Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Siberian Tiger

Siberian tiger edit

A stretching tiger.

How's this for a close call? Despite the size, I think this is another wonderful tiger photograph. I found it on the Siberian tiger article after nominating Image:Siberischer tiger de edit02.jpg, and thought this too would make an excellent addition to featured pictures; appears in Siberian tiger, and Malene created the image.

Comment. The image now appears in the stretching article as well. --Tewy 00:42, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nominate and support. - Tewy 00:21, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support - meets all criteria. --GoOdCoNtEnT 04:50, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Lovely photograph, excellent light conditions and DOF. Would strongly support a high-res version - doniv 06:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Im lovin' that pic. Looks good. AFL45 10:18, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I like the other FPC of a siberian tiger better than this one. This has a poor background, and area of the tigers coat looks strange (is it wet?) and it's really pushing the size limit. Perhaps if it were in higher res I would support. --Fir0002 12:02, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose - nothing is hugely in favour of this image. It shows the whole body but in an atypical position. Its eyes are closed. It's the bare minimum for resolution. It's a zoo shot rather than a nature shot. The lighting is pretty flat. Does it add a lot to Siberian tiger? Not really. It's not a very compelling case. Stevage 14:12, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't like the apparent lack of any eyes (I suppose they're closed) and the pose is awkward - Adrian Pingstone 14:17, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support - Wonderful picture, but is there a higher res version? I would strongly support that. HighInBC 23:04, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per the general feel of other opposes. Also, it may be relatively minor, but I find that bit of log obscuring his leg offputting. --jjron 12:15, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Does not contribute significantly to article by showing its differences from other tigers. Jeeb 01:43, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Doesn't illustrate a tiger in the wild, doesn't seem to show anything significant about tigers in captivity. --Davepape 01:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suport is an exelent picture. It would be cool a higher verison.--Neo139 15:26, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. It would probably add more to the stretching article, where it could replace this image, which seems to have a colour problem. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 15:28, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I added the image to the stretching article, but I couldn't bring myself to replace the current image, so I just moved it down. --Tewy 00:40, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - My problem with that is that the article seems to be basically about human stretching (for sports). The text doesn't mention cats; I have the impression (from our vet) that stretching is an important activity for cats, so the article should discuss that, for the image to be appropriate. --Davepape 18:55, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Artistic and encyclopedic merit. Rtcpenguin 21:43, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. —Aiden 05:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted (+7.5/-5.5) -- Moondigger 01:08, 25 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]