- Reason
- Really high-quality image of something not seen every day. Shows perfectly what a bifid uvula looks like.
- Articles this image appears in
- Palatine uvula
- Creator
- David Bernstein
- Support as nominator -- Solepole ( talk) 15:53, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
- Weak oppose. I don't think the picture is really FP-worthy- I do feel a better picture could be produced. For instance, the shadow on the left detracts from the picture. However, as the subject is so unusual, this would be a fantastic candidate to become a valued picture. J Milburn ( talk) 22:45, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose – A very amateur picture (no offence if you took it). It's a fair amount of EV, but does not meet the technical standards of a FP, sorry, but FPs must be the best illustration of their subject. Sorry. Jerry teps ( talk) 09:11, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose - mainly because lighting wise it could be improved -- Childzy ¤ Talk 22:59, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
- Weak oppose - I think the lighting is fine, but there is very little image. The bottom half of the image is completely out of focus, and only the uvula itself has any detail. It looks great at thumbnail size, but at full zoom there just isn't enough there. Stevage 07:24, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Not promoted -- jjron ( talk) 08:03, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
- Reason
- Really high-quality image of something not seen every day. Shows perfectly what a bifid uvula looks like.
- Articles this image appears in
- Palatine uvula
- Creator
- David Bernstein
- Support as nominator -- Solepole ( talk) 15:53, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
- Weak oppose. I don't think the picture is really FP-worthy- I do feel a better picture could be produced. For instance, the shadow on the left detracts from the picture. However, as the subject is so unusual, this would be a fantastic candidate to become a valued picture. J Milburn ( talk) 22:45, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose – A very amateur picture (no offence if you took it). It's a fair amount of EV, but does not meet the technical standards of a FP, sorry, but FPs must be the best illustration of their subject. Sorry. Jerry teps ( talk) 09:11, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
- Oppose - mainly because lighting wise it could be improved -- Childzy ¤ Talk 22:59, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
- Weak oppose - I think the lighting is fine, but there is very little image. The bottom half of the image is completely out of focus, and only the uvula itself has any detail. It looks great at thumbnail size, but at full zoom there just isn't enough there. Stevage 07:24, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Not promoted -- jjron ( talk) 08:03, 12 September 2009 (UTC)