Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Autoretrato 2.jpg

File:Autoretrato 2.jpg, not featured

Voting period ends on 5 Jun 2009 at 15:46:57

•  Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 15:46, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
•  Support I wanted a cliché self portrait, but destiny turned me into a dog!!! -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 15:46, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose I cannot see any value of this photo for Wikimedia projects, and it is not particularly visually appealing - what is this a photo of? --Tom dl (talk) 17:50, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose Can't see any reason for why this should be FP. /Daniel78 (talk) 18:04, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: it is not stunning, questionable composition, has glare, has lighting problems, and doesn't befit the FPC criteria in general.

Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

—Anonymous Dissident^Talk 14:16, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

•  Comment I am commenting on your proposal to FPX the image because of the reasons that you state are completely subjective and lack substance at that, except at your personal level, which cannot be relied on as evaluation criteria. Not stunning is subjective and subject to personal preference. Not an objective point. Questionable composition is also subjective and again, subject to personal preference. Not an objective point. Glare, where? the sun is behind, so there is no glare. Not a valid technical point. Lighting problems? Which? dynamic range is there, if you knew zone system photography this would be evident. In fact, given the dynamic range, exposure is pretty good. Again, not a valid technical point. So I nonymously (sic?) dissent in your personal opinion and I definitely dissent on your technical observations. Self portraits are a tradition in painters, photographers, etc., and are self interpretations of the creators. Whether they work or not for the observer is a different story, subjected to the cultural capital of the observer and his knowledge of the medium, but they are definitely a common practice. A simple oppose would have been enough. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:48, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

 Oppose -- Really can't see any use or worth in this picture. It's just a picture of a dog shaded by the photographer, in no special way. Definitely not FP-quality. -- Peipei (talk) 11:13, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

•  Comment - Yes, it's amusing. Thank you. Now back to the serious candidates :) Downtowngal (talk) 16:56, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose The poor dog looks so scary --kaʁstn 19:26, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
•  Oppose As Tom dl. --Javier ME (talk) 21:23, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Maedin\talk 15:40, 3 June 2009 (UTC)