Commons:Candidatas a Imagens de qualidade

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
This page is a translated version of a page Commons:Quality images candidates and the translation is 77% complete. Changes to the translation template, respectively the source language can be submitted through Commons:Quality images candidates and have to be approved by a translation administrator.

Ir para as nomeações
Other languages:
العربية • ‎čeština • ‎Deutsch • ‎English • ‎español • ‎français • ‎日本語 • ‎македонски • ‎Nederlands • ‎polski • ‎português • ‎русский • ‎svenska
float

Estas são as candidatas a tornarem-se Imagens de qualidade. Por favor, fique claro que não é o mesmo que Imagens especiais. Além disso, se você deseja obter informações sobre as suas imagens, pode consegui-las em Críticas fotográficas.

Objectivo

O objectico das Imagens de qualidade é incentivar as pessoas que são a base do Commons, os utilizadores individuais que fornecem imagens para ampliar esta colecção. Enquanto que as imagens especiais são as melhores de todas as imagens carregadas no Commons, as Imagens de qualidade servem para identificar e encorajar os esforços dos utilizadores para carregar imagens de qualidade no Commons.
Além disso, as imagens de qualidade podem ser um local onde outros utilizadores expliquem métodos para melhorar uma imagem.

Orientações

Todas as imagens nomeadas devem ser trabalho próprio dos utilizadores do Commons

Para os nomeadores

Aqui estão as diretrizes gerais para Imagens de qualidade, Below e orientações gerais para Imagens de qualidade; e outras orientações mais detalhadas estão disponíveis em Diretrizes de imagens.

Requisitos das imagens

  1. Status de direitos autorais. As candidatas a Imagens de qualidade foram carregadas no Commons pelo proprietário dos direitos autorais sob uma licença adequada. Os requisitos completos de licença estão disponíveis em COM:CT
  2. Images should comply with all Commons policies and practices, including Commons:Photographs of identifiable people.
  3. Quality images shall have a meaningful file name, be properly categorized and have an accurate description on the file page in one or more languages. It is preferred, but not mandatory, to include an English description.
  4. Sem anúncios ou assinaturas na imagem. Os direitos de autor e informações de autoria devem ficar na página da imagem e podem estar nos metadados da imagem, mas não deve interferir no conteúdo da imagem.


Creator

Pictures must have been created by a Wikimedian in order to be eligible for QI status. This means that pictures from, for example, Flickr are ineligible. (Note that Featured Pictures do not have this requirement.) Photographical reproductions of two-dimensional works of art, made by Wikimedians, are eligible (and should be licensed PD-old according to the Commons guidelines). If an image is promoted despite not being the creation of a Wikimedian, the QI status should be removed as soon as the mistake is detected.

Requisitos técnicos

Critérios mais detalhados estão disponíveis em Diretrizes de imagens.

Resolução

As imagens do Commons podem ser usadas não só para visualizá-las no ecrã. Também podem ser usadas para impressão ou visualização em monitores de alta resolução. Não podemos prever quais dispositivos serão usados no futuro, por isso é importante que as imagens que são nomeadas tenham uma resolução razoavelmente alta. Normalmente o limite inferior é de 2 megapixels, mas para imagens 'fáceis de tomar', os revisores podem exigir muito mais.

Não se aplica a imagens SVG.

Qualidade das imagens

As imagens digitais estão sujeitas a vários problemas resultantes da captura e processamento da imagem, tais como ruídos, problemas com a compressão JPEG, falta de informação de zonas ou realces, ou problemas com a captura de cores. Todas estas questões devem ser tratadas adequadamente.

Composição e iluminação

A disposição do objecto principal de uma imagem deve contribuir para a própria imagem. Objectos em segundo plano não devem desviar a atenção. A iluminação e o foco também devem contribuir para o resultado global; o objecto principal tem de se destacar, ser completo e estar bem exposto.

Valor

Nosso principal objectivo é melhorar a qualidade das imagens que contribuem para o Wikicommons, algo valioso para os projectos da Wikimedia.

Como nomear

Basta adicionar uma linha deste formulário no topo da lista de candidatos da secção de Nomeações.

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Breve descrição  --~~~~ |}}

A descrição deve ser não mais do que algumas palavras, e por favor deixe uma linha em branco entre sua nova entrada e as demais.

If you are nominating an image by another Wikimedian, include their username in the description as below

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Breve descrição  --~~~~ |}}

Note: there is a Gadget, QInominator, which makes nominations quicker. It adds a small "Nominate this image for QI" link at the top of every file page. Clicking the link adds the Image to a list of potential candidates. When this list is completed, edit Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list. At the top of the edit window a green bar will be displayed. Clicking the bar inserts all potential candidates into the edit window.


Number of nominations

A descrição deve ser não mais do que algumas palavras, e por favor deixe uma linha em branco entre sua nova entrada e as demais. A adição de mais de um par de imagens de uma só vez pode ser considerado flooding, o que é desaprovado.


Avaliando as imagens

Qualquer utilizador registado pode revisar um nomeação.
Quando um revisor avalia uma imagem deve considerar as mesmas diretrizes do nomeador.

Como revisar

Como actualizar o status

Examine cuidadosamente a imagem. Abre-a na resolução máxima, e veja se ela atende aos critérios de qualidade.

  • Se você decidir promover a nomeação, altere a linha relevante de
Image:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Breve descrição --~~~~ |}}

to

Image:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Promotion|Breve descrição --Assinatura do nomeador |Por que você gostou. --~~~~}}

Em outras palavras, altere a predefinição de /Nomination para /Promotion e adicione a sua assinatura, possivelmente com algum pequeno comentário.

  • Se você decidir rejeitar a nomeação, altere a linha relevante de
Image:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Breve descrição --~~~~ |}}

to

Image:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Decline|Breve descrição --Assinatura do nomeador |Por que você não gostou --~~~~}}

Em outras palavras, altere a predefinição de /Nomination para /Decline e adicione a sua assinatura, possivelmente declarando os critérios pelos quais a imagem fracassou (podes usar os títulos das secções de diretrizes). Se houver muitos problemas, notifique os 2 ou 3 mais graves, ou adicione múltiplos problemas. Ao rejeitar uma nomeação, por favor, explique as razões na página de discussão do nomeador - em regra, seja agradável e estimulante! Na mensagem, você deve dar uma explicação mais detalhada de sua decisão.

Nota: Por favor, avalie primeiramente as imagens mais antigas.


Período de tolerância e promoção

Se não houver objecções no período de 2 dias (exactamente 48 horas) desde a sua revisão, a imagem será promovida ou rejeitada, de acordo com a revisão que recebeu. Se você possuir objecções, mova a imagem para a secção Consensual review.

Como executar uma decisão

QICbot trabalha automaticamente nisso 2 dias depois de a decisão ter sido tomada, e as imagens promovidas são armazenadas em Promovidas recentemente à espera de categorização e inserção automática em uma página apropriada das Imagens de qualidade.

If you believe that you have identified an exceptional image that is worthy of Featured picture status then also nominate the image at Commons:Featured picture candidates.

  • As imagens que esperam uma revisão são mostradas em uma caixa azul
  • As imagens que o revisor aceitou são mostradas em uma caixa verde
  • As imagens que o revisor rejeitou são mostradas em uma caixa vermelha

Imagens não avaliadas (quadro azul)

As imagens nomeadas que não foram promovidas nem rejeitadas, ou que acabaram em consenso (que haja um número igual de oposições e apoios) após 8 dias nesta página devem ser removidas desta página sem promoção, armazenadas em Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives maio 2015 e a categoria Unassessed QI candidates acrescentada à imagem.

Processo de revisão de consenso

Consensual review is a catch all place used in the case the procedure described above is insufficient and needs discussion for more opinions to emerge.

Como pedir uma revisão consensual

Para pedir uma revisão consensual, basta alterar /Promotion ou /Decline para /Discuss, e adicionar o seu comentário imediatamente após a revisão. Um bot automático irá movê-lo para a secção de revisão consensual dentro de um dia.

Por favor, somente envie coisas para a revisão consensual que foram revisadas como promovidas/rejeitadas. Se, como revisor, você não pode tomar uma decisão, adicione seu comentário, mas deixe o candidato nesta página.

Regras de revisão consensual

Veja Commons:Quality images candidates#Rules.

Actualização da página: purge this page's cache

Contents

Nominations

Due to 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

--[[User:yourname|yourname]] 07h38min, 25 maio 2015 (UTC)
  • Please open a new date section if you are nominating an image after 0:00 o'clock (UTC).
  • Please leave a blank line between your new entry and any existing entries.
  • Please help in reviewing "old" nominations here below first, many are still unassessed.
Thank you.

May 25, 2015

May 24, 2015

May 23, 2015

May 22, 2015

May 21, 2015

May 20, 2015

May 19, 2015

May 18, 2015

May 17, 2015

May 16, 2015

May 15, 2015

May 13, 2015

Consensual review

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. Our 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 will be registered at the end of the text using the template {{QICresult}} 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 nomination can be closed as inconclusive after 8 days, counted from its entry.
  • Turn any existing comments into bullet points—add Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose and Symbol support vote.svg 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".


Consensual Review

File:Mosaic_in_Santa_Prassede_(Rome).jpg

Mosaic in Santa Prassede (Rome).jpg

  • Nomeação Mosaic in Santa Prassede (Rome) --Livioandronico2013 09:01, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 11:22, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
    Isn't it a bit tilted and slightly out of focus? I want more opinions, please. --Kadellar 11:00, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Irisbus_Citelis_12_n°183_TAM_Saint-Denis_-_Florian_Fèvre.JPG

Irisbus Citelis 12 n°183 TAM Saint-Denis - Florian Fèvre.JPG

  • Nomeação Bus in Montpellier --Billy69150 18:48, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose missed focus --MB-one 10:41, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't see a problem with the sharpness. --King of Hearts 09:28, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This picture is improvable. Sharpening, reducing overexposure, increasing brightness. --Hockei 08:16, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support not perfect but QI.--Jebulon 21:00, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. Why ISO 800? -- Spurzem 22:05, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Jebulon 21:00, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Nsg_amrumer_dünen_rand_mit_vordünen_1.jpg

Nsg amrumer dünen rand mit vordünen 1.jpg

  • Nomeação nature reserve Amrum Dunes --Dirtsc 17:44, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, nice view, but there are too many artifacts. --Halavar 18:04, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't agree. --Dirtsc 18:23, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but the quality isn't good enough. You should rework it from RAW. --Hockei 08:20, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 10:03, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Lsg_amrum_strand_nebel.jpg

Lsg amrum strand nebel.jpg

  • Nomeação Eastern shore of the north-frisian island Amrum, beach near Nebel --Dirtsc 17:44, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, nice view, but there are too many artifacts. --Halavar 18:04, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't agree. --Dirtsc 18:23, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but the quality isn't good enough. You should rework it from RAW. --Hockei 08:21, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 10:03, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Fields Messara plain from Phaistos Crete Greece.jpg

Fields Messara plain from Phaistos Crete Greece.jpg

  • Nomeação Fields in the Messara plain, as seen from Phaistos, Crete, Greece.--Jebulon 16:41, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not a QI to me, it lacks detail --Poco a poco 18:58, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I strongly disagree, it don't lack details. I normaly don't discuss negative votes, but in this case I need other opinions.--Jebulon 20:46, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support no lack of details and sharp enough --Christian Ferrer 05:45, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Plants are inherently unsharp. This is far beyond the minimum requirement I have for plants. --King of Hearts 09:50, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as poco — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hubertl (talk • contribs) 10:14, 24 May 2015 (UTC) (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK IMHO, sharpness is acceptable. --C messier 16:49, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promote?   --C messier 16:49, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Ferrière-la-Petite, la « voie verte de l'Avesnois » et la Solre.jpg

Ferrière-la-Petite, la « voie verte de l'Avesnois » et la Solre.jpg

  • Nomeação La « voie verte de l'Avesnois » et la Solre à Ferrière-la-Petite.- Parc naturel régional de l'Avesnois, dans le Nord.- France.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 09:51, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It´s too dark in some parts. Like most of your pictures. You should think about calibrating your monitor! The picture itself is fine! Are you working with your notebook? --Hubertl 12:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose IMHO, the clouds are clipped. --C messier 13:13, 22 May 2015 (UTC) </>✓ Done darkness corrected in some areas. Thank you for your encouraging comment. I am working on a tower PC with a CPU I reviewed the parameters of RawTherapee. Maybe is this the better.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 14:03, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment unfortunately not,PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ, you brightened everything, not just the dark areas. C messier: In the first version, the clouds are not clipped at all (about 80%), in the second version, the cloud brightness raised up to 87%. Even that is not clipping --Hubertl 14:21, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment C messier The photo was taken at midday sun under a 3/4 face (local time 14:21). It is difficult to adjust the brightness and perfect contrast.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 07:52, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment IMHO, the brightest part of the clouds show no structure (brightness was lowered, but information was already lost). According to GIMP, there is a distinct peak at 221, much higher than the rest. Also the part of the sky next to the house has the same brightness with the clouds. --C messier 14:39, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There are two opposite positions, I give a Symbol support vote.svg Support and set it to discuss.--Hubertl 15:19, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
      I agree (to set it to discuss :), clounds and a part of the sky are burned out. A try to recover information just turned them grey. Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --C messier 15:23, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl 23:08, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Central_Park_New_York_May_2015_006.jpg

Central Park New York May 2015 006.jpg

  • Nomeação Midtown skyline from Central Park. --King of Hearts 02:13, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Upper half shows blurry leaves, lower half is sharp. --Lucasbosch 07:41, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Lucasbosch:: Is it sharp enough at 6 MP? I don't see any significant unsharpness at this resolution. --King of Hearts 01:26, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg weak from my side --Hubertl 07:24, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roletschek 08:22, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 06:44, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Villa_Johannesberg_Cafe_Gilf_Meran_2015.jpg

Villa Johannesberg Cafe Gilf Meran 2015.jpg

  • Nomeação Villa Johannesberg in Meran, Passeggiata Inverno 45-51 --Tuxyso 06:57, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Lucasbosch 07:38, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • {{o}} Disagree, left and right side leaning in. --Hubertl 07:42, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
    You are right, but this time I decided knowingly to do no full vertical correction because my shooting position was quite low in relation to the building. Let's discuss. --Tuxyso 08:06, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
    For comparision: fully corrected version --Tuxyso 09:03, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment You are right, that a completely "perspective correction" would be absolutely wrong. Something inbetween should work. Everything else is QI for me! --Hubertl 07:57, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Hubertl, I've uploaded a new version, please take another look. --Tuxyso 06:25, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think, this solution it´s very fine. Sorry for inconvenience, but sometimes necessary! --Hubertl 06:39, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roletschek 08:22, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl (talk) 06:40, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

File:RhB E-Lok IMG 2512ac.jpg

RhB E-Lok IMG 2512ac.jpg

  • Nomeação Electric locomotive typ Ge 6/6 II of the meter gauge Rhaetian Railways entering the station of Bergün Switzerland --CHK46 08:33, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Billy69150 08:34, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Really QI? Is it not a bit overexposed at the right? -- Spurzem 20:38, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yes, it is. --Berthold Werner 07:11, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Spurzem 18:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 19:24, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Notocactus uebelmannianus Kh.499 (Khanon-201 select).jpg

Notocactus uebelmannianus Kh.499 (Khanon-201 select).jpg

  • Nomeação Notocactus uebelmannianus (Parodia werneri) - plant selection (large flowers, bright violet color). --Финитор 12:31, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão Insufficient quality. Below the minimum resolution of 4 mp. --Crisco 1492 01:47, 18 May 2015 (UTC) ✓ Done resolution-600 Thank you. --Финитор 11:12, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
    Resolution (number of megapixels), not file size.Crisco 1492 00:08, 20 May 2015 (UTC) ✓ Done --Финитор 14:21, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
    I've uploaded a new version (a bit of middle ground), but this makes me too involved to pass the nom. Second opinion neededCrisco 1492 23:30, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Resolution is good. --Ralf Roletschek 08:25, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 08:00, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Kvarteret_Toppsockret_May_2015_01.jpg

Kvarteret Toppsockret May 2015 01.jpg

  • Nomeação Facade of residential building in Hökarängen. --ArildV 20:11, 19 May 2015 (UTC)* Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment has Sweden been visited by Mr. Hundertwasser in his early days? Please look at the lines on the upper side. Looks like an result of an earthquake. --Hubertl 05:52, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão Perharps before Mr. Hundertwasser stopped using a ruler. The horizontal lines are not straight because the building is curved, please compare with this images and the category--ArildV 06:51, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In this case, this image has been taken just about on meter more from the left, to demonstrate this construction detail. In this case, the picture doesn´t show this special construction. I´m happy to get some more opinions. Basicly, the technic is ok, but the composition is bad and incorrect. --Hubertl 07:07, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I strongly disagree, the point was to show the design of balconies and windows (not to demostrate the sharp of the building). One out of ten images focusing on different aspects of the building. I therefore dont think this symmetrical composition is bad or wrong. --ArildV 07:34, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Somewhat dull lighting, but in all other aspects absolutely QI. I really do not understand the decline vote above. -- Smial 09:48, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl 05:58, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Winterswijk_(NL),_Woold,_Boven_Slinge_--_2014_--_3151.jpg

Winterswijk (NL), Woold, Boven Slinge -- 2014 -- 3151.jpg

  • Nomeação Boven-Slinge in Woold near Winterswijk, Gelderland, Netherlands --XRay 04:47, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Overexposed at the upper third. --MB-one 14:01, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I disagree Symbol support vote.svg Support Not OE --Moroder 17:21, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roletschek 08:26, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 05:56, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

File:14-09-02-oslo-RalfR-008.jpg

14-09-02-oslo-RalfR-008.jpg

  • Nomeação Flytoget train in Oslo, Norway --Ralf Roletschek 10:16, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. Es schaut im ersten Moment aus, dass der Bahnsteig schief ist, wahrscheinlich ist es auch so wg. einer erhöhten Bahnsteigkante für diesen Zugtyp. enkrechten im Bild. --[[User:Ralf Roletschek|Ralf Roletschek]] 20:25, 16 May 2015 (UTC) I don´t know why this happens, but I promoted this picture on 16th of May. 20:25 UTC. --Hubertl 07:49, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Do I misunderstand something? But you are qualifying your own nommination!--CHK46 20:09, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hence moved to discussion -- KlausFoehl 11:29, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment das war irgendein Editunfall. Ich habe auf die Frage von Hubertl geantwortet, da ist etwas schiefgegangen. --Ralf Roletschek 12:49, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Some barrel distortion, high contrast not well handled, background widely overexposed. In addition the wide angle lens leads to a very unnatural view of the train (composition aspect). -- Smial 09:58, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl (talk) 07:53, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Tere schoonheid van de Camellia × williamsii 'Jury's Yellow' bloem. Locatie, Tuinreservaat Jonker vallei 01.jpg

Tere schoonheid van de Camellia × williamsii 'Jury's Yellow' bloem. Locatie, Tuinreservaat Jonker vallei 01.jpg

  • Nomeação Delicate beauty of the Camellia × williamsii 'Jury's Yellow' flower. Location. Garden sanctuary JonkerValley.
    Famberhorst 04:44, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão

Symbol support vote.svg SupportA few dark but good --Livioandronico2013 06:45, 18 May 2015 (UTC) *Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I disagree, it is really too dark and underexposed.--Jebulon 19:33, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yes, it's underexposed. --Berthold Werner 06:06, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
    *✓ Done Correctie WB. --Famberhorst 15:50, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support IMO OK now. --XRay 17:49, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support after correction. --Hubertl 10:27, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Enough for QI, but still too dark IMO. I strike my oppose, but cannot support, sorry.--Jebulon 21:13, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 10:27, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Ngayogyakarta-style blangkon, 2015-05-17 01.jpg

Ngayogyakarta-style blangkon, 2015-05-17 01.jpg

  • Nomeação Ngayogyakarta-style blangkon, a traditional Javanese hat Crisco 1492 01:41, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --King of Hearts 02:55, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose see notes, loss of texture in the front (not enough light, maybe), unclear lighting on the left backside. Please see notes. Third opinion appreciated.--Hubertl 04:58, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
    Texture is visible for me (screen calibration?). Will touch up that one edge.Crisco 1492 05:20, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
    I've retouched the gold edge, though in all of the base shots there wasn't all that much texture there. Crisco 1492 05:50, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl 08:02, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Ngayogyakarta-style blangkon, 2015-05-17 03.jpg

Ngayogyakarta-style blangkon, 2015-05-17 03.jpg

  • Nomeação Ngayogyakarta-style blangkon, a traditional Javanese hat Crisco 1492 01:41, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment stacking problems, see notes. --Hubertl 04:49, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There's not much detail in the originals, either (and, a side note, I'm using Helicon Focus, not PS).Crisco 1492 05:30, 18 May 2015 (UTC) I don´t know, how the original looks like, but I don´t want to prevent a nomination. I believe, that there are some basic mistakes made during the whole process. --Hubertl 07:27, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl 08:03, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Kehlsteinhaus Umgebung.JPG

Kehlsteinhaus Umgebung.JPG

  • Nomeação "Eagle´s nest" and Alps --Nordenfan 12:58, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. See notes ;-) --Hubertl 16:17, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I disagree. Verry informative and well labeled. But a unfortunate composition. To much sky and no golden cut. You´ve already given the QI award yourself. This is not o.k. --Milseburg 17:30, 18 May 2015 (UTC) * Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment und inwieweit habe ich mir den Award selbst gegeben? Bin ich Nordenfan, Milseburg? Ich glaube, du liegst damit jetzt aber gewaltig schief. Ich reagiere immer etwas unwirsch auf solche Anschuldigungen. Nachhaltig.--Hubertl 17:55, 18 May 2015 * Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sorry, Milseburg, ich hab jetzt erst gesehen, was du gemeint hast. Das ist wirklich sehr eigenwillig, was sich da der Nordenfan gedacht hat.--Hubertl 18:01, 18 May 2015 (UTC) (UTC) Auch sorry, ich hätte deutlicher machen sollen, wen ich anspreche. Selbstredend war Nordenfan gemeint. Das Lob für die Beschriftung geht aber eindeutig an dich, Hubertl. Ich bemerkte eben erst, dass die von dir ist. --Milseburg 19:48, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition, too much empty sky.--Jebulon 21:09, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Jebulon 21:09, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Königssee Hütte.JPG

Königssee Hütte.JPG

  • Nomeação Königssee Germany--Nordenfan 12:56, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality maybe the left side is a bit too dark. --Hubertl 16:17, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good, but: There is no English description and the author has already given the QI award to himself. --Milseburg 17:40, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment BTW: An english description is not necessary. The requirement is just a description in one or more languages. --XRay 17:57, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
      • Ok. English description isn´t necessary and the author promised never to do QI-Bot´s work again. So I give up opposition in this case. --Milseburg (talk) 12:33, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Milseburg (talk) 12:33, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Dome_of_Musei_capitolini.jpg

Dome of Musei capitolini.jpg

  • Nomeação Dome of Musei capitolini --Livioandronico2013 13:45, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Can you get the crop symmetrical? It's a bit tighter to the left. --C messier 16:17, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Overexposed in center --Daniel Case 02:36, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment IMHO, the center, although brighter from the rest of the image, due to light I suppose, is not overexposed, (no FFFF, shows structure). Please discuss. --C messier 07:40, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support no futher comment.--Tobias "ToMar" Maier 14:53, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl 05:55, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

File:CoA_Pius_IX_in_Porta_Portese.jpg

CoA Pius IX in Porta Portese.jpg

  • Nomeação CoA Pius IX in Porta Portese --Livioandronico2013 08:21, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Hubertl 08:41, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for now. Categorization (done). IMO the perspective does not need such a tilt (to be discussed)) and I would like a geocode, please (not a mandatory, I know).--Jebulon 10:27, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment No, no ... I thought, I not retreat. The perspective is perfect (I hate distortion) is not frontal. Come on guys, what you think? --Livioandronico2013 21:00, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
  • you can keep the lateral perspective, which is nice and more interesting than a frontal view (relief), but correcting the horizontal line, which is excessively tilted IMO.--Jebulon 11:41, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
If is lateral don't need horizontal but lateral adjustment.--Livioandronico2013 14:58, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't understand.--Jebulon 20:34, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support IMHO for this picture, the perspective is ok, because it is not a frontal shoot. QI is not about interesting composition, we are working with tecnical rules --The Photographer 16:41, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I don't agree with Photographer. Composition is a very important component of quality. This disturbs me a lot. Since it is almost frontal a correction of horizontal lines is due and even very easy as I guess.--Moroder 21:16, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Out of date clock icon 2.svg Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Hubertl 05:58, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Daruma doll, cut out, 01.jpg

Daruma doll, cut out, 01.jpg

  • Nomeação Japanese Daruma doll Crisco 1492 08:23, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Not good enough for a studio work. No DOF, edges are completely unsharp. --Hubertl 09:19, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
    Since this is a focus stack, I think it's the cut-out. Fixed.Crisco 1492 15:02, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I changed to neutral, because in my opinion, it is not just the cut out, its more the problem with the lighting, which made this a bit unclear. I understand it very good, that especially with this surface (and this color too!) it is really difficult to get clear edges.--Hubertl 06:12, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Indeed. My first and foremost goal was to avoid blowing the reds... *shudder* but in the end it just didn't look right. A black background may work a bit better in the future. I'll have to consider that.Crisco 1492 07:30, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Out of date clock icon 2.svg Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Hubertl 10:09, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Daruma doll, cut out, 02.jpg

Daruma doll, cut out, 02.jpg

  • Nomeação Japanese Daruma doll Crisco 1492 08:23, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussão
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Not good enough for a studio work. No DOF, edges are completely unsharp. --Hubertl 09:19, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
    Since this is a focus stack, I think it's the cut-out. Fixed.Crisco 1492 15:02, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I changed to neutral, because in my opinion, it is not just the cut out, its more the problem with the lighting, which made this a bit unclear. I understand it very good, that especially with this surface (and this color too!) it is really difficult to get clear edges.--Hubertl 06:12, 15 May 2015 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Out of date clock icon 2.svg Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Hubertl 10:10, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Tabela de tempo (8 dias após a nomeação)

dom 17 mai. → seg 25 mai.
seg 18 mai. → ter 26 mai.
ter 19 mai. → qua 27 mai.
qua 20 mai. → qui 28 mai.
qui 21 mai. → sex 29 mai.
sex 22 mai. → sáb 30 mai.
sáb 23 mai. → dom 31 mai.
dom 24 mai. → seg 01 jun.
seg 25 mai. → ter 02 jun.