Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Grasshopper June 2008-2.jpg (new)

File:Grasshopper June 2008-2.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2010 at 16:29:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Grasshopper June 2008-2.jpg (new) Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Grasshopper June 2008-2.jpg (new)

•  Info Portrait of an Egyptian grasshopper, second try. Everything by Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
•  Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Ggia (talk) 16:34, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --The High Fin Sperm Whale 17:00, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment what is different now to the other candidates Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Grasshopper June 2008-2.jpg and Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Grasshopper June 2008-2.jpg? I see no new version or another reason for a revote! --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 17:11, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

•  Question according to the rules isn't it allowed to propose a photo for revote? Ggia (talk) 17:23, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
  •  Info It is the same image. As far as I know there is no rule preventing re-nominations. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:58, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

•  Comment but looks like a waste of resources to re-upload the image, just because somebody want to nominate it as a feature picture. The rule doesn't prevent re-nomination.. I believe that you are right.. But has this been discussed before? Before most of us believe that something is nominated once. And if re-nomination is allowed.. should be clearly mentioned in the rules.. and this should not be done by re-uploading the image with different name (waste of resources to have duplicate identical images). Ggia (talk) 18:17, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

• But the image was not uploaded as a new version... It is the same image! As for re-nominating a picture, the practise was not rare in the past 2 or 3 years. It is a fair thing to do if the first nomination did not receive much attention, which is the present case. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:31, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

• It does not matter how much attention the picture got. Obviously the rules do not disallow renominations, so you are allowed to renominate an image as many times as you wish, even if it was rejected by a vote of 20 to 1. --Petritap (talk) 19:10, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

•  Neutral for now. One way I'm not sure I agree with such a re-nomination, even if it is allowed by an unclear rule, but other way I didn't know this pic, and I'm happy to see it because it is very nice... Please convince me !!--Jebulon (talk) 22:11, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
  • I don't know what to say to convince you, except that I love this picture and I feel more and more fascinated with the insect world. Do you realize how these little critters are so different from us? It's not by chance that the alliens appearing in the low-budget movies are inspired by them. Look at eyes. Not only the composite ones (which are banded) but also the three ocelli: two above the antennae and one below. Nobody knows how they work and what kind of vision these animals have. Look at the mouth parts. Scary, aren't they? Now, I realize that I have nominated this picture not only two but three times... Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:42, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose, too short DOF for me. Sorry, —DerHexer (Talk) 22:28, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose, too short DOF for me. Sorry,--Luis Miguel Bugallo Sánchez (talk) 23:14, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose dof and flash light are not convincing. aperture is okay, but focus could be better. regards, PETER WEIS TALK 21:52, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose As others above, mainly DOF. --Karelj (talk) 16:51, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

 Poor little and innocent thing... Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:40, 10 October 2010 (UTC)