Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Papilio Polytes Female

Papilio Polytes Female

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2014 at 19:13:44 (UTC)

Original – Papilio polytes

Reason

Good quality and EV.

Articles in which this image appears

Papilio polytes

FP category for this image

Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects

Creator

Muhammad Mahdi Karim

• Support as nominator --Bellus Delphina ^talk 19:13, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
• Support nice shot. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:26, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose per Amanda. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 16:46, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

• Support, though it is at the lowest allowable resolution. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:06, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose per Amanda. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:55, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

• Oppose, The gravel is in sharper definition than the butterfly. The butterfly itself is damaged. For an artistic shot, this may not matter, but for a very straight image with emphasis on subject matter rather than artistry, the butterfly needs to be intact. Amandajm (talk) 05:12, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
• Question: Is it acceptable to try and mend a butterfly's wing? nagualdesign (talk) 20:40, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

• I rather like it, though I'm not sure how others feel. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:55, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

• Hi Nagualdesign, great! You are a butterfly doc :-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 16:46, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Yep. I can doctor anything, me. nagualdesign (talk) 16:59, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

See previous discussion. :( Jee 03:54, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

But it is a good example for explaining how the fancy tails, antenna like growths and "false eyes" help to confuse the predators and save their lives. They also adapt a behavior to enhance these features. Jee 04:04, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

I think that once the broken piece of wing is digitally replaced, it rules it out as a great photo. Amandajm (talk) 05:34, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:38, 11 January 2014 (UTC)