Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Persicaria capitata iki.jpg
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
File:Persicaria capitata iki.jpg, not featured
[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2023 at 02:05:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Polygonaceae
Info created by Relativity - uploaded by Relativity - nominated by Relativity -- Relativity (talk) 02:05, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Relativity (talk) 02:05, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Comment -- While walking on the Kīlauea Iki trail, you'd see Persicaria capitata on the path, seemingly growing out of nowhere (i.e. [1], which was on the path to the crater, where the path was rock) This specimen that I'm nominating is actually on the crater. Relativity (talk) 02:05, 16 September 2023 (UTC)- Support - ABAL1412🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺 (talk ☭) 07:19, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
Regretful oppose – it's a nice QI and would make for a nice VI for its outstanding motif – however, it's hard to call this one of this site's best pictures when much of the Persicaria capitata is out of focus. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:01, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- Comment @SHB2000: Part of it is in focus, and you can see that part clearly. Plus, one of the requirements for QI has to do with focus, and it wouldn't have passed QI if the focus hadn't been serving a purpose. Relativity (talk) 18:34, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Persicariacapitataonthetrail.jpg){kind=link}
- For it to be an FP, I would expect all of it to be in focus. --SHB2000 (talk) 04:09, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Yes, or at least some left and right. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:22, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- For it to be an FP, I would expect all of it to be in focus. --SHB2000 (talk) 04:09, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Per SHB2000. ~Moheen (keep talking) 13:31, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
- Support Nice macro-shot. It is true to the source, as it is not focus-stacked as so many featured macro pictures here. Macro photos having a shallow depth-of-field is just natural and we should accept that. --Ephramac (talk) 19:46, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:40, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
