Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Safari Tanzania.jpg

Safari[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2013 at 03:12:50 (UTC)

Reason: Very good EV. The image shows the clothes worn on a safari and the dusty atmosphere evidenced by the kerchief over the face. The man with the binoculars illustrates how a safari is different from a zoo. The rooftop opening of the car and the out of focus one in the background roughly show the type of vehicles used.
Articles in which this image appears: Safari
Creator: Muhammad Mahdi Karim

Support as nominator --Muhammad(talk) 03:12, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment has not been in article for a week. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:20, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- That's not a requirement and the image that I replaced was also mine. --Muhammad(talk) 03:24, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - It has, in many cases, been upheld. WP:FP? says "It is preferable to wait a reasonable period of time (at least 7 days) after the image is added to the article before nominating it, though this may be ignored in obvious cases, such as replacing a low-resolution version of an image with a higher resolution of the same image." — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:32, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Honestly, I think it depends on the article. An article where images are highly competitive needs that rule. We don't want to end up with a situation where images are thrown out of all the articles they were in, making them ineligible for FP even as the nomination runs. But an article like this, where, if anything, it's under-illustrated? Not so much of an issue. Especially as it's rarely edited anyway. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 03:46, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - I don't mean to belittle Muhammad's fantastic work, but it's better to be safe than sorry. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:53, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        I don't mind if it's suspended till we pass the 7 day period. --Muhammad(talk) 01:29, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        That's fine, or we could start !voting now if there is consensus to do so. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:42, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        Let's start then and if anybody has an objection we can correct it on the way. Care to do the honors? --Muhammad(talk) 05:06, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support assuming everyone agrees we can waive the seven day thing. Sharp, good EV, good composition. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:12, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very tight framing, doesn't show the surrounding terrain and animals (which is what safari about). Brandmeister^talk 10:26, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- We already have an FP that shows the terrain and animals but misses out on detail on safari goers which only a close-up can show --Muhammad(talk) 14:51, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Then I'm going to have to Oppose on redundancy, I don't see this closeup adding anything new that the other picture can't provide better. A safari isn't about the person but the experience, and the wide shot captures that. — raeky t 23:22, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - The wide view does not show the clothing/equipment or the cars that well and it's not meant to do so. Saying the wide one is enough is like saying this image is good enough for wildbeests and impalas and we don't need any FPs of those. --Muhammad(talk) 13:42, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - I would only be convinced in the EV of that if the article actually discussed clothing.. as for vehicles you barely show the vehicles in this picture so it's not THAT high EV to illustrate the vehicles used in a safari, and the article doesn't talk about those as well. The comparison isn't valid since there is clear EV for wildebeests both closeup pictures and habitat images. — raeky t 17:22, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        Regarding the vehicles, the important part is the viewing method (rooftop opening). The nature of vehicle (again generic) is illustrated by the out of focus one in the background without distracting from the main subject. Regarding clothing, please see the article where it mentions khaki clothing, belted bush jackets and slouch hats among others all of which are present in this image, the most notable one being the slouch hat. --Muhammad(talk) 18:20, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I appear with raeky - this could be Longleat Safari Park for all we know... gazhiley 12:56, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- That's the point of this image IMO. Its usage in the safari article shows a generic, not specific safari. The image is not used to illustrate Ngorongoro --Muhammad(talk) 13:38, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - I accept what you're saying there... But this picture still doesn't say Safari to me - it's just someone with their head out of the top of a jeep... Would need to see more around them to show that it's a safari... gazhiley 12:32, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - You have the right to an opinion but for me the bush jacket, slouch hat, binoculars, vehicles and environment all point to a typical safari. Where else would you ever see such a scene? --Muhammad(talk) 12:56, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - Clothing Catalogue, Movie/documentary scene, in the Australian Bush/Outback, deserts, etc etc...... Clothing and equipment do not guarentee anything. I just think showing a wider scene with animals would indicate it better... gazhiley 12:38, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, no wow, really no different from a vacation shot you'd see on Instagram. Daniel Case (talk) 17:53, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 03:35, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]