Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Ara ararauna Italy.JPG

A blue-and-yellow Macaw during the summer (2007)

Edit 1 - noise reduction

Support Self Nom. --Ba'Gamnan 19:06, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I uploaded an edit that hopefully helps with some of the noise, but it seems to me that parts of the bird are a bit out of focus. CillaИ ♦ XC 18:16, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, it's not very sharp at full-size. Looks like camera shake to me. -- Coneslayer 18:47, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Poor focus. --Sean 23:54, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Just for the record, this is no longer in an article. It was removed from the Blue-and-yellow Macaw article about an hour-and-a-half after Ba'Gamnan put it in there. --jjron 04:38, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe so, but this image is significantly one than the one it tried to replace. Debivort 07:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's up to the people jousting over the images to work out; whether it's better or not doesn't alter the fact that it's currently not in an article, and therefore not eligible for FP candidacy until it is in one, and likely to stay in it. --jjron 08:46, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, that it's not eligible, I was just saying. Actually I asked at the article talk page, and they said it was removed because the wing looks like it was clipped and that italy is not the animals natural range, thus - not enc!. Debivort 04:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why are we arguing over an image neither of us are actually supporting? :-) On one point though, I'd agree that if the wings are clipped (I wouldn't pick that myself) that does reduce enc, but the photo being taken in Italy doesn't concern me - we have plenty of FPs of species taken outside their natural range. And unless the author told you it was you Italy, you wouldn't know, so I don't see that that reduces enc. Natural range may be preferred, but it's not required. --jjron 06:14, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Further to this, I just read the discussion on the talk page. The replaced main image was taken in Singapore (in a bird park), the second image in the article was taken in Canada, but they say part of the reason this image was removed was because it's not wild. These birds are native to South America - none of these are wild! --jjron 06:19, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose not enc, clipped wings, blurry. Sorry. Debivort 04:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted MER-C 05:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]