Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Asteracea poster.jpg

Image:Asteracea poster.jpg

Original, not featured

•  Info A poster with twelve different species of flowers from the Asteraceae family. The two most representative subfamilies were included: the Asteroideae (about 70% of known species) and the Cichorioideaea. (14%). Individual photos in full resolution can be accessed through the links in the picture file. Photos by Alvesgaspar, Dori and Tony Wills; nominated by Alvesgaspar -- Alvesgaspar 09:15, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Alvesgaspar 09:15, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support It gets my vote because it is beautiful and high quality. One caveat though, encyclopaedically it would have been better if it had e.g. been all wild flowers from around the Lisboa area. Lycaon 12:32, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  • You seem to read my thoughts! Yes, it would be better, but not all photos are suitable for this kind of presentation and I couldn't get enough photos of wild species with good quality. For example, this one (a nice example of the Carduoideae subfamily) was supossed to be part of the poster but I was not able to mask it properly -- Alvesgaspar 14:11, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support You know, I don't really like flowers from the Asteracea family. Yuck! It's a personal thing and I recognize that. I'd like to see more pictures of leaves, bark, branches, etc. But you've done a nice job, here. Good composition. Charlessauer 14:15, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
  • I appreciate your fresh perspective on featured pictures (even though I often disagree!), but where were you when I was nominating all of my leaves, bark, and branches pictures? I've lost count of how many of those nominations have failed even though they are high quality and some, like the paperbark maple, are quite pretty. Perhaps it is time for a renomination... -- Ram-Man 17:18, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- Laitche 18:09, 14 February 2008 (UTC) Moved to the alternative --Laitche 09:16, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- MJJR 20:43, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
•  SupportI prefer the new version-- Slaunger 13:35, 16 February 2008 (UTC) Very nice (and surely hard) work. -- Slaunger 23:06, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

   Comment I think the image page could be improved by adding explicit links to the other images this one is composed of in, e.g., the source field. I actually wanted to check on the licensing to see if t was comptable with the licenses of the individual images, bot this check is very hard to do without the links. I noticed that it is stated above that links are established to the individual images via the image. I have tried to click on everything there and I cannot find any links... -- Slaunger 11:53, 16 February 2008 (UTC)Fixed. -- Slaunger 12:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

•  Support --Karelj 17:43, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Böhringer 23:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- Benh 10:04, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Supporting new version-- --MichaelMaggs 09:25, 17 February 2008 (UTC) --MichaelMaggs 10:30, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support /Daniel78 21:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose Other image is better. Freedom to share 17:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Other version has more support votes) Simonizer 09:07, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Alternative, featured

•  Info - Sorry to be a little late with this alternative, in which I was finally able to include a species of the Carduoideae subfamily (#8 - Galactites tomentosa). Now, the three most representative subfamilies of Asteracea, containing about 95% of all species, are present -- Alvesgaspar 11:56, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support - Alvesgaspar 11:56, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support This is even better! Lycaon 12:02, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Yes, an improvement with respect to value compared to the first version. -- Slaunger 13:36, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Also excellent, of course... -- MJJR 21:37, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- Laitche 09:15, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --MichaelMaggs 09:23, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Karelj 20:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Nice portfolio. Freedom to share 17:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support I don't particularly like poster formats of this sort aesthetically, but they do, undoubtedly, serve an educational purpose that wouldn't be served by a more artistic layout. Adam Cuerden 10:48, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support--Mbz1 02:11, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer 09:06, 29 February 2008 (UTC)