Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/JohnDaly

John Daly

I am nominating this picture because I feel that it exemplifies not only John Daly and golf, but also the level of fitness (or lack thereof) required to play; This appears in the John Daly and the golf article and was taken by me.

• Nominate and support. - Banpei 06:35, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose both. Unbalanced composition, too much sky, thus less encyclopedic. I don't think the new version is FP worthy, either... --Janke | Talk 06:56, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per Janke, too much sky makes it not FP quality and makes it poorer quality. Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 06:58, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose per above - but this isn't something that a little cropping can't fix. --Red Penguin 07:03, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• I've just uploaded a cropped version, Image:John Daly at AmEx edit.png. I'm not the best graphics editor, so I may still be a bit off, but I trimmed a bit of the sky away. Vote/recommendation retracted --Red Penguin 07:16, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Neutral. I was thinking more along the lines of this crop (shown second on the right) that I have just uploaded. The composition is improved and you don't really lose anything of interest from the scenery. The focus is SUPPOSED to be the golfer. I have also lifted the shadows SLIGHTLY to decrease the contrast of the image as the sunlight is quite harsh (the highlights are blown and cannot be recovered however). Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 12:29, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Oppose I agree completely with Janke, though the second cropped image is much better than the first. Alvinrune ^TALK 02:49, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose ack Janke Calderwood 11:58, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support The second (cropped) pic is excellent - Adrian Pingstone 17:11, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - I'm sorry but that disgusting fat gut just grosses me out. Its like that giant bellybutton is some menacing cyclopean force just staring me down. shudder.--Deglr6328 08:02, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment So are you opposing *simply* because the subject of the image 'grosses you out' without any regard to the technical composition of the 'photo? Nippoo 17:45, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am opposing because I ALSO find the image technically unrenarkable and otherwise roundly uninteresting.--Deglr6328 06:41, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak support #2 cropped version. I also find the picture somewhat un-pretty, but I'm surprised to find this guy is a professional sportsman. We don't have enough good GFDL pictures of reasonably famous people. This is a weakly contested subject area, so despite misgivings, support. -- Solipsist 09:32, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Second version. I think the skyspace actually makes the picture cooler, making the golf ball look even smaller. My only complaint is that his face, the key factor for showing what a famous person looks like, is very shadowy. Staxringold 20:15, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support second version. Excellent quality, illustrative. Unusual to get such a good PD image of a famous person. Plus, it gives hope to fat men everywhere that they too may become rich and famous and featured in Wikipedia. Johntex\^talk 04:10, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support The 2nd picture is great. Really makes you stop and examine his golf game. How does he get away with it? Canuck89 01:40, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Support second version. - Bevo 16:50, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not promoted