From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

Jump to: navigation, search

This project page in other languages:

Shortcut:
COM:QIC

現在の候補へスキップ

ここは「高画質な画像」を選定するため候補画像を集めた頁です. 「秀逸な画像」とは違う事に注意して下さい。あなたの作成・撮影した写真・画像に対して意見が欲しい場合は、「写真評価」ページがあります。

[edit] 趣旨・目的

「高画質な画像」の目的は、様々な個人ユーザーのユニークな画像の提供により画像コレクションを増やし、コモンズの地盤を広げ築き上げる事にあります。コモンズに蓄えられた全ての画像の中から最上のものを選ぶ「秀逸な画像」に対し、「高画質な画像」はコモンズに対しより良い画質での提供に務めるユーザーを奨励し、またそれを選別する為に設置されたものです。

加えて「高画質な画像」は、他ユーザーからの助言を受け、より高い画像品質を目指す場でもあります。

[edit] ガイドライン

高画質な画像への推薦はコモンズユーザー自身が作成したものに限ります。

[edit] 画像を推薦する方へ

以下の説明は高画質な画像への全般的なガイドラインです。より詳しい評価基準はイメージガイドラインを参照して下さい。

[edit] 推薦条件

著作権状況：高画質な画像への推薦画像は著作権保持者によって適切なライセンスの付与、及びアップロードされたものである必要があります。ライセンスに関するあらゆる情報はCommons:コピーライト・タグを参照して下さい。
高画質な画像は、画像の内容に合わせたファイル名を持ち、画像説明、カテゴリー別けがされている必要があります。これは生物学で使用されている分類名においても同様です。
画像に広告や署名、サイン等が含まれていてはいけません。高画質な画像の著作権と原作者の情報は（可能ならメタデータも）画像ページ内に置き、画像内容の妨げにならないよう留意しなければなりません。

[edit] 作者

写真は高画質な画像に選ばれるためにはウィキメディアン自身が撮影・作成したものでなければなりません。これは画像の出所を重視しており、例えばFlickrから供給された画像等は適切ではありません。（注：この必要条件は高画質な画像のみで、「秀逸な画像」では採用されていません）

[edit] 撮影技術

さらに詳細な評価基準は評価基準はイメージガイドラインを参照して下さい。

[edit] 解像度

画像解像度は2メガピクセル（1,600 x 1,250 ピクセル）以上を必要最低ラインの目安にして下さい。コモンズに置かれた画像は一般的なPCモニターでのみ閲覧されるとは限らず、高解像度モニターでの閲覧やプリントアウトされる事もあります。モニター・プリンタ等閲覧機器の将来的な高性能・高解像度化を踏まえると、推薦される画像がある程度高い解像度を保っていることは重要な事です。ですが条件を満たしても安易に撮られた画像は評価者の満足は得られないでしょう。（注：SVG画像にこの条件は当てはまりません）

[edit] 画像品質

デジタル画像特有の諸問題は全て適切に処理されていなければなりません。例えばイメージノイズ、JPG圧縮ノイズ、ハイライトの白つぶれとシャドー部分の黒つぶれ、カラー調整によって失われる色情報等々。デジタル画像は画像表現や加工において様々な問題に直面します。

[edit] 構図と照明効果

画面内での被写体の配置はより適切であり、前景と背景が被写体の邪魔になっていてはいけません。また、照明とフォーカスも画面全域に渡って注意を払い、被写体にピントが良く合い、画面がスッキリとしており、適性な露出である必要があります。

[edit] 価値観点

我々の主な目標は、高画質な画像を奨励することでウィキメディア・コモンズに貢献し、ウィキメディアプロジェクト全体の価値を高める事にあります。

[edit] 推薦方法

画像の推薦は決まった書式で１行だけ加えるのみです。Quality images candidates/candidate listを開き、Galleryタグ「 <gallery widths="143px"> 」の次の行に以下のフォームで書き込みます。

File:画像名.jpg|{{/Nomination| 簡潔に画像の説明を記入 --~~~~ |}}

画像の説明は最小限で良く、新しい推薦と既存の推薦フォームとの間は空白スペースを明けておいて下さい。一度に推薦する画像は評価する側の事も考えると２〜３点程度が適切でしょう。

[edit] 画像評価

評価資格は登録ユーザーであれば誰でも。
評価者は推薦者と同様にイメージガイドラインを基準に画像の評価をしてください。

[edit] 評価方法

画像の評価は慎重に行って下さい。画像は等倍サイズで開き、品質基準が満たされているかどうかを確認して下さい。

その画像が品質を満たしていると判断したら、下記の様に該当箇所を書き換えます。

File:画像名.jpg|{{/Nomination| 画像説明 --推薦者署名 |}}
　↓
File:画像名.jpg|{{/Promotion| 画像説明 --推薦者署名 | 評価理由 --~~~~ }}

つまりテンプレートを /Nomination から /Promotion へ切り替え、署名をし、可能ならコメントを記入するのみです。

画像が基準を満たしていないと判断した場合は、下記の様に書き換えます。

File:画像名.jpg|{{/Nomination| 画像説明 --推薦者署名 |}}
　↓
File:画像名.jpg|{{/Decline| 画像説明 --推薦者署名 | 評価理由 --~~~~ }}

こちらはテンプレートを /Nomination から /Decline へ切り替え、署名をし、基準を満たしていないと判断した理由を記入します（イメージガイドラインの該当箇所へのリンクでも可）。該当理由が多くある場合は主だった理由を２〜３点に絞って記すか、或は「multiple problems（問題点多数）」とのみ書き加えます。その際はマナーとして推薦者のトークページで説明を書き加えましょう、行儀良くかつ励みになる様に！トークページではより詳細な判断理由を述べましょう。

Info:古い画像から優先して評価するようお願いします。

[edit] 評価猶予期間から決定まで

評価から２日間（48時間）の間に意義・反対が出なければ、その画像は「高画質な画像」の認定／落選が決定、認定されます。意義・反対があれば、それまでに画像を#Consensual reviewへ移動してください。

[edit] 決定方法と決定後

評価者からの判定から２日過ぎた画像はQICbotが自動的に処理し、「高画質な画像」に認定された画像は一旦最近の認定画像へ蓄えられます。その後手動で適宜画像を「高画質な画像」に掲載、以後はコモンズのコンテンツとして提供・蓄積されます。

認定された画像が「秀逸な画像」として特に優れた価値のある画像だと思えたら、秀逸な画像の推薦へノミネートしましょう。

手動運営マニュアル（QICbotが不動等、緊急時に開いてください）

評価を待つ画像は青枠が表示されます。
高画質評価を受けた画像は緑枠が表示されます。
落選評価を受けた画像は赤枠が表示されます。

[edit] 評価を受けなかった画像（青枠のまま）

推薦画像が高画質認定・落選認定どちらの評価も受けなかった場合、または合意形成で反対/賛成が同数であった場合、８日の期間を置いて高画質の認定は受けずこのページから移動、Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 2009及びCategory:Unassessed QI candidatesへ加えられます。

[edit] 合意形成へ

#Consensual review（合意形成）では上記で説明した手順では評価不十分であり、さらに多くの意見を求め議論する必要がある場合は全てここにまとめられ、再検討されます。

[edit] 合意形成を求める

合意形成を求めるには画像推薦フォームを#Nomination一覧から#Consensual reviewのImages節へ移動し、ソースフォーマットを以下の様に変更します。

=== 画像名 ===
[[File:画像名.jpg|none|180px]]
{{/Discuss|画像説明 --推薦者署名 |
*{{support/oppose}} 評価・コメント --評価者署名
*{{support/oppose/comment}} 評価・コメント --~~~~
}}

もしこの手順が解り難くかったら、#Consensual reviewへの移動はせず#Nomination内でテンプレートだけ /Promotion, /Decline から /Discuss へ変更、前評価者すぐ後にあなたのコメントを加えておけば、他の誰かが#Consensual reviewへ移動してくれるでしょう。また初めて移動する際も、他のメンバーが移動したものを見ながら慎重に行えば大丈夫です。

#Consensual reviewへ移動する画像は、高画質評価若しくは落選を受けたものだけにして下さい。もし評価者としてどちらの評価にするか決めあぐねた場合はコメントのみ書き加え、画像は推薦画像としてこのページに残しておきましょう。

[edit] 合意形成ルール

（Commons:Quality_images_candidates#Rulesと同文です。）

ここでは#Consensual reviewで通常行われている手順とルールを紹介します。もしこれら手順とルールに疑問を持たれた際は、お気軽に変更を提案して下さい。

合意形成を求めるには画像推薦フォームを#Nomination一覧から#Consensual reviewのImages節へ移動し、ソースフォーマットを上記#合意形成を求める節で紹介した通りに書き換えます。
あなたが他者の評価に対して意見を述べたい時、または高画質評価に疑問を持った時（この場合は「落選」と仮定されて）は、推薦画像を移動することが出来ます。いずれにしても合意形成を求める際は理由と説明を忘れずに。
最終決定は、推薦者を除き一番最初に評価した者の票を含めた多数決を取ります。最後に投稿された票から最短で48時間を置いて採否を決定、決定内容は該当議論の最後尾に記載され、上記#決定方法と決定後通りの手順を辿ります。

投票には {{support}} (支持) 若しくは {{oppose}} (反対) をコメント文頭に置いて意思表示をしましょう。票の集計を容易にします。

匿名の投票はカウントされません。投票の際は必ず署名をお願いします。

賛否同点の場合、または最初の評価者から誰の意見も無かった場合、その推薦画像は最初のエントリーから数えて最長で8日間 Consensual Review に留まり、評価を待ちます。
#Nominationから#Consensual reviewへ移動する時など既存のコメントを「*」付き箇条書きへ変更する際は、可能ならばそれぞれに Oppose 若しくは Support を書き加えて下さい。
合意形成を求め移動する際はその旨と理由をコメントしましょう。移動時はテンプレートの{{}}の位置に注意して下さい。
画像移動の際はプレビューをして保存を心掛けましょう。手順を要約すれば"File:Example.jpg"を加えるのみです。

ページキャッシュを消去

[edit] Nominations

Due to changes in the Mediawiki parser code ~~~~ signatures are only working on this page if you have Javascript enabled. If you do not have Javascript enabled please manually sign with --''yourname'' (ctrl-click)">[[User:yourname|yourname]] 02:56, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] December 16, 2009

Nomination Castle Peleş, Sinaia, Romania - gardens --Pudelek 00:41, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
Review needed

Nomination Castle Peleş, Sinaia, Romania - gardens --Pudelek 00:41, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
Review needed

Nomination Castle Peleş, Sinaia, Romania --Pudelek 00:41, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
Review needed

Nomination The Back Entrance to the Great Church of the Sinaia Monastery --Pudelek 00:41, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
Review needed

Nomination A replica of a Curtiss JN. Photo by myself. --Airwolf 21:16, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Review needed

Nomination A MAN airport fire truck. Photo by myself. --Airwolf 18:40, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Review needed

Nomination Two wild rhinos --Ikiwaner 18:14, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion -- Perfect Archaeodontosaurus 18:55, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Oostende (Belgium): western jetty -- MJJR 17:00, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Yes - QI to me --Herbythyme 18:25, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Zeebrugge (Belgium): container cranes -- MJJR 17:00, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Illustrative, impressive lighting and clouds. Well done. --Ikiwaner 18:15, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Sharm el-Sheikh (Egypt): White Knight Bay -- MJJR 17:00, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Ok. --Berthold Werner 18:50, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Chalcanthite - Canaveille mine - Pyrénées Orientales France (20x16cm)-- Archaeodontosaurus 16:55, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Excellent. --Cayambe 22:37, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination 16th Century cross on Dartmoor --Nilfanion 12:10, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Lots of details, good composition --Ikiwaner 18:19, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination 20th Century cross on Dartmoor --Nilfanion 12:10, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Decline Centered composition and top-down perspective make it look a bit static and not as impressive like the alternative image --Ikiwaner 18:19, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination High res picture of the Friedenswarte, an observation tower in Brandenburg/ Germany --Leviathan1983 10:35, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good quality, some reasonable noise and CA. --Eusebius 10:45, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Electronic medical thermometer --Berthold Werner 08:38, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion QI to me --Herbythyme 08:47, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination sleeping baby cat --Lipedia 02:00, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Decline Blown whites, due to flash light (?). Sorry. --Cayambe 07:31, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] December 15, 2009

Nomination Beach house at Misquamicut Beach Juliancolton 23:47, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Review Comment certainly a little tilted (fixable) and maybe a touch over exposed? Nice image though --Herbythyme 08:47, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Hmm, I can't really see any tilt, but I'll play around with it in gimp later today. Juliancolton 16:12, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Done, better? :) Juliancolton 21:25, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination 360° of desert --Ikiwaner 20:53, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Tremendous. I will vote to feature in an instant. (My only regret is that you didn't park your car behind the big rock :)). --99of9 03:48, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Schreierstoren, Amsterdam, the Netherlands --Massimo Catarinella 19:21, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good. -- Smial 21:16, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Jordan, Amman, Ruins of the byzantine church on the citadel --Berthold Werner 12:50, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Ok, but please try to avoid f/22, as sharpness will be better if you use f/11 maximum :-) -- Smial 14:50, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Uca anatomy --Surachit 10:07, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Correct scheme, good work --George Chernilevsky 17:24, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Stained glass Jesus as King. --99of9 06:42, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Well done. --Cayambe 21:39, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Stained glass Jesus and the Children. --99of9 05:56, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good. --Cayambe 21:43, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Stained glass in Alcazar of Segovia, Spain --Bgag 04:46, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good. --Cayambe 21:43, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Aqueduct of Segovia, Spain --Bgag 04:46, 15 December 2009 (UTC).
Promotion Well done. --Cayambe 16:33, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Closeup on mature cones and a branch of an Araucaria araucana tree --D-Kuru 03:23, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good. --Cayambe 16:33, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Stained glass Nicodemus. --99of9 02:50, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Very good. --Cayambe 08:59, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Stained glass Nathanael. --99of9 02:12, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Also very good. --Cayambe 08:59, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] December 14, 2009

Nomination Rail viaduct over River Tavy, UK--Nilfanion 22:33, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Excellent image full res, thanks --Herbythyme 08:55, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Brother and sister in Venice--Lipedia 22:28, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Decline Far too noisy. --Eusebius 22:37, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Romanian military cemetery from World War I in Sinaia, Romania --Pudelek 21:38, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good. --Cayambe 08:28, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Old gate in Braşov (Kronstadt, Brassó) --Pudelek 21:38, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion I love the promotion and the athmosphere. Would also look good as b/w. --Ikiwaner 21:13, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Braşov (Kronstadt, Brassó) during rain --Pudelek 21:38, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good, I can live with the small, almost blown sky. --Cayambe 21:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Black Church (Schwarze Kirche) - Braşov (Kronstadt, Brassó) --Pudelek 21:38, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion OK for me. --Eusebius 10:43, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Antoine-Laurent de Jussieu, sharpened a bit since last nomination. --Eusebius 21:33, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Very good. --Cayambe 08:39, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Model of the sun in the Sternstunden exhibition in the Gasometer Oberhausen -- H005 21:25, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Comment Clever exhibition! The floor and ceiling are posterized, can you do something about that? --99of9 23:05, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Very good image in terms of composition and mood. I can't see posterization, there is a little bit of luminance noise in the almost dark parts and some CA around the lights but both are acceptable at full screen or print resolution. --Ikiwaner 21:09, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks to both of your for your review. 99of9, can you point me to where you see posterization? I'm happy to further improve the image, but I can't spot it. -- H005 22:28, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
I can't see it anymore either! Sorry about that. I think it must have downloaded incorrectly before - it was very strong and clear to me, but I've looked again at the same places and they're perfect. --99of9 00:32, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Historism architecture in Zurich --Ikiwaner 21:06, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good. --Cayambe 08:30, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination PZL-104 Wilga. Photo by myself. -Airwolf 19:38, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Nice. --Eusebius 21:40, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Centre of Luxembourg City: place Guillaume II seen from the City Hall. --Cayambe 19:04, 14 December 2009 (UTC).
Info: Cropped version now. --Cayambe 16:13, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion well exposed and illustrative --Ikiwaner 21:12, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination A stitch showing the seafront and harbour at Swanage in Dorset. --Herbythyme 16:42, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Nice work. --Cayambe 16:56, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Firing of an arquebus during the Geneva Escalade of 2009. The lock has just ignited the power in the touch hole and the shot is about to go off, amidst the smoke caused by neighbouring arquebusers. -- Rama 15:12, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Review Comment I like the shot though it is slightly overexposed. But there seems to be some trouble with the server cache: The preview has nice colours, but the full view is too bluish for me. What happend there? -- Smial 14:57, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination A stitch showing the seafront at Swanage around to Ballards point on the Jurassic coast in Dorset. It is rather large (even downsized slightly so full res is best!) --Herbythyme 14:33, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Ok for me. --Cayambe 07:26, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Fountain in Nantes. --Eusebius 14:03, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Review needed

Nomination The gardens of Cawdor castle. --Eusebius 14:03, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good image --Herbythyme 14:34, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] December 13, 2009

Nomination House in Nowoberezowo --Yarl 20:25, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Decline Perspective not corrected. Unfortunate timing - after 15 mins both walls would have been lit. :-/ Now the front wall is too dark IMO. --MattiPaavola 17:50, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Man in Tirana sleeping on the remains of his demolished house --Lipedia 19:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Decline Valuable image, but rotated too much IMO. --MattiPaavola 17:32, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Different ruins from Kosovo war (the black edge at the left side is already removed) --Lipedia 19:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Decline Oppose Sorry, far too noisy and unsharp. Argentic camera? --Eusebius 21:46, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Lancets of the western rose of Chartres cathedral, by Rama. --Eusebius 16:36, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Comment I'd prefer if the four lights were cloned out. This time I agree with the black borders, but would prefer if they were even. --99of9 01:24, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Perspective correction would be nice, too. --MattiPaavola 17:38, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Info: Lights cloned out, perspective corrected, centred. --Eusebius 20:10, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Good now. --99of9 20:30, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination A Finnihs BAe Hawk. Photo by myself. --Airwolf 14:26, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Fine. --MattiPaavola 17:38, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination A CSS-13 (green) and an RWD-5 (blue). Photo by myself. --Airwolf 12:45, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Review needed

[edit] December 12, 2009

Nomination The crossing tower of Dol cathedral. I couldn't insist more on perspective correction without the transept looking awkward. --Eusebius 20:51, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Review needed

[edit] December 11, 2009

Nomination Half Dome and a raven in Yosemite National Park --Mbz1 22:20, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Review needed

[edit] December 10, 2009

Nomination Bunker at a surfing spot. Jastarnia, Poland. --MattiPaavola 18:39, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Review Comment I think you should crop off a bit at the bottom, about as much as the shadow on the right. Airwolf 20:18, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] December 9,2009

Nomination Jabłonowskich Palace, Warsaw, Poland --Sfu 09:04, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Decline Comment Vertical lines on the right side are ok, but these on the left are cw tilted. --Berthold Werner 11:40, 9 December 2009 (UTC) Info: New version uploaded --Sfu 20:22, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Sky doesn't look good and geometry is disturbing. The central part of the picture is sharp but I think perspective correction has caused upsampling on the sides. --Eusebius 21:07, 12 December 2009 (UTC) Is downscaled version better then? --Sfu 21:19, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
You mean the first one? For sharpness on the sides yes, but the other elements still motivate an oppose vote from me. --Eusebius 20:15, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] December 7,2009

Nomination New Dormition of the Theotokos church from Braşov - view from White Tower --Pudelek 21:43, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Decline Not particularly sharp top me. While the title is clear the subject in the image is not. A crop would help that? --Herbythyme 12:09, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Braşov (Kronstadt, Brassó) - city center. View from White Tower --Pudelek 21:43, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Decline Distracting tree in the foreground and under exposed/dark in the background to me. --Herbythyme 12:06, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] December 6,2009

Nomination Pagoda in Japan --Jnn 13:27, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Review Comment I like this image a lot. Unfortunately, the branches overlap the main subject. Without those branches this would be a really good shot. --MattiPaavola 19:33, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] December 2, 2009

Nomination Campfire -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Review Comment Nice interesting image but I don't feel able to promote it. Bot completely clear and the odd light spots in the background seem a little distracting. --Herbythyme 13:48, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] November 30, 2009

Nomination A small fall in Golden Gate Park. --Mbz1 15:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Review Comment Interesting subject. However, I'd like to see a slightly wider view without the left and right end of the fall being cut. --MattiPaavola 11:15, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Agree. Thank you.--Mbz1 14:32, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Neutral Nice picture. I don't really like the horizontal crop (left part), and it is slightly overexposed. --Eusebius 22:24, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Consensual review

[edit] Rules

These rules are in accordance with the procedures normally followed in this section. If you don’t agree with them please feel free to propose changes.

To ask for consensual review, just change the /Promotion, /Decline to /Discuss and add your comments immediately following the review. An automatic bot will move it to the consensual review section within one day. Alternatively move the image line from the main queue to Consensual Review/Images and follow the instructions in the edit window.

You can move an image here if you contest the decision of the reviewer or have doubts about its eligibility (in which case an 'oppose' is assumed). In any case, please explain your reasons. Or QICBot will move it for you. When the bot moves it, you might have to revisit the nomination and expand your review into the Consensual Review format and add "votes".

The decision is taken by majority of opinions, including the one of the first reviewer and excluding the nominator's. After a minimum period of 48 hours since the last entry, the decision - Promoted or Not promoted - will be registered at the end of the text and then executed, according to the Guidelines.

Using {{support}} or {{oppose}} will make it easier to count your vote.

Votes by anonymous contributors aren't counted

In case of draw, or if no additional opinions are given other than the first reviewer's, the image will stay in Consensual Review for a maximum period of 8 days, counted from its entry.
Turn any existing comments into bullet points—add Oppose and Support if necessary.
Add a comment explaining why you've moved the image here - be careful to stay inside the braces.
Preview and save with a sensible edit summary like "+Image:Example.jpg".

[edit] Consensual Review

[edit] File:StJohnsAshfield_StainedGlass_MaryJesus.jpg

Nomination Stained glass Mary and child. --99of9 06:42, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Discussion
Oppose nice but too unsharp for me --Pudelek 13:04, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Comment Hum, I don't see it to be that unsharp. Let's discuss it. :-) --Cayambe 21:48, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Support. Ok for me. --Cayambe 15:10, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Support I don't think the photograph is unsharp. It is a photograph of a painting! --null 18:47, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote? H005 19:07, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Balancing boy.jpg

Nomination Boy in Venice, balancing on a walking adults rucksack--Lipedia 21:53, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Discussion Without the explanation you don't see what is so special. Also a bit too bright. --Schlurcher 17:51, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
CommentYou dont see he's balancing - what else could he be doing? The hand must be very bright, lest the face shouldn't be dark.--Lipedia 18:29, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose No clear view of the balancing act. --99of9 12:43, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose per 99of9 I'm afraid --Herbythyme 15:18, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Blown highlights, cropped feet and adult's head. Sorry. --Cayambe 16:07, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline? H005 19:07, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Abbotsbury stitch.jpg

Nomination A stitch showing the historic village of Abbotsbury in Dorset. Again fairly large so full res may be best! --Herbythyme 14:49, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Discussion Comment What about a crop which excludes the left part of the image? There is no sky there and nothing remarkable, I think. --Kiban 20:48, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
* Comment I don't really understand this. The whole village is historic and has many old buildings (and gets a lot of tourism). What would be gained by cutting off some of the village - anyone wanting to use the image may crop it. How does this affect QI? --Herbythyme 08:44, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Support QI for me. The crop can indeed be done by anyone who wants to use the image. --Cayambe 16:10, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Support -- Archaeodontosaurus 18:02, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote? H005 19:07, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Poor man reading.jpg

Nomination Homeless man at a silent place under Skopje trainstation bridge --Lipedia 19:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Discussion Comment White balance off. --MattiPaavola 13:42, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Brighter now.--Lipedia 21:12, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose too much blue, sorry --George Chernilevsky 06:03, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Sure, you saw this newly uploaded version? The colors are still cold, indeed, but that's intended.--Lipedia 11:02, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Part of the beard and of the book's white sheets are blue. These are unnatural colours. Sorry. --Cayambe 16:12, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? H005 19:07, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Logical connectives Hasse diagram.svg

Nomination The operations of propositional logic, or set theory respectively, in one diagram. --Lipedia 13:04, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Discussion Does anyone know about this stuff? I find it disconcerting that the red and white boxes are not more clearly paired with the big circle nodes (they sort of float below, but get crossed by all kinds of connecting lines). But I probably don't know enough to see the reason it's that way. --99of9 06:30, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
CommentI tried different versions, but to me it looked ugly, when the boxes mobbed the circles. There had to be some space in between. The connection lines are unavoidable, as they indicate, which set is a subset of an other set. I made them luminescent, not to interfere with the boxes and letters.--Lipedia 11:27, 16 December 2009 (UTC).
Question: Could the connectors start from the bottom of the boxes and go into the top of the next circles? --99of9 12:06, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment Information would get lost this way, as this is a geometric object as well:

If the edges wouldn't meet in the center of the nodes, it wouldn't be a rhombic dodecahedron anymore. But that's important, to show, that this diagram is a shadow of the four dimensional cube. --Lipedia (talk) 12:23, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Ok, so maybe the circles and the rectangles should be combined inside another shape, which is then considered the node? Anyway, I think I'm just saying that I can't promote it as it is because the rectangles look misfit to me. --99of9 12:40, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment This nominated diagram shows en:Boolean logic, but far better description need. Strange non-typical symbols used --George Chernilevsky 21:17, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
- en:wikibooks:Electronics/Boolean Algebra most native symbols --George Chernilevsky 21:31, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Mimurotoji5553.JPG

Nomination Shrine in Japan --Jnn 13:27, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Discussion Comment Really dark shadows here as well. --MattiPaavola 19:33, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose per above. Good subject matter but underexposed too I think --Herbythyme 12:10, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Comment much better to me. Would not oppose now and will think about it. Thanks --Herbythyme 15:21, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Comment Gamma and perspective adjusted, please review -- Smial 20:08, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Chapelle Sainte-Avoye

Nomination Chapelle Sainte-Avoye. --Eusebius 13:58, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Discussion
Support QI for me --George Chernilevsky 14:38, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Unfortunately I must disagree with this. About 1/3 on the bottom is covered with trees which cover the main subject almost completely. The centered composition and the rather dull lighting make the image look substandard to me. Technical image quality is good. --Ikiwaner 21:20, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose per Ikiwaner --Pudelek 22:32, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? George Chernilevsky 06:01, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Lough Derg Station Island Basilica SE 2009 09 17.jpg

Nomination St. Patrick's Basilica on Station Island, Lough Derg, County Donegal. --AFBorchert 20:44, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Discussion --Lipedia 20:58, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose CCW tilt? --Eusebius 21:43, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Tilt/perspective correction needed but the colour looks a little odd too? --Herbythyme 16:40, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? George Chernilevsky 06:00, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Old men near Kukes.jpg

Nomination Typical old Albanians--Lipedia 19:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Discussion CommentCould you fix the white balance? It seems to be too blue IMO. --MattiPaavola 17:32, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
CommentDone. There was too much blue indeed.--Lipedia 20:19, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Rather over exposed/washed out I think --Herbythyme 16:41, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose agree with --Herbythyme. The colour cast is still there in my opinion (see the wall). Sorry. --Cayambe 16:59, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? George Chernilevsky 05:59, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Image:KFOR in Dragas.jpg

Nomination KFOR post in Kosovo landscape--Lipedia 19:49, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Discussion
Oppose Over exposed and a strange colour cast to me --Herbythyme 12:04, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Comment How about cropping the tire from left, little adjusting the white balance and maybe downsampling to get rid of the film grain? This is a really valuable image, but I have to agree that it is not of high quality as is. --MattiPaavola 13:40, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
CommentDone.--Lipedia 20:32, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, I cannot support the composition. --Eusebius 21:46, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Thanks for the WB correction. The colors are now better. However, the sky is still overexposed. To fix that and the film grain, maybe you would need to rescan the original negative (instead of the print) and start from the beginning: apply gaussian blur and downsample etc... Probably it is not worth it if you are only after the QI stamp since like Eusebius said the composition is not perfect. The helicopter is unfortunately cut. Anyway, I think this is a really valuable image regardless of its technical perfectness. Thanks! --MattiPaavola 01:17, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose I fully agree both with MattiPaavola and Eusebius --Ikiwaner 21:01, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose rare, very interesting, but low quality. Per Herbythyme. :((( --George Chernilevsky 05:57, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose → Decline? George Chernilevsky 05:57, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Zlin 143LS Góraszka.JPG

Nomination A Zlin 143LS. Photo by myself. --Airwolf 15:37, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Discussion
Support Good. --MattiPaavola 16:31, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Chroma noise. --Eusebius 20:20, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Support Noise not a problem in print resolution or fullscreen. Composition and lighting good, illustrative image. --Ikiwaner 20:59, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Support good IMO --George Chernilevsky 05:54, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 05:54, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:NeuschwansteinSouth.jpg

Nomination Neuschwanstein castle, Germany -- Schlurcher 22:07, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Discussion Comment There is a strange colour on the castle (blue) to me and too much dark foreground? --Herbythyme 17:44, 11 December 2009 (UTC) I adjusted the picture from the original data. I like the foreground, but this is only my opinion. --Schlurcher 22:36, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Comment This picture has been stopping me now several times when I have been browsing through the candidate page. Sometimes I like it a lot and sometimes some unidentified thing bothers my eye. Anyway, I think this picture with the shadow has huge potential, but how to reveal it? Today an idea came to my mind: maybe you shouldn't cut the shadow, but instead crop the sky so that both the shadow and the sky would fill approximately one third each - to fulfill the rule of thirds. For sure you have been playing around with the crop a lot with this one, but have you tried that?--MattiPaavola 16:45, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Tried another crop. Now the shadow covers the complete botton. --Schlurcher 00:03, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Support I think it is fine now. Unordinary but nice composition IMO. --MattiPaavola 00:38, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose The bottom is completely black and there is a bit too much sky. The shadows are harsh od the contrast too high. --Ikiwaner 21:14, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Agree with Ikiwaner. IMO, part of the dark bottom and also of the sky should be cropped away. --Cayambe 17:02, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Support I think the black foreground adds mucht to the special mood and makes it stand out of the crowd. -- H005 22:37, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose This was my favourite castle in the whole world when I was 11, but I have to agree with Ikiwaner. --99of9 03:43, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline? 99of9 11:25, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Ciutadella Park fountain.jpg

Nomination Fountain of Ciutadella Park, Barcelona --Bgag 02:05, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Discussion
Oppose Nice view, but not a QI IMO. JPEG compression is too agressive and the composition, being otherwise really good, shows only a fraction of the pond's edge at the bottom. I think it should be either cut away completely or more of it should be boldly shown. Sorry. --MattiPaavola 19:46, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Support I can't see any JPG artifacts (and file size ratio seems bearable). Pond edge is probably a deliberate choice - I would have gone with Matti's suggestion, but for me it doesn't fail QI for that. --99of9 21:57, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Support QI for me. --Cayambe 13:32, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Support good -- Archaeodontosaurus 14:11, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Question: It looks good, but could something be done about the CA on the palmtree? --Eusebius 20:54, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Comment I have imported a better version. --Bgag 23:58, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Better indeed. --Eusebius 06:28, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote? Eusebius 20:54, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Devil's Golf Course in Death Valley NP 2.jpg

Nomination Devil's Golf Course in Death Valley NP--Mbz1 21:09, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Discussion Comment CW tilted? --99of9 09:56, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
I am not sure. It is kind of hard to tell. Let's put it for the discussion. Thank you for your comment.--Mbz1 17:22, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Comment if source photo much cropped at left then not tilted. Если отрезано больше слева, то накклона нет. Людмила, сравните со своим оригиналом --George Chernilevsky 15:35, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Timetable (day 8 after nomination)

Wed 09 Dec → Thu 17 Dec
Thu 10 Dec → Fri 18 Dec
Fri 11 Dec → Sat 19 Dec
Sat 12 Dec → Sun 20 Dec
Sun 13 Dec → Mon 21 Dec
Mon 14 Dec → Tue 22 Dec
Tue 15 Dec → Wed 23 Dec
Wed 16 Dec → Thu 24 Dec
Thu 17 Dec → Fri 25 Dec

Commons:高画質な画像の推薦