Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Lynx lynx (Linnaeus 1758).jpg

File:Lynx lynx (Linnaeus 1758).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2010 at 20:55:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Lynx lynx (Linnaeus 1758).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Lynx lynx (Linnaeus 1758).jpg

<div style="display:none--Michael Gäbler (talk) 17:50, 27 May 2010 (UTC);">

•  Info created by Michael Gäbler - uploaded by Michael Gäbler - nominated by Michael Gäbler -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:55, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:55, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --The High Fin Sperm Whale 21:00, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose Beautiful picture, but DOF probably too shallow, and the part in focus is not so sharp. --Eusebius (talk) 21:19, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Seems focused enough for me. Steven Walling 22:10, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose -- As Eusebius -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:34, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Neutral I find it a little disturbing that the eyes are in the center of the image. I find that this doesn't make it a very good composition. Amada44 (talk) 09:41, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Ggia (talk) 10:35, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Eusebius --kaʁstn Disk/Cat 10:40, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose background very noisy. Sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
  • No, the background isn't noisy or very noisy. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 17:50, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
    • I agree with Michael Gäbler, the image is not grainy.. and the quality of the image should be judged, looking closely, trying to find the noise etc.. Ggia (talk) 22:32, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
  • Sorry. I may be wrong, but I think the background is noisy. All the images here are judged, looking closely, trying to find the noise etc... I think it's good. It's the rule in FPC, isn't it ? I may say too that for me, it's not focused enough. But I agree: it's only my opinion. Nothing personal here--Jebulon (talk) 23:35, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
• The image is well focused, at least the interesting parts of the image are focused. I don't see much noise either. I find more disturbing that the eyes that are in the center of the image, and I think that it is more fruitful comment about the discussion. Talking about noisy photographs, ie. looking closely to the images of Sebastião Salgado you will see a lot of noise (due to the use of Tri-X 400ASA black & white film). If the photographs of this photographer were in a free license and they we uploaded here.. and if one of them was a candidate as a featured picture we will comment that it is low quality according to FPC rule (because of the grain)? Ggia (talk) 07:54, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Support --Brackenheim (talk) 16:39, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Oppose - Zoo animal, and too much of a posed portrait to look realistic. Looks like those pics one sees of businessmen looking artificial with a plastic smile. Sorry! - MPF (talk) 11:11, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
•  Info No, the Eurasian Lynx is not smiling, he is yawning. Therefore this is no posed portrait. Did you ever see a pic of a yawning businessman? By the way the Wisentgehege Springe game park is no zoo, it is under the Habitats Directive a Natura 2000 natural habitat with wild fauna and flora. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 22:13, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
  • "natural habitat with wild fauna" - so this animal is unconstrained, free to leave the park if it wishes, even to go to Germany or France without hindrance, and gets all its food by its own hunting, not provided by man? I have my doubts!! From the literature I have, Lynx lynx is long extinct as a wild animal in the Netherlands. If it is reintroduced, where from, and how many generations ago? In general, reintroduced animal populations are required to show at least 2-3 generations of survival without human assistance before they can be considered wild again (e.g., in Britain, reintroduced Haliaeetus albicilla were only officially accepted as re-established in the wild 28 years after reintroduction commenced). If this animal doesn't meet those requirements, it is as far as I'm concerned, a zoo animal. - MPF (talk) 18:31, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:00, 6 June 2010 (UTC)