Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Heliconius melpomene 2b Richard Bartz.jpg

Image:Heliconius melpomene 2b Richard Bartz.jpg, featured

•  Info created & uploaded & nominated by --Richard Bartz 13:04, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Richard Bartz 13:04, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Question What happened to the other two legs? -- Lycaon 13:28, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

They left as organ donation for veteran butterflies. Heliconius has only 4 legs. --Richard Bartz 13:35, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

So I learn new things here! Indeed the front most legs are very much reduced in males of this family! Thanks Richie ;-). Lycaon 13:52, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Here is a picture where you can see the 3rd pair very good --Richard Bartz 14:29, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

We zoologists call it the first pair ;-)). Lycaon 15:19, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

That sounds logical 2 me. I was astounded right now that in my mind things which are not used becoming a lower hierachy --Richard Bartz 17:38, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

•  Support Ja ja --Bergwolf 13:46, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Lycaon 13:52, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Neutral - It is a beautiful butterfly and a nice composition. But I really think a little more light on the wings and body would reveal a better detail. About the tight crop... well I have to accept it as a kind of trademark -- Alvesgaspar 13:54, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Question Is this the original background on the lower right corner? It doesn't seem as good as in the previous versions, but if it's the original I guess it has to be better. --Dori - Talk 15:00, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
  •  Support --Dori - Talk 19:48, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose The posterization in the original didn't bother me because the shading looked natural. This is not nearly as good and as such I cannot support it because it is not the best version. On the other hand, I like that this one is not over-sharpened. I'd like the fake smudged background removed and this butterfly kept. -- Ram-Man 15:15, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I let it .. this is the original version --Richard Bartz 15:17, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

 Support If you say so. -- Ram-Man 18:04, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

•  Support Anyway, FP. ( Good WUXGA image. ) -- Laitche 17:13, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Beyond silence 17:58, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Boffo. --Calibas 18:05, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Digitaldreamer 18:26, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Aqwis 20:07, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Yes, still like it. Pschemp 20:51, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- MJJR 21:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --Böhringer 22:26, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Wohooww ! -- Benh 20:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Very beatiful! Канопус Киля 18:30, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support --MichaelMaggs 18:24, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Basik07 21:03, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Freili! ;-) --Simonizer 22:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral => featured. Simonizer 15:19, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

•  Support stark --Mbdortmund 23:00, 19 February 2008 (UTC)voting is closed --Simonizer 15:19, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Very documentative, real value. Freedom to share 15:54, 20 February 2008 (UTC) voting is closed Lycaon 14:37, 22 February 2008 (UTC)