Female Hardhead

Reason

High quality image of Australia's only true diving duck

Articles this image appears in

Hardhead

Creator

Fir0002

• Support as nominator -- Fir0002 13:14, 7 July 2009 (UTC) reply
• Comment What an interesting image mainly due to the green things floating on the water. Would you clarify what they are?-- Caspian blue 14:37, 7 July 2009 (UTC) reply

• The green stuff is Duck weed, how appropriate ;-). Lycaon ( talk) 15:25, 7 July 2009 (UTC) reply

• Okie, thank you for the info. I've never seen the species cover the whole pond, so it looks quite interesting.-- Caspian blue 15:54, 7 July 2009 (UTC) reply

• Forgot to say support. -- Caspian blue 16:56, 7 July 2009 (UTC) reply

• Support per nom. Durova ²⁷³ 15:30, 7 July 2009 (UTC) reply
• comment size issues. Is it posible to crop a little less closely on the left?© Geni 16:46, 7 July 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Not sure what you mean... the size is fine - 1800px>>1000px min. I don't have anything more on the left, but not sure why you'd want more duckweed? -- Fir0002 06:24, 10 July 2009 (UTC) reply
• Oppose I need to take the time to get some of the local duck species myself. Some hooligans burned down the bird hide some time ago though :(. Reconstruction has just started fortunately. Anyway, the bird is clearly squinting from the E-TTL preflash, or the sun (it happens) and particularly around the head area the sharpness seems to be a little lacking. Noodle snacks ( talk) 12:39, 10 July 2009 (UTC) reply
  • Hmm not sure what you mean by the squinting - looks like it's eyes are wide open to me! I think I might have been a little sloppy with NR around the back of the head which might have contributed to a lack of sharpness (but the fine feather detail can't really be shown at this res anyway). Anyway uploaded an edit -- Fir0002 13:20, 11 July 2009 (UTC) reply
• Weak Support NS is right about the sharpness around the head. But the strong EV is enough for a weak support. Makeemlighter ( talk) 19:27, 10 July 2009 (UTC) reply
• Weak support Per Makeem. Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 18:19, 14 July 2009 (UTC) reply

Not promoted No consensus. -- wadester 16 05:59, 16 July 2009 (UTC) reply

Could you explain your reasoning? I'd say promoted from where I sit. -- jjron ( talk) 06:50, 16 July 2009 (UTC) reply

Yeah I'd have thought 3S + 2 WS - 1O = promote. Particularly since I uploaded an edit which addressed the sharpness concerns which were raised -- Fir0002 08:28, 16 July 2009 (UTC) reply

In all likelihood, he missed Caspian blue's comment. It's easy to overlook indented supports. Mention it on his talk page, and ask him to recheck. Shoemaker's Holiday ( talk) 20:57, 16 July 2009 (UTC) reply

Agreed, as an uninvolved editor I'd say consensus is to promote. – Juliancolton |  ^Talk 02:56, 17 July 2009 (UTC) reply

This is indeed a mistake; my bad. I'll fix it tomorrow. wadester 16 05:35, 17 July 2009 (UTC) reply
Promoted File:Female Hardhead duck.jpg Fixed from mistaken non-promotion; my apologies to all parties involved.-- wadester 16 03:33, 18 July 2009 (UTC) reply