Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Longhorn beetle Cerambycinae.jpg

Support as nominator --Muhammad(talk) 00:47, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Slight depth of field issues with the antennae actually add to the encyclopedic value in this instance: an excellent example of natural camouflage. The narrow depth of field functions as subtle reminder that few species have vision as good as the human eye. Durova³¹⁰ 22:52, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. We're not illustrating camouflage in this case, so what would you think of a tighter crop? Kaldari (talk) 23:46, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Edit 1 Uploaded --Muhammad(talk) 09:15, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak~~ support original the crop is too tight. Zoo Fari 04:35, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support No preference for the crop. Noodle snacks (talk) 23:40, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ lacks any caption or description in the - unsourced, one line - article it is in. More than half the article talks about the numerous genera of the subfamily, do you know which this one is? Guest9999 (talk) 03:49, 6 September 2009 (UTC) Oppose struck, caption and context improved. Guest9999 (talk) 13:02, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see that, so I'm going to have to change to weak support. A caption in the taxobox and a source are not mandatory. Zoo Fari 04:16, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I have added it to Chrysomeloidea. --Muhammad(talk) 07:52, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Longhorn beetle Cerambycinae.jpg No comments on the edit, so the original is promoted. --upstate NYer 05:17, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]