- Reason
- Good quality and EV
- Articles this image appears in
- Stratiomyidae
- Creator
- Muhammad
- Support as nominator -- Muhammad (talk) 02:37, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- Support Certainly, nice. Mfield ( Oi!) 02:47, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- Support. What's the silky stuff to the right of the image? Is that anything to do with the subject?
J Milburn (
talk)
16:55, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- Probably some kind of fungus growing on the leaf -- Muhammad (talk) 18:04, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- Weak support Lacks a bit of sharpness even in the clear parts, but overall pretty good. Sasata ( talk) 19:31, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Support. It might be worth saying whether the eyes are really striped, or if it's some sort of prism effect. Thank you. Papa Lima Whiskey ( talk) 19:31, 6 September 2009 (UTC)"- Oppose lighting is really harsh unfortunately. Noodle snacks ( talk) 11:11, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
OpposeScale is missing. Papa Lima Whiskey ( talk) 00:31, 9 September 2009 (UTC)- Scale added. --
Muhammad
(talk)
12:12, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- Where did you get the scale from? The description says app. 20mm long, with your scale it looks more like 10 or 15mm max now. I'm not sure scale is missing is a solid reason for oppose, but sure as hell sticking in a made-up/guessimate scale is not adressing that concern either. --
Dschwen 14:27, 9 September 2009 (UTC) P.S.: It is actually making it worse, as the image now claims an acuracy it cannot provide (unless of course you convince me otherwise, that your scale is exact) --
Dschwen
14:28, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- Since I had pictures of the fly at 1:1 and at less, I used the 1:1 and got the scale. The 20mm was an approximate as mentioned as I had not "measured" the fly. Sorry for all the confusion -- Muhammad (talk) 16:41, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- Where did you get the scale from? The description says app. 20mm long, with your scale it looks more like 10 or 15mm max now. I'm not sure scale is missing is a solid reason for oppose, but sure as hell sticking in a made-up/guessimate scale is not adressing that concern either. --
Dschwen 14:27, 9 September 2009 (UTC) P.S.: It is actually making it worse, as the image now claims an acuracy it cannot provide (unless of course you convince me otherwise, that your scale is exact) --
Dschwen
14:28, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- Scale added. --
Muhammad
(talk)
12:12, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Voting closed; waiting on Papa Lima Whiskey to respond to request for scale, which was fulfilled. upstate NYer 05:30, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- Supporting again since a genuinely useful scale was added. Papa Lima Whiskey ( talk) 17:37, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Promoted File:Soldierfly.jpg -- jjron ( talk) 07:21, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
- Reason
- Good quality and EV
- Articles this image appears in
- Stratiomyidae
- Creator
- Muhammad
- Support as nominator -- Muhammad (talk) 02:37, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- Support Certainly, nice. Mfield ( Oi!) 02:47, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- Support. What's the silky stuff to the right of the image? Is that anything to do with the subject?
J Milburn (
talk)
16:55, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- Probably some kind of fungus growing on the leaf -- Muhammad (talk) 18:04, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
- Weak support Lacks a bit of sharpness even in the clear parts, but overall pretty good. Sasata ( talk) 19:31, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Support. It might be worth saying whether the eyes are really striped, or if it's some sort of prism effect. Thank you. Papa Lima Whiskey ( talk) 19:31, 6 September 2009 (UTC)"- Oppose lighting is really harsh unfortunately. Noodle snacks ( talk) 11:11, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
OpposeScale is missing. Papa Lima Whiskey ( talk) 00:31, 9 September 2009 (UTC)- Scale added. --
Muhammad
(talk)
12:12, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- Where did you get the scale from? The description says app. 20mm long, with your scale it looks more like 10 or 15mm max now. I'm not sure scale is missing is a solid reason for oppose, but sure as hell sticking in a made-up/guessimate scale is not adressing that concern either. --
Dschwen 14:27, 9 September 2009 (UTC) P.S.: It is actually making it worse, as the image now claims an acuracy it cannot provide (unless of course you convince me otherwise, that your scale is exact) --
Dschwen
14:28, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- Since I had pictures of the fly at 1:1 and at less, I used the 1:1 and got the scale. The 20mm was an approximate as mentioned as I had not "measured" the fly. Sorry for all the confusion -- Muhammad (talk) 16:41, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- Where did you get the scale from? The description says app. 20mm long, with your scale it looks more like 10 or 15mm max now. I'm not sure scale is missing is a solid reason for oppose, but sure as hell sticking in a made-up/guessimate scale is not adressing that concern either. --
Dschwen 14:27, 9 September 2009 (UTC) P.S.: It is actually making it worse, as the image now claims an acuracy it cannot provide (unless of course you convince me otherwise, that your scale is exact) --
Dschwen
14:28, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- Scale added. --
Muhammad
(talk)
12:12, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Voting closed; waiting on Papa Lima Whiskey to respond to request for scale, which was fulfilled. upstate NYer 05:30, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
- Supporting again since a genuinely useful scale was added. Papa Lima Whiskey ( talk) 17:37, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Promoted File:Soldierfly.jpg -- jjron ( talk) 07:21, 16 September 2009 (UTC)