Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Dead Vlei 4.jpg

Dead Vlei, Namibia-Acacia trees[edit]

Reason: Besides being technically OK it gives the viewer a good impression how Dead Vlei looks like. You see the ground with its pattern, several trees and the dunes.
Articles this image appears in: Dead Vlei - Namib-Naukluft National Park
Creator: Ikiwaner (talk)

Support as nominator --Ikiwaner (talk) 22:33, 2 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Would you mind providing a caption for the image? Thanks, Spencer^{T♦Nominate!} 00:42, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- And translating the image page into English (which I was going to use to make a caption) - kind of necessary for en:wiki. --jjron (talk) 11:50, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love it, but I actually prefer this one.--Silversmith Hewwo 08:41, 3 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Reminded of Georgia O'Keeffe (yeah, Africa and America are quite different places, but this picturesque image reminds me of her paintings).--Caspian blue 06:02, 4 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. High value in Dead Vlei, and decent encyclopedic value in Namib-Naukluft National Park. Mostlyharmless (talk) 03:22, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support - did its job, made me want to check out the article. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 14:41, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. per nom. Elekhh (talk) 02:24, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Question and comment. Does anyone really consider Wikipedia to be a viable first source? Do you have an outside source for the age of the trees? 158.158.240.230 (talk) 16:22, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Umm, this is not the place to bring up the reliability of Wikipedia. Sorry. As for the trees, I am sure that if it really bothered you, you could go there, cut one down, and count the rings... Nezzadar ^[SPEAK] 07:08, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Come on, Nezz. Its a legitimate concern brought up and your snide reply is not helpful. --Muhammad(talk) 14:08, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, counting the rings won't help as the trees have been purported to be dead for 900 years, not dead when 900. --Muhammad(talk) 14:11, 8 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Muhammad is absolutely right - you've been counseled to be civil before Nezzadar. A search of Google scholar reveals that 900-700bp is the accepted date range. We can't be sure the figure is right, but we can't be sure that it's wrong either. Mostlyharmless (talk) 01:58, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree that caption shouldn't use self-quotation. Support age of trees with independent source in the article, or remove age from caption, i.e. replace with "Dead acacia trees in Dead Vlei, Namib-Naukluft National Park, Namibia." or similar. Elekhh (talk) 02:41, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Dead Vlei 4.jpg --jjron (talk) 11:46, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]