Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Solitary bee feeding
- Reason
- It is a high resolution and encyclopaedic depiction of the species.
- Proposed caption
- A male solitary bee of the Megachilidae family (Anthidium florentinum) collecting nectar from a Lantana camara flower. The long tongue and part of the head are sunk inside one of the florets. It is also known as a leafcutter bee, for it uses hair plucked from leaves to build the nest. Flies all summer and nests in holes in the ground, trees or walls. Males are noticeably larger than females.
- Articles this image appears in
- Bees, Megachilidae
- Creator
- Joaquim Alves Gaspar
- Support as nominator Alvesgaspar 09:43, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Moderate Support; it's a good image, but I can still detect some artifacts in the image. -- AltirisExeunt 09:48, 13 September 2007 (UTC)- Support Edit1: Excellent details and encyclopedic. --LucaG 23:27, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Oppose The composition isn't very good. We can't see most of its head and there's a lot of useless space top and bottom of the image. The edit while an improvement still has significant noise. I tried reducing it but there isn't enough image data and it became posterized. I've uploaded an edit anyway. Also seems a pretty ragged specimen (from it's wings). The composition of Image:Anthidium September 2007-2.jpg is much better since we get to see it's eyes, however that image fails in terms of IQ which is poor at 100% (seems to suffer from over sharpening). --Fir0002 08:24, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
- After viewing Fir's upload of Edit 2, my voted has been changed to moderate support for Edit 2. -- Altiris Exeunt 09:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Support excellent details Mario1987 16:08, 17 September 2007 (UTC)- Support I think it's worthy of FP. Puddyglum 19:53, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose all versions - Composition isn't ideal (too much bee hidden by the flower it's buried in) and the specimen, as Fir says, is somewhat damaged (if that doesn't sound to cold when talking about a living thing). Also, there's a lot of flash glare on the abdomen and wings and the background seems artificially dark (probably due to the limited range of the flash). A reasonable photo but not featureworthy IMO. --YFB ¿ 10:32, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose, mainly because of the composition, per Fir. I disagree regarding "ragged" and "damaged", though; that makes the image more useful and interesting, in my view. --ragesoss 04:06, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Not promoted -- Chris B • talk 14:02, 24 September 2007 (UTC)