Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Skull of venezuelan red howler

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2012 at 15:23:25 (UTC)

Original – Skull of a Venezuelan red howler

Support as nominator --Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:23, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Support as before. Jujutacular ^talk 15:31, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. If this was a rare fossil then OK, but for an extant and according to the article fairly common species I'm not sure why we'd feature such a damaged skull (most notably all the missing teeth). --jjron (talk) 16:11, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Doubt the specimen had access to a dentist... Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:29, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So let's find one that did. ;) --jjron (talk) 03:01, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Zoo? Argh, good luck. Oh well. Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:07, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Given it was sourced from the Muséum de Toulouse collection it well could have come from a zoo originally. Regardless, I note their baboon skull for example does not suffer from this problem. --jjron (talk) 04:56, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

<supersmall>Cheap zoo. Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:21, 31 December 2011 (UTC)</supersmall>[reply]

If JJHarrison can shoot all those bird shots, maybe he could just go lop some heads until we get one with better teeth? But seriously, I don't feel the skull is very damaged and dentition is not an emphasis of the article. (for that I think you want separated open jaw, perhaps even detached into two arcs.TCO (Reviews needed) 16:43, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Like the aspect (angled view) and feel you get some good content, not seen from the living head. There is some detailed discussion in the facing text about the large jaw for example. I wish there was a bit less super anatomical term writing, but that is a side issue.TCO (Reviews needed) 16:43, 1 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I discovered by chance that appointment (thank to Crisco 1492). The skull dates from the early 1920s and was taken in the forest. The interest of the image is in the angle of view which is not usual. This is to show the interest of Focus stacking.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:30, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Papa Lima Whiskey 2 (talk) 18:14, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough support (4S, 1O) Papa Lima Whiskey 2 (talk) 18:14, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]