Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Klee Wagenmoos 01.JPG

Image:Klee Wagenmoos 01.JPG, featured

•  Info created by and nominated by Simonizer 11:57, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
•  Support nice light and colour --Simonizer 11:57, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
•  Support You forgot to mention the DOF, POV, focus, lack of noise, identification ;-), wow and ... Lycaon 12:27, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
•  Support wow... --Digon3 ^talk 13:42, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
•  Support nice --Böhringer 22:15, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
•  Support--Seeder 02:13, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
•  Support -- MJJR 19:59, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Composition. --Beyond silence 01:31, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose Common 'garden image'. I do not see anything that would make it special or valuable. Freedom to share 09:51, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
•  Support Reposant... -- J-Luc 11:06, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose - Sorry, no wow this time. BTW, only one species is identified ;-) Alvesgaspar 09:40, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
•  Support A fresh look at something 'common', I've never seen oxalis and ferns growing together, I never noticed that oxalis has slightly hairy leaves, great technically, great composition. --Tony Wills 11:20, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
  • That's probably because they are not ferns but mosses, more specifically the undergrowth is most probably Thuidium tamariscinum which unfortunately has no English name (Gewoon thujamos in Dutch). Lycaon 11:39, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
•  Support I never thought I'd be saying this to a common garden picture, but... --Ben^hello! 11:28, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose It is good, but not excellent and not enough wow for me, sorry. -- Slaunger 23:43, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Oppose beautiful image, but does not conform to the Value standard of Wikimedia : no didactic or information content in that image.

... Commons:Featured picture candidates#Featured picture delisting candidates Value - our main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that: ... beautiful does not always mean valuable.
If this is not, Wikimedia commons should change values definition and focus only on esthetic or meaningless "wowo factor"
Benwik 18:46, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

• • I do not understand you. Which value do you look for? One can use this picture to show Oxalis in its natural environment or to show the form of the leaves. Thus the picture has even encyclopaedic value, although this is not required at wikimedia. --Simonizer 09:03, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
•  Support --Lestat 08:32, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

result: 11 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer 18:27, 4 September 2007 (UTC)