Withheld for privacy reasons is fine but should be mentioned on the image description. Geocoding is a requirement and that way that requirement is also met. Lycaon (talk) 11:43, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Geodata are very useful for living species to provide input for distribution maps of species and to examine regional variances in the species. It is something which have been discussed numerous times when the project was setup, it has been re-evaluated several times as well and there has always been very broad consensus on the geolocation requirement. --Slaunger (talk) 21:53, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I do think the scope is relevant. I think the image should be categorized to some category, which has to do with flight. --Slaunger (talk) 21:58, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose In my opinion the image does not satisfy the valued image criteria. Is ist not the best image within the scope. File:Apis mellifera flying2.jpg ist much better. A valued picture should show the typical look of a flying bee, so if the bee is transporting pollen, it should show the 2 pollen packages as they are fixed to the hind legs, and it should show the typical shape of a bee from the side. The candidate is taken from a bad angle. The diagonal view causes a strong foreshortening of the long abdomen, which looks smaller and shorter than it really is. As it is a macro, DOF is not enough to show the abdomen quite sharp. Thus the typical orange rings of the african bee cannot be seen well. The wings can hardly be seen. The position of the legs is untypical. The background is distracting, half of the image is filled with unsharp small forms of high contrast. I am sorry, I know how difficult it is to take a macro picture of a bee in flight! For a picture in flight, the front of the bee is very good. But the other image is better! --wau>18:56, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
