the hood is just a cropped clone of the assembled version on the right - which seems misleading. de Bivort 03:35, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- How? Samsara (talk • contribs) 06:47, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The statue is interesting, but it looks like all images have been cutout and pasted onto that coloured background - no that doesn't discount it from being an FP, but it just looks odd, especially that 'floating' torso. (And personal grumble, why are we getting an increasing number of candidates through here with their image page description in another language? Can they not be translated? I like to read these to see what the original uploader said, not just what's been put into the caption here, which is often considerably different.) --jjron (talk) 07:17, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't read French, so I used babelfish to translate the original French caption, puzzled out what it was supposed to say, then did some additional research to come up with the caption used above. I've added my English-language caption to the Commons description page for the image. Spikebrennan (talk) 14:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, not very good quality for a still life. Blown out, not sharp around some edges. etc. --gren グレン 08:27, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per per Debivort and Jjron. Clegs (talk) 17:10, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose too bad, I think this is a fascinating sculpture, but I don't like how it looks cut and pasted. Rudy Breteler (talk) 22:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 04:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]