Wikipedia:Picture peer review/Common snakeneck turtle (Chelodina longicollis).jpg

I feel that this image displays and illustrates the turtle very well (Unlike two of the other photos I took today Image:Common snakeneck turtle (Chelodina longicollis) 1.jpg Image:Common snakeneck turtle (Chelodina longicollis) 2.jpg) and is encyclopedic.

The photo itself is quite OK, but I'd have a couple of issues. Firstly, in Australian usage turtle refers to species that live in/around water (see here). Being photographed on the grass with no water in sight thus looks rather unnatural for an Aust turtle. Secondly the infobox image in that article is already featured - while that doesn't mean that another image of this species can't be featured, it does tend to make it a little more difficult, especially if the EV is slightly compromised as mentioned above. --jjron (talk) 14:08, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I would have liked it to be near water (Photo was taken about 100m from a lagoon to my west and 300m to my east is the Murrumbidgee River) and say it was moving from a lagoon to a river . I wasn't going to 'aid' it to water since I'm very careful of any type of wildlife. Bidgee (talk) 20:13, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't know if it was there then removed, but at the time of writing it was not in the article, so therefore would be ineligable for a featured picture currently. Noodle snacks (talk) 05:45, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - My idea is not to add it to the article just yet. I'll rather find out what the review about the photograph is before doing so. Bidgee (talk) 09:32, 15 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]