Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Red fox with prey delist

Red fox with prey

This image is quite dreadfully oversharpened.

Nominate and ~~delist~~. - KFP (talk | contribs) 21:41, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, it seems that a wrong version of the image was listed as a featured picture. --KFP (talk | contribs) 17:16, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - ~~Weak~~ delist. The image quality is still not very good. --KFP (talk | contribs) 09:43, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist at 100%, it looks really weird. Noisy, oversharpened, jpg artifacts, etc. --Andrew c 22:43, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist agree that at 100% it's quite noisy and littered with artifacts. --NMChico24 23:30, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Something is not right here. It was not like this prior to it getting uploaded to the commons. the quality has since changed. take a look at the original version that i had uploaded, Image:Red fox with prey.JPG. --ZeWrestler ^Talk 01:51, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the original is still in the file upload history. The Commons page says that the "new" version was edited by Fir0002. Keep. I've reverted to the older version and besides, according to the original discussion, the sharpened version was not promoted. howch e ng {chat} 17:07, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - that looks more like the version that was promoted. I say keep it as featured. --ZeWrestler ^Talk 18:07, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sorry there's still some weird line ejecting up from the fox's neck. It's a good picture (certainly as good as any I'm capable of taking), but it's not the best Wikipedia has to offer, which IMHO is what a featured picture should be. --NMChico24 04:46, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The line on the neck is just a blade of grass -- Chris 73 | Talk 12:09, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist artifacts noise and blur. I've seen both edits, they both exhibit it. drumguy8800 C T 03:43, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist I looks like it was taken out of focus and artificially sharpened. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:36, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist. As with a lot of these, good for the article, not good for FP. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 15:06, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist. Terrible quality, definitely not an FP if judged by today's standards. mstroeck 13:10, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I fail to see the lack of quality your refering too. if this picture was not any good to begin with, then it wouldn't have made Feature status. -Puma5d04 05:42, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It was promoted last August, and judging by other pictures promoted around the same time, standards were somewhat lower. --Pharaoh Hound (talk) 14:26, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist. Very blurry at full res. The colours look oddly warm, perhaps because it was taken at sunset/sunrise, but the lighting looks rather diffused. Also, anoying purple dot above the fox's back, and the cropping is too tight on the tail. --Pharaoh Hound (talk) 14:26, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I think the purple dot is a out of focus flower which shouldn't be taken into consideration because the image is focused on the fox. --68.83.180.195 19:40, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per all above; odd colors and tail off edge of screen. --Bridgecross 01:22, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per above. --Yarnalgo 02:32, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delisted. (8 delist votes that apply for the non-oversharpened version / 4 keep votes) --KFP (talk | contribs) 16:42, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]