Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Culex sp larvae.png
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Image:Culex sp larvae.png, featured
[edit]- Info created by James Gathany, CDC - uploaded by Ayacop - nominated by Ayacop 17:52, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support --Ayacop 17:52, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
OpposeGreat photo!! Shame it is so small! -- Lycaon 18:01, 15 February 2007 (UTC)- Support Changed my mind, it's too nice to oppose, guess that's what the mitigating circumstances are for ;-) Lycaon 07:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support pretty cool norro 23:30, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support Yann 23:34, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support Neat shot! NoahElhardt 06:34, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry, but resolution is too low--Simonizer 09:21, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support Big enough for me--Torbenhenke 12:47, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support Big enough for me too. Olegivvit 13:08, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment From the FP Guidelines for Nominators: Resolution - graphics located on Commons may be used in ways other than viewing on a conventional computer screen. They may be also used for printing or for viewing on very high resolution monitors. We can't predict what devices may be used in the future, so it is important that pictures being nominated have as high a resolution as possible. At least 2 million pixels (e.g. 2000 x 1000) seems reasonable right now. Images of lower resolution are typically rejected unless there are strong mitigating reasons --Simonizer 13:23, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, i know about that, but the picture itself is good enough and the subject matter is good too, so i know about that and say its small, but not too small.--Torbenhenke 18:04, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment From the FP Guidelines for Nominators: Resolution - graphics located on Commons may be used in ways other than viewing on a conventional computer screen. They may be also used for printing or for viewing on very high resolution monitors. We can't predict what devices may be used in the future, so it is important that pictures being nominated have as high a resolution as possible. At least 2 million pixels (e.g. 2000 x 1000) seems reasonable right now. Images of lower resolution are typically rejected unless there are strong mitigating reasons --Simonizer 13:23, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support - it's 1½ megabytes! That's plenty large enough. Lots of featured pics are less than half that size. - MPF 18:09, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support It shows the picture well despite its size. --Digon3 19:13, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support --Karelj 22:18, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- Comment -- I don't get it. Why the mosquitos are like this? What is the exact subject of this image? bunch of mosquitos truned around? It just looks wierd. Would be glad if someone can clear that for me. --Arad 05:55, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Info Excerpt from image text: ...mosquitoes (their larvae amass in standing water, as seen above) ... That's IN the water, just under the surface, and it's the larvae, not the flies. --Ayacop 15:39, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support i do like it -LadyofHats 20:27, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support striking pfctdayelise (说什么?) 07:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support but why .png?? --Lestat 17:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Info There was a time when uploading of photos as PNG was favoured over JPG, due to the lossy/lossless compression issue. Why this has changed, I cannot say. --Ayacop 18:50, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support nice one. --Tone 20:52, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support Amazing. /Daniel78 21:04, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support--Amrum 07:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support --MichaelMaggs 11:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support - Tbc 01:13, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
- Support Good idea --The Photographer 02:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 19 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer 07:58, 2 March 2007 (UTC)