Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Mandarin Duck

Mandarin Duck

Mandarin Duck (drake) waddling

A fine specimen of a duck. Feather textures are clear. Water droplets show he has just come out of the water. Image appears in Mandarin Duck (Aix galericulata), taken by Peter Galaxy.

• Self-Nominate and support. - one of my fav photos —Pengo 02:40, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weak oppose It is an incredibly beautiful bird, and good photo, it just seems slightly out of foucus. Also, the cropping is pretty bad, in that there is a large gap at the front, and his tail is cut off.--liquidGhoul 02:52, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Another weak oppose, a pity the background is so distracting, and the tail is cut off. BTW, it's probably motion unsharpness, not bad focus - see the moving leg. But, oh, how cute the Mona Lisa smile is! , oh, shucks, it's a male... ;-) --Janke | Talk 07:47, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes it's motion blur, and it's not aparent at "typical" screen resolutions (e.g. 1280×1024), which is the resolution i'm now thinking i should have uploaded the image at. —Pengo 10:51, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

• Weak oppose. Yes badly cropped, but nothing wrong with the background. I prefer to see animals in a nature environment instead of doctored images with backgrounds removed or changed. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:34, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose - out of focus - Adrian Pingstone 10:30, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• 

  

   Weak Oppose
    You know, I'm a little bitter about the entire 'not enough tail!' thing (one of my FPC got shot down for it) but this is a little much to me. It's very clear and in focus though. I like it.. just noticing the tail makes it feel so unbalanced.. drumguy⁸⁸⁰⁰ - speak? 13:19, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Drumguy, we'll have to differ on the focus. On my 1024 by 768 screen (which gives perfect focus on other pics) it's definitely not in focus. Yes, the focus is reasonable but not FPC quality. Isn't it fascinating how different eyes see things differently! - Adrian Pingstone 17:34, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
    • You know, I had another look and Janke is right, it is motion blur, not out of focus. Regardless, it just isn't sharp enough to be featured, I think. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 00:39, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
• Very weak oppose - I guess I find that it is out of focus too, but damn is that thing really cuuute! --Cyde Weys 18:37, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. Mainly for the cropping of the tail. Unfortunate as I don't find anything else about the image a problem. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 19:43, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
• Support I think the rest of the pic makes up for the cut off tail -Ravedave 05:03, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
• Neutral. Motion blur and missing tail bother me, but I'm not sure it's enough to put a kibosh on the pic as a whole. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 21:39, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose can't forgive the amputated tail feathers. chowells 01:14, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose Distracting background. SteveHopson 05:08, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
• Very weak oppose A beautiful duck and a good picture. Pity the tail got cut off! Kessa Ligerro 10:59, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose Nice bird, but I don't like the background: it's a brown bird on a brown background. bogdan 22:20, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Support - could be so much better. Are you one of those people who can't stand it when people talk using terrible grammar? If so, I'd be delighted if you could pass the proverbial fine-toothed comb of grammar through my user page. Thanks! 00:15, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Support - Slightly out of focus, still a nice pic --vineeth 05:55, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose Tail cut off, focus pretty average. --Fir0002 www 09:18, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
• Support Would prefer it sharper, with the tip of the tail on, but I still think it is striking and FP worthy. –Joke 20:16, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
• Support - I love it. ^KILO-_LIMA 21:35, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
• Neutral We have to remember, just because the duck looks so cool doesn't mean its FP quality. DaGizza^{Chat ©} 07:42, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
• Support. I don't think you could capture that subject much better. - Samsara _contrib ^talk 03:57, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support - Isn't this supposed about clicking into an encyclopedia article because the picture looks interesting? I'm not trying to frame it and put it on my wall, but the picture makes me want to learn about Mandarin Ducks. That's the point. The picture is awesome. ^tara
• Comment Personally, I much rather this image. It has a good background, and the ducks are framed well. It has the same focus/motion blur (whichever it is) problems, but doesn't have the other problems. --liquidGhoul 02:02, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
• Support Nice! Alvinrune ^TALK 23:13, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Not promoted ~ Veledan • Talk 00:46, 11 March 2006 (UTC)