Commons:Candidats pour les images de qualité

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 93% 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.

Aller directement aux propositions en cours
Other languages:
العربية • ‎čeština • ‎Deutsch • ‎English • ‎español • ‎français • ‎日本語 • ‎македонски • ‎Nederlands • ‎polski • ‎português • ‎русский • ‎svenska
float

Voici les candidats pour les images de qualité. Notez que ce n'est pas la même chose que les images remarquables. Aussi, si vous voulez uniquement des conseils et critiques de vos photos, allez vers les critiques de photographie.

Raison d'être

L'objectif du label Images de Qualité est d'encourager les personnes qui sont à la base du fonctionnement de Commons c'est à dire les contributeurs qui, grâce à leurs photos personnelles, permettent d'agrandir cette bibliothèque d'images. Alors que les Images remarquables rassemblent les images d'une qualité exceptionnelle chargées dans Commons, le label Image de qualité est destiné à identifier et encourager les efforts des contributeurs qui chargent des images de bonne facture dans Commons.
Par ailleurs les images recevant le label sont destinées à servir de référence pour tous les contributeurs souhaitant améliorer la qualité d'une image.

Guide

Toutes les images proposées doivent être l'œuvre d'un utilisateur de Wikicommons.

Pour les proposants

Un guide général sur les Images de Qualité, comprenant des critères plus détaillés, est disponible dans la page guide des images.

Conditions de la page de l'image
  1. Statut de copyright. Pour être éligible au titre image de qualité, l'image doit être téléchargée sur Commons et disposer d'un Bandeau de licence avec une licence acceptable.
  2. Les images doivent correspondre aux critères et conventions de Commons, incluant les photos de personnes identifiables.
  3. Les images de qualité auront un nom de fichier pertinent, seront correctement catégorisées et la page associée au fichier possèdera une description précise dans une ou plusieurs langues. Une description en anglais est recommandée mais pas obligatoire.
  4. Aucune publicité ou signature sur l'image. Toute information sur l'auteur et le copyright devrait être placé sur la page de l'image ou dans les métadonnées, afin de ne pas interférer avec le contenu de l'image.


Créateur

Les images doivent avoir être créées dans l’un des projet Wikimedia. Cela signifie que les images en provenance de Flickr ne sont pas éligibles. Remarque : le label « Featured Pictures / images remarquable » n’a pas cette limitation. Les photos réalisées par des Wikimédiens, représentant des œuvres en deux dimensions, sont éligibles ( et devraient avoir la licence PD-old conformément aux recommandations de Commons). Si une image est promue bien que n'étant pas la création d'un Wikimédien, le statut de QI doit être retiré dès que l'erreur est détectée.

Conditions techniques

Les critères détaillés sont disponibles ici : Commons:Guide des images

Définition

Les images qui se trouvent sur Commons ne sont pas seulement destinées à être visualisées sur un écran. Elles peuvent être imprimées ou être consultées sur des écrans à très haute désolution. Nous ne pouvons pas prédire quels appareils seront utilisés dans le futur pour les consulter. C’est pourquoi il est important que les images proposées disposent d’une désolution suffisante. 2 millions de pixels est normalement la limite basse, mais les Critiques peuvent vous en demander plus pour des images « faciles à prendre ».

Ceci ne s’applique pas aux images au format SVG.

Qualité d'image

Les images numériques peuvent souffrir de nombreux problèmes, comme le bruit, des problèmes de compression JPEG, un manque d’information dans les ombres ou les zones trop lumineuses, des problèmes de restitution des couleurs, … Tous ces problèmes doivent être gérés correctement.

Composition et éclairage

La composition de l’image doit contribuer à l’intérêt de l’image. Le premier plan ou l’arrière plan ne doivent pas détourner l’attention. L’éclairage et la mise au point contribuent à obtenir un résultat de qualité ; le sujet doit être piqué, épuré et bien exposé.

Objectif

Notre but principal est d'encourager la contribution d'images de qualité, utiles aux projets Wikimedia, sur Wikicommons.

Comment proposer une image de qualité

Il suffit d'ajouter, en haut de la section des Propositions (Nominations), sur la liste des images candidates, une ligne ayant cette forme :

File:Nom de l'image.jpg|{{/Nomination|Description très brève --~~~~ |}}

La description ne doit comporter que quelques mots ; il est également préférable de laisser une ligne blanche entre votre nouvelle proposition et celles déjà présentes.

Si vous proposez une image réalisée par un autre Wikimedian, veuillez inclure son nom d'utilisateur de la façon indiquée ci-dessous :

File:Nom de l'image.jpg|{{/Nomination|Description très brève (par [[User:USERNAME|USERNAME]]) --~~~~ |}}

NB : il existe un gadget, QInominator, qui accélère la nomination. Il ajoute un petit lien "Nominate this image for QI" en haut des pages des images proposées. Cliquer sur le lien ajoute l'image à une liste d'images potentiellement candidates. Quand cette liste est terminée, allez à la liste des images candidates et, en mode édition, cliquer sur la barre verte (en haut de la fenêtre d'édition) insère tous les candidats potentiels dans la fenêtre d'édition.


Nombre de nominations

Sélectionnez correctement vos images à proposer. Proposer plus de deux images à la fois peut être considéré comme du flooding, chose qui peut être mal vue et conduire à l'évincement.


Critiques des images

Tout utilisateur enregistré peut critiquer une nomination.
Les personnes qui effectuent une évaluation doivent s'appuyer sur le même guide que le créateur de l'image.

Comment critiquer

Comment mettre à jour le statut.

Examinez attentivement l’image. Ouvrez-la en haute résolution, et vérifiez que tous les critères de qualité sont respectés.

  • Si vous décidez de promouvoir l’image nominée, changez la ligne suivante
File:Nom de l'image.jpg|{{/Nomination|Description très brève --~~~~ | }}

to

File:Nom de l'image.jpg|{{/Promotion|Description très brève --signature du nominateur |Pourquoi vous avez apprécié l'image. --~~~~}}

Autrement dit, changez le code /Nomination par /Promotion et ajoutez votre signature avec, si possible, un court commentaire.

  • Si vous décidez de refuser la promotion de l’image nominée, changez la ligne suivante
File:Nom_de_l'image.jpg|{{/Nomination|Description très brève --~~~~ | }}

to

File:Nom de l'image.jpg|{{/Decline|Description très brève --signature du nominateur |Défaut(s) trouvé(s) dans l'image. --~~~~}}

Autrement dit, changez le code /Nomination par /Decline et ajoutez votre signature avec un court commentaire indiquant les critères non satisfaisant de l'image (par exemple, avec les titres de section du guide). S'il y a beaucoup de défauts, notez seulement les 2 ou 3 plus importants, ou bien ajoutez « multiple problems » (plusieurs problèmes). Si possible, expliquez en détail vos raisons sur la page discussion du promoteur, tout en restant gentil et encourageant !

NB : s'il vous plaît, évaluez les images candidates les plus anciennes en premier.


Délai de grâce et de promotion

Si aucune objection n'est soulevée pendant une période de 2 jours (exactement 48 heures) à partir de la première critique, l'image est promue ou refusée, selon la critique qu'elle a reçue. Pour soulever une objection à la critique reçue, déplacer l'image dans la section évaluation consensuelle (Consensual review).

Comment exécuter une décision

La gestion par QICbot est automatique deux jours après la prise de décision et promeut les images en cache dans Images de qualité récemment promues qui sont en attente de catégorisation avant leur insertion dans la page Quality images appropriée.

En outre, si vous pensez avoir identifié une image exceptionnelle, qui pourrait légitimement prétendre au label d'« Image remarquable », alors vous pouvez aussi nominer l'image dans la liste des images candidates au label d'« Image remarquable »

  • Les images qui attendent une évaluation sont entourées d'une cadre bleu
  • Les images qui ont reçu une critique favorable sont entourées d'un cadre vert
  • Les images dont la promotion est refusée par la personne ayant effectué l'évaluation sont entourées d'un cadre rouge

Images non-critiquées (cadre bleu)

Nominated images which have not generated assessments either to promote nor to decline, or a consensus (equal opposition as support in consensual review) after 8 days on this page should be removed from this page without promotion, archived in Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives avril 2015 and Category:Unassessed QI candidates added to the image.

L'évaluation consensuelle (Consensual review)

L'évaluation consensuelle est une procédure utilisée lorsque la procédure initiale n'a pas permis d'aboutir et qu'il est nécessaire de disposer d'autres avis.

Comment demander une évaluation consensuelle

Pour demander une évaluation consensuelle, modifiez seulement /Promotion, /Decline en /Discuss et ajoutez vos commentaires immédiatement après l'évaluation. Un robot déplacera la ligne dans la section appropriée dans la journée.

Ne mettez dans la section évaluation consensuelle que les images ayant reçu un avis soit positif soit négatif. Si, en tant qu'évaluateur, vous ne pouvez prendre une décision, vous devez ajoutez vos commentaires sans déplacer l'image.

Règles de l'évaluation consensuelle

Voir Commons:Candidats pour les images de qualité#Rules

Rafraîchir l'affichage de la page : 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]] 01:42, 21 avril 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.
Please nominate only a maximum of 5 images per day. [3] The minimum resolution for submissions is 4 megapixels.[4]

April 21, 2015

April 20, 2015

April 19, 2015

April 18, 2015

April 17, 2015

April 16, 2015

April 15, 2015

April 14, 2015

April 13, 2015

April 12, 2015

April 11, 2015

April 10, 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:2015-03-22_Air_Berlin_Takeoff_at_Berlin-Tegel_by_sebaso.jpg

2015-03-22 Air Berlin Takeoff at Berlin-Tegel by sebaso.jpg

  • Nomination Air Berlin Takeoff at Berlin-Tegel, Boeing 737 D-ABKT --Sebaso 19:38, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Sorry, the sky is overexposed--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 19:46, 19 April 2015 (UTC) please check again on commons detail page with white background - its not overexposed. --Sebaso 20:27, 19 April 2015 (UTC)*Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment OK! In that case, I'll adjust my judgment in the discussion.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 20:55, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
    Well it does seem over-exposed to me too. --Charlesjsharp 20:59, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

File:2015-02-21_Samstag_am_Karmelitermarkt_Wien_-_9440.jpg

2015-02-21 Samstag am Karmelitermarkt Wien - 9440.jpg

  • Nomination Farmersmarket on a saturday at the Karmelitermarkt, Vienna --Hubertl 00:38, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Both sides leaning out Poco a poco 09:45, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • ✓ Done New, perspective correctioned version uploaded, Poco a poco.
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks fine to me now Poco a poco 20:26, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
  • crop bad with cut sign --Denkmalhelfer 17:12, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The sign itself is not subject of this picture, Denkmalhelfer. Außerdem gilt in Deutschland Vermummungsverbot! --Hubertl 08:36, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose CA. -- Smial 10:58, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done CA korrigiert, danke für den Hinweis, Smial --Hubertl 11:39, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Pennsylvania Route 487 northbound south of Stillwater.JPG

Pennsylvania Route 487 northbound south of Stillwater.JPG

  • Nomination Pennsylvania Route 487. Jakec 18:07, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Sorry Jakec below 4mpx, there is new rules (see QI talk page) --Christian Ferrer 14:54, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
    It was nominated before that rule. Jakec 11:18, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral --Christian Ferrer 21:05, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose CA(s), poor detail, 2,123 × 1,504 pixels (see notes)--Lmbuga 16:50, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

File:San_Pancrazio_(Isola_Farnese_-_Roma).jpg

San Pancrazio (Isola Farnese - Roma).jpg

  • Nomination San Pancrazio (Isola Farnese - Roma) --Livioandronico2013 10:22, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Hubertl 11:47, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportI disagree Dust spot --Moroder 12:23, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support for me. Where is a dust spot? I see a plane in the sky. -- Spurzem 12:47, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Indeed there is a big dustspot, I added a note --Christian Ferrer 14:03, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:San_Pancrazio_(Isola_Farnese_-_Rome).jpg

San Pancrazio (Isola Farnese - Rome).jpg

  • Nomination San Pancrazio (Isola Farnese - Rome) --Livioandronico2013 10:22, 18 April 2015 (UTC)Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice Dust spot--Moroder 12:24, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Where? For me it's QI -- Spurzem 12:51, 18 April 2015 (UTC)?? big dustspot indeed. @Spurzem: is it possible to expect an attempt to correct before a promotion? --Christian Ferrer 14:08, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
    I disagree. DS must be fixed --Moroder 16:29, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
    Ops Face-tongue.svg ✓ DoneMoroder and Christian Ferrer ,Sorry but i don't seen --Livioandronico2013 19:08, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As above. -- Spurzem 08:14, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support looks fine. --Denkmalhelfer 12:53, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Störche Steinwedel (3).jpg

Störche Steinwedel (3).jpg

  • Nomination Two young white storks. --Hydro 07:14, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Good quality. --Cayambe 11:12, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
    Sorry, but I'm not convinced about the sharpness here --Poco a poco 14:49, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose looks not sharp --Denkmalhelfer 12:52, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
  • I uploaded a sharpened version. --Hydro 19:38, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Unbalanced IMO, but...--Lmbuga 16:53, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Stryhanka Tyshycia Windbreak.JPG

Stryhanka Tyshycia Windbreak.JPG

  • Nomination Windbreak between Stryhanka and Tyshycia villages. --Mykola Swarnyk 05:57, 18 April 2015 (UTC) * Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment please do a perspective correction..! --Hubertl 06:41, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
    ✓ DoneMykola Swarnyk 07:11, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Good quality. --Hubertl 08:07, 18 April 2015 (UTC)Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose below 4mpx --Christian Ferrer 13:46, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
    Bigger size added. --Mykola Swarnyk 15:33, 18 April 2015 (UTC) ok but it's a bit unsharp with lack of fine details, sorry --Christian Ferrer 16:05, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Really, too unsharp. CAs (see note as example). Underexposed areas IMO. Sorry, nothing is QI IMO: The road is cropped or too tight at left (poor composition)--Lmbuga 17:00, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Cornus_mas_in_Blüte_Hegerberg_03.JPG

Cornus mas in Blüte Hegerberg 03.JPG

  • Nomination Flowering Cornus mas on Hegerberg mountain near Kasten, Lower Austria --Uoaei1 18:34, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Hubertl 19:08, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I am very sorry that I have to disagree in this case but most of the tree is completely blurred. I don't know how this could happen at 1/250 but I don't think that this is fixable. --Code 16:43, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as for Code --Smial 11:03, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

File:FordFiesta-Tandil-abr2015.JPG

FordFiesta-Tandil-abr2015.JPG

  • Nomination Ford Fiesta parked in Tandil, Argentina --Ezarate 21:33, 11 April 2015 (UTC)</> Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Perhaps it will be better if you crop the upper part,.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 21:43, 13 April 2015 (UTC) ✓ Done --Ezarate 22:37, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
    Further the front of the car is too dark. -- Spurzem 16:36, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
    ✓ Done
  • Discussion It"s better good quality.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 09:56, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
    It's a bit better now but no QI for me. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 12:58, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support looks fine. --Denkmalhelfer 12:50, 19 April 2015 (UTC)--Denkmalhelfer 12:50, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There is not enough contrast between bumper and background. Further the rear light is to bright and sharpness could be better. And the composition is not fine for me. But this may be a question of taste. -- Spurzem 16:14, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noisy, bad lighting and too unsharp regarding the rather low resolution. --Smial 11:05, 20 April 2015 (UTC)Smial 11:02, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others--Lmbuga 17:10, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Benton Township, Columbia County, Pennsylvania in April (1).JPG

Benton Township, Columbia County, Pennsylvania in April (1).JPG

  • Nomination Benton Township, Columbia County, Pennsylvania. Jakec 18:07, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Good quality. --Hubertl 00:44, 18 April 2015 (UTC) Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose below 4mpx --Christian Ferrer 15:00, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
    Christian Ferrer the limiti for 4 mpx started from 14 April --Livioandronico2013 19:50, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
    Yes and we are the 19 April and the image is still candidate, until it's writen in the guideline it's the same rules for all candidates in this page, I was not in favor of this rules and I'm sorry that Jakec was not invited for to vote and that the vote be stopped so fast. --Christian Ferrer 08:06, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
    But surely if it was nominated before, it would be subject to the grandfather clause. Jakec 18:33, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral --Christian Ferrer 21:03, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor detail (see note). Too noise reduction IMO. CAs (see notes). 2,256 × 1,504 pixels (not 4 megapixels). It seems dark IMO. A bit cyan--Lmbuga 17:14, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Hondeghem Estaminet de l'ancienne maison commune.jpg

Hondeghem Estaminet de l'ancienne maison commune.jpg

  • Nomination Hondeghem Estaminet de l'ancienne maison commune.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 17:51, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Insufficient quality. --Touzrimounir 18:31, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
    Touzrimounir Can you give me the pleasure to motivate your opposition? Pierre and I do you'd be terribly grateful! Thanks --Livioandronico2013 18:52, 17 April 2015 (UTC)Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A pic ‎(4 608 × 3 456 pixels, taille du fichier : 11,73 Mio, type MIME : image/jpeg), corrected with RawTerapee ! Please, Touzrimounir I would be happy to know why it's Insuffisant quality.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 21:10, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Weak support The left part of the picture is blurry, perhaps may be cropped Ezarate 01:50, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @ Ezarate thank you for your review. The left part croped, gives a pic too tight.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 09:29, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Ξυλόσκαλο 3751.jpg

Ξυλόσκαλο 3751.jpg

  • Nomination Fog on Lefka Ori, Crete. --C messier 13:51, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but: no meaningful file naming, stains, uncalibrated Colorspace. --F. Riedelio 15:56, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
    Name is in greek (i think this acceptable) and is the name of the place (+ image number from the camera). Uncalibrated Colorspace maybe due to RawTherapee, I think I can fix it. Can you note the stains on the picture? --C messier 18:38, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
I note some stains on the picture. --F. Riedelio 15:51, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose fog blow out half of the picture --Denkmalhelfer (talk) 17:25, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @F. Riedelio, thank you for your review. Cloned out the noted features, although I think it is more possible that these were real world objects, propably garbage. I cannot fix the color space in EXIF data, but sRGB was selected when saving from RawTherapee. --C messier 18:16, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
@Denkmalhelfer, I can't understand your comment. There is visible structure in the fog (which is also the subject of the image) and as is a thick fog it covers the top of the hills/mountains. I don't see a technical shortcoming there. --C messier 18:16, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment here we are not talking about creative or idea behin the picture, it is pure quality of the pciture. And this is not good due too half of the picture flooded in white fog. --Denkmalhelfer 12:48, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support with less of the half of the picture flooded in white fog. --Ralf Roletschek 11:10, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Irisbus_Cristalis_ETB_12_n°115_TCL_Place_Carnot_-_Florian_Fèvre.JPG

Irisbus Cristalis ETB 12 n°115 TCL Place Carnot - Florian Fèvre.JPG

  • Nomination Trolleybus in Limoges --Billy69150 15:52, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Tilt/perspective issues. --C messier 10:20, 8 April 2015 (UTC) ✓ Done --Billy69150 10:39, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
    Suffers from pincushion distortion on the left, and there is a lot of almost empty space above the subject. Mattbuck 07:52, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Why is this image in CR? --C messier 09:28, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Pincushion distortion on the left. The car of the bottom right is disturbing--Lmbuga 17:36, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Minor issues but very good dynamic with this bus. Kvardek du 19:51, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Sea Fishing, Batticaloa.jpg

Sea Fishing, Batticaloa.jpg

  • Nomination Fishermen return to seashore --AntanO 18:17, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Touzrimounir 18:35, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I disagree: Colour noise in the sea part and posterisation in the sky. --Cccefalon 19:18, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I can't see any relevant chromatic noise or posterization. Alvesgaspar 14:23, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great composition but Cccefalon is right. On the left side in the sky there is some heavy posterization. It's really a pity. Otherwise the picture was FP-worthy in my eyes. I don't know if that's fixable. --Code 09:20, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose coclour noise on dark parts. --Denkmalhelfer 12:46, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Colour noise in the sea part and posterisation in the sky. As Cccefalon--Lmbuga 17:39, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Hoverfly April 2014-1.jpg

Hoverfly April 2014-1.jpg

  • Nomination A female hoverfly (Epistrophe eligans) on a Narrow leaved Cistus flower. The only one fly of this species that I have seen in Portugal. Alvesgaspar 21:01, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion *Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 21:13, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looking at Wikipedia etc. I think this is a different species. --Charlesjsharp 12:09, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info No, it is not. It was identified by an expert (diptera.info) Alvesgaspar 19:37, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
    • @Alvesgaspar:: I think it would be relevant to add details about the identification process on the file page, preferably with a link to the discussion where the identification is established. -- Slaunger 16:12, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
      • @Slaunger: Done, it is not possible to insert links into this template. Gerard Pennards is an expert on syrphid flies -- Alvesgaspar 13:26, 20 April 2015 (UTC)


File:Gurk Domplatz Friedensglocke 10042015 0701.jpg

Gurk Domplatz Friedensglocke 10042015 0701.jpg

  • Nomination “Peace bell” on Domplatz (with the cathedral in the background), Gurk, Carinthia, Austria --Johann Jaritz 06:28, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality.--ArildV 12:23, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry. But the bell is too distorded for me. It looks nearly like a big shoe. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 08:07, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment ✓ Done Thanks for your review. Straightened and cropped version uploaded (without cathedral behind). --Johann Jaritz 12:21, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • * Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Good composition now but for me it should not be so bright. Perhaps a bit more dark and contrast. -- Spurzem 07:32, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Thanks for your review. New version uploaded. Darker image and more contrast now. --Johann Jaritz 11:16, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good now. -- Spurzem 13:15, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 19:01, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 21:53, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Symbol support vote.svg Promoted   --Hubertl 03:04, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Lupinus Stradch.jpg

Lupinus Stradch.jpg

  • Nomination Lupin flowers on the side of the Highway M10 (Ukraine) near Stradch. --Mykola Swarnyk 02:39, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion * Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient quality because of extreme oversaturation. --Hubertl 04:25, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
    * Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment What about previous version? It seamed too blue to me. Mykola Swarnyk 16:12, 15 April 2015
    maybe this will be better? Mykola Swarnyk 16:39, 17 April 2015 (UTC) (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Overprocessed. Oversaturated greens--Lmbuga 17:43, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Friedhofskirche_St._Maria-4.jpg

Friedhofskirche St. Maria-4.jpg

  • Nomination Pilastergegliederter Saalbau mit flacher Stichkappentonne und eingezogenem Chor, Dachreiter mit Spitzhelm, vermutlich von Michael Stiller, 1722 --Tobias "ToMar" Maier 07:41, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient quality. Subject unsharp. Third opinion appreciated --Hubertl 11:36, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A third opinion means "discuss". Or am I wrong? --Tobias "ToMar" Maier 21:17, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The subject is really not sharp. --ArishG 13:41, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not sharp, bad CA --Denkmalhelfer (talk) 17:25, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   ----Billy69150 16:50, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Webysther_20150321171849-2_-_Painel_Tiradentes_de_Candido_Portinari.jpg

Webysther 20150321171849-2 - Painel Tiradentes de Candido Portinari.jpg

  • Nomination Painel Tiradentes, Candido Portinari. One of best works. --Webysther 14:22, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose 18,431 × 3,351 pixels, but sorry, blurried, noise, poor detail, CAs. With this resolution other users may think differently: Discuss--Lmbuga 18:37, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info In place of exposition is not possible use tripod, flash and have low light. O do no how fix this issues. To create this image i used another 20 joined. -- Webysther 11:09, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For me the resolution is good enogh to resolv the problems. In 3k pixel is impossible to see any problem. -- Webysther (talk) 01:15, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Vache00.JPG

Vache00.JPG

  • Nomination Sexy charolais cattle.--Classiccardinal 20:22, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support GQ --Palauenc05 05:30, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficiently sharp and inappropriate description. --Charlesjsharp 09:24, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Charles --Σπάρτακος 12:23, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not sharp --Denkmalhelfer (talk) 17:25, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Iglesia_de_San_Nicolás,_Tallinn,_Estonia,_2012-08-11,_DD_17.JPG

Iglesia de San Nicolás, Tallinn, Estonia, 2012-08-11, DD 17.JPG

  • Nomination St. Nicholas' Church, Tallinn, Estonia --Poco a poco 10:17, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Steeple unsharp, with CA --Daniel Case 05:29, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • No reaction, please, let's discuss this one --Poco a poco 20:24, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Good now. Daniel Case 20:28, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral No good perspective for me. Overall we see tilted lines. -- Spurzem 11:03, 16 April 2015 (UTC).
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The tilted lines underline the character of the subject: beeing high. And leads the eye up to the sky in good colour and with beautiful clouds. --ArishG 15:50, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I disagree. Look to the hauses at the right. They don't lead me to the beautiful sky. I only think they will fall in. -- Spurzem 20:47, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: you are voting in 2 different directions Poco a poco 10:20, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The verticals should be rectilinear. --Code 16:52, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • @Daniel Case: Are you still opposing? --Code (talk) 16:54, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but only without unnatural distortion. Verticlas not must be rectilinear. --Ralf Roletschek 11:05, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Perspective distortion is disturbing--Lmbuga 17:47, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → More votes? Code 16:52, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:BustoaBelgranoTandil-abr2015.jpg

BustoaBelgranoTandil-abr2015.jpg

  • Nomination Busto a Manuel Belgrano en Tandil, Argentina --Ezarate 16:29, 4 April 2015 (UTC)* Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment needs some perspective corrections. The technical quality is sufficient for QI. IMO --Hubertl 17:53, 4 April 2015 (UTC) ✓ Done --Ezarate 20:44, 4 April 2015 (UTC) @Hubertl: And? --Ezarate 00:00, 9 April 2015 (UTC) 09:46, 8 April 2015 (UTC)*Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Now is more distorted. --C messier 10:25, 8 April 2015 (UTC) Another version uploaded --Ezarate 00:00, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
    It's overexposed now. --C messier 21:49, 9 April 2015 (UTC) fixed --Ezarate 00:39, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
    Now it's leaning again. --C messier 17:47, 11 April 2015 (UTC) now? --Ezarate 18:17, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
    Nope. You need to correct the perspective, not just rotate it. Mattbuck 08:04, 12 April 2015 (UTC) redone --Ezarate 13:13, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Acceptable now. --Hubertl 08:02, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
    None of the verticals are vertical in the latest version. --Mattbuck 21:35, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support looks fine --Denkmalhelfer (talk) 17:25, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry guys but "fine" is not good enough for QI. In this case, the contrast is too hard and the image quality of the subject (the face) is below par. Alvesgaspar 13:30, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Need perspective correction --Billy69150 16:49, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Contrast is too hard. It needs perspective correction. Yellowish IMO. Unbalanced--Lmbuga 17:52, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Billy69150 16:49, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

File:European_robin_(Erithacus_rubecula)_with_nest_material.jpg

European robin (Erithacus rubecula) with nest material.jpg

✓ Done lightened image uploaded. --Charles (talk)

Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:56, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Southern_vine_snake_(Thelotornis_capensis_capensis).jpg

Southern vine snake (Thelotornis capensis capensis).jpg

  • Nomination Southern vine snake (Thelotornis capensis capensis), Phinda Private Game Reserve, KwaZulu Natal, South Africa --Charlesjsharp 11:18, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unsharp --Christian Ferrer 17:14, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
    2nd opinion please. This tit-for-tat oppose done in response to my oppose of file:Apis mellifera on Cistus albidus 01.jpg --Charlesjsharp 10:35, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment yes indeed, you, first you have my attention this way with the examples you cite, however when I want to decline your photos I did not need to invent a pretext, this image is really unsharp --Christian Ferrer 04:52, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment and you too the first, isn't it your opposes in response to my oppose on File:Nyala (Nyala angasii) female.jpg? --Christian Ferrer 05:16, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, it's a nice picture but it's unsharp IMO to be QI. As Christian Ferrer--Lmbuga 20:45, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:53, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Small_tortoiseshell_(Aglais_urticae_L.)_Port_Meadow.jpg

Small tortoiseshell (Aglais urticae L.) Port Meadow.jpg

Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:51, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:2015-02-28_Electric_Avenue_Museumsquartier_Wien_Kunstmeile_9540.jpg

2015-02-28 Electric Avenue Museumsquartier Wien Kunstmeile 9540.jpg

  • Nomination Electric Avenue, Museumsquartier, Vienna --Hubertl 04:53, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but too much noise and a few blurry. --Livioandronico2013 09:42, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
    I think, for this situation (dark room, capturing the content of monitors) the noise is acceptable --Hubertl 07:59, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Beside the question about quality: I'm not sure, if taking a photo of another photographs images might perhaps be a copyvio of if de minimis applies here. --Cccefalon 06:41, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This is a permanent presented art object, open to the public. And because of the austrian copyright laws (which exactly this situation makes the difference to the german and all other countries law situation afaik worldwide) its part of FOP. Permanent in the decisions of austrian high court jurisdiction means, at least six month. In this case, this art object is presented longer than one year. Vos fēlīcibus Austriacorum, photografica! Sed, quae ante semper ambulant lente tuas!--Hubertl 06:48, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
My latin lessons are too long ago, but I got the FOP part :) thank you for your explanations, this copvio stuff is always a little bit tricky ... --Cccefalon 04:54, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Soferne ich es einigermaßen richtig übersetzt habe: Ihr glücklichen Ösis, fotografiert! Was immer vor eurer Linse vorbeispaziert.--Hubertl 19:07, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Many reflections, esp. flash & photographer. Unsufficiant lighting. Not really sharp. --Smial 11:42, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:49, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:2014 Wolfstein 01.jpg

2014 Wolfstein 01.jpg

  • Nomination Ruine of "Burg Wolfstein" in Bavaria, part of a former house --Derzno 14:55, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Nice, but the crop is tight above.--Jebulon 17:21, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
    ✓ Done New version uploaded, aggressive crop slightly extended but unfortunately the original data doesn’t contain much more on the top of the picture. --~~~~
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support looks fine --Denkmalhelfer (talk) 17:25, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Billy69150 16:46, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Stollenmundloch_Grube_Magdalena_Morsbach.JPG

Stollenmundloch Grube Magdalena Morsbach.JPG

  • Nomination Stollenmundloch der Grube Magdalena in Morsbach, NRW, Hausteinrahmung von 1890 inschriftlich datiert. Denkmalgeschütztes Bauwerk. 2.050 m langer Stollen, eröffnet 1890 für den Abbau von Eisenerz. --Reneman 12:21, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment QI for me with English description. The image data must be in at least two languages. If possible, English. To be classified in Commons:Quality images/Recently promoted (It is not a rule, it is my opinion)--Lmbuga 14:15, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  • {{s}} Good quality. The user does not respond, but the picture is good. I think that the nomination must be in English, but I'm not sure and, if so, it's a good picture and, perhaps, an interesting partner--Lmbuga 16:42, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could a German user explain to the author what happens?--Lmbuga 16:50, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hm. According to his Babel-infobox on dewiki Reneman speaks English as well. But however: Lmbuga ist der Meinung, die Nominierung des Bildes müsste in Englisch erfolgen, weil das Bild sonst nachher nicht kategorisiert werden kann. Außerdem sollte die Bildbschreibung in mindestens zwei Sprachen sein, vorzugsweise sollte eine davon Englisch sein. Lmbuga räumt aber ein, dass das keine feststehende Regel ist, sondern seine eigene Meinung. Von mir übrigens ein
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support: Very good quality. --Code 05:27, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Ganz offensichtlich habt leider IHR ein Problem mit der Sprache. Erstens sind die Regeln klipp und klar formuliert: Commons:Leitlinie für Qualitätsbilder#Anforderungen an Qualitäts- und exzellente Bilder. Hier steht, dass ein Bild über einen sinnvollen Namen und eine geeignet Beschreibung verfügen soll. Dieses Bild verfügt über einen sinnvollen Namen und eine geeignete Beschreibung! Zweitens wurde bereits am 10. Apr. 2015 eine weitere Sprache ergänzt. Bevor ihr also Tage später über dieses "Problem" immernoch diskutiert, hättet ihr euch das Bild lieber nocheinmal engesehen! Drittens ist das Wiki immernoch ein Gemeinschaftsprojekt! Wenn einer der Meinung ist, dass eine Kategorie, Beschreibung, Geodaten oder sonst was ergänzt werden sollte, dann sollt er es einfach tun! Denn vom Diskutieren wird sich nichts ändern! So, dass war mein Wort zum Sonntag! Wäre sinnvoll, wenn die Bewertenden erst die Regeln lesen! MfG --Reneman 22:39, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • @Reneman: Was soll die Pöbelei? Ich habe auf Bitten von Lmbuga seine Anmerkung übersetzt, nichts weiter. Außerdem hab ich Deinem Bild ein Pro gegeben, als reg Dich ab. Übrigens: Wenn man während des QI-Prozesses Änderungen macht (Sprachen ergänzen etc.) dann teilt man das auf der QIC-Seite mit und wartet nicht drauf, ob es jemand von selbst merkt. Und jetzt arbeite mal an Deinem Tonfall. --Code 15:23, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I don't want to think or opine. es: Por lo dicho:La propuesta en QIC debe estar en inglés. Para que varíe mi opinión se me ha de hablar en una lengua que entienda y solamente entiendo gallego, castellano y portugués (I can't translate my words, sorry)--
Thanks Code--Lmbuga 20:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote? Code 15:23, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Nyala_(Nyala_angasii)_male.jpg

Nyala (Nyala angasii) male.jpg

  • Nomination Nyala (Nyala angasii) male, Phinda Private Game Reserve, KwaZulu Natal, South Africa --Charlesjsharp 21:56, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unsharp --Christian Ferrer 17:18, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
    2nd opinion please. This tit-for-tat oppose done in response to my oppose of file:Apis mellifera on Cistus albidus 01.jpg --Charlesjsharp 10:37, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment thanks to highlight that, really a pity that your comment can make this image sharper, that's proove your idea of sharpness when it concerns your images or images from others that you want to decline.... --Christian Ferrer 04:45, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment and you too the first, isn't it your opposes in response to my oppose on File:Nyala (Nyala angasii) female.jpg? --Christian Ferrer 05:17, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:46, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Apis_mellifera_on_Cistus_albidus_01.jpg

Apis mellifera on Cistus albidus 01.jpg

  • Nomination Apis mellifera (Western honey bee) on Cistus albidus --Christian Ferrer 11:23, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Zcebeci 11:34, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bee is not sharp. --Charlesjsharp 13:54, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The bee is less sharp than the flower because it is active and there is a little motion blur on the bee, but it's not really disturbing and widely acceptable IMO --Christian Ferrer 17:09, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Accetable --Livioandronico2013 08:10, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done thank you all, reworked version uploaded, the last one is better --Christian Ferrer 17:32, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The sharpened area is a little area, but it's QI IMO. Bee is too little as subject, but the subject is not only the bee--Lmbuga 20:57, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 02:45, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Lycaena thersamon - Lesser Fiery Copper 01.jpg

Lycaena thersamon - Lesser Fiery Copper 01.jpg

  • Nomination Wing upperside of male Lesser Fiery Copper (Lycaena thersamon). Adana - Turkey. --Zcebeci 10:13, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality --Halavar 10:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Wings not in focus and are the colours not over-saturated? --Charlesjsharp 13:52, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support fine for me --Denkmalhelfer 12:43, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl 02:44, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Lycaena_thersamon_-_Lesser_Fiery_Copper_02.jpg

Lycaena thersamon - Lesser Fiery Copper 02.jpg

  • Nomination Wing upperside of male Lesser Fiery Copper (Lycaena thersamon). Adana - Turkey. --Zcebeci 10:13, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality --Halavar 10:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Head is not in focus. --Charlesjsharp 13:52, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Head is not in focus. For my taste, too much space at right--Lmbuga 14:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:43, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Golf_I_2014-09-07_13-35-24.jpg

Golf I 2014-09-07 13-35-24.jpg

  • Nomination Golf I --Berthold Werner 09:24, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Σπάρτακος 16:40, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry. But in my opinion the car is too distorted. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 18:11, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Spurzem, maybe a more "normal" focal length around 30-35mm would have been better here. Also, I find the background a bit busy. --El Grafo 09:25, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with others, and it seems to me the crop is too tight .-.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 07:29, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:42, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Flap-necked_chameleon_(Chamaeleo_dilepis)_female.jpg

Flap-necked chameleon (Chamaeleo dilepis) female.jpg

  • Nomination Flap-necked chameleon (Chamaeleo dilepis) female, iSimangaliso Wetland Park, KwaZulu Natal, South Africa --Charlesjsharp 12:29, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Nice and very good -- Spurzem 12:34, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unsharp, you said my images are unsharp (here and here, yours is much less sharp --Christian Ferrer 17:25, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • For someone who ask to me for a high level of sharpness (Charlesjsharp), see my exemple, I want at least the half of sharpness that he ask to me. It is logical not revenge. --Christian Ferrer 10:50, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Anyway the head isn't not sharp.Please,before criticizing the photos of others is good to see their own, with affection --Livioandronico2013 08:18, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As I said above. -- Spurzem 08:43, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sharp enough. --Code 09:26, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's not very good IMO, but QI: very good composition, but the head could be better. Good resolution, bigger than other pictures, and the head is not fully or completely unfocussed--Lmbuga 12:38, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. --PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 13:02, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Agree with Lmbuga: acceptable. --Aiwok 10:02, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks fine for me --Denkmalhelfer 13:48, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 6 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 02:40, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Pipe_organ_of_St._George_in_Locorotondo.jpg

Pipe organ of St. George in Locorotondo.jpg

  • Nomination Pipe organ of St. George in Locorotondo --Livioandronico2013 09:32, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient quality. Sorry. The overexposed window at the top is too disturbing. --XRay 11:05, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
    Excuse me but I like have other opinions,the Subject have a good exposure--Livioandronico2013 11:35, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment No problem. If you have the RAW file you should try to reduce the lights at the windows.--XRay 12:11, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
    ✓ Done Better XRay? Thanks --Livioandronico2013 18:25, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Ok for me --Uoaei1 15:25, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It's not good, but it's better. And it may be acceptable.--XRay 17:02, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Good view to the organ but the window is too bright. -- Spurzem 18:29, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 02:23, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:PlacaenEscuelaNormal.JPG

PlacaenEscuelaNormal.JPG

  • Nomination Plaque infront of Escuela Normal, Tandil, Argentina --Ezarate 21:33, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Cayambe 08:00, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Could easily be taken with exactly frontal view, so distortion is not acceptable for me. --Uoaei1 18:45, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl 02:24, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Ålesund in May 2013.JPG

Ålesund in May 2013.JPG

  • Nomination A shot of Ålesund, Norway. --Miyagawa 17:13, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
    Has a slight CW tilt. Could benefit from a geocode. Nicely detailed with lovely light. -- Slaunger 19:49, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, certainly very nice, but perspective distortion (barrel or lens distortion), blown out (overexposed areas: See 3 notes as example). CAs (perhaps minor CAs: See note).--Lmbuga 19:37, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:26, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:BustoaSarmiento-Tandil.jpg

BustoaSarmiento-Tandil.jpg

  • Nomination Bust to Domingo Faustino Sarmiento, Tandil, Argentina --Ezarate 16:29, 4 April 2015 (UTC)* Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment needs some perspective corrections. The technical quality is sufficient for QI. IMO --Hubertl 17:53, 4 April 2015 (UTC) ✓ Done --Ezarate 20:44, 4 April 2015 (UTC) Another version uploaded --Ezarate 00:00, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ok for me now --Hubertl 22:22, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too bright for me. --Mattbuck 08:04, 12 April 2015 (UTC) colors levels reduced
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I can't read the signs: Most of the important area of the picture is a bit blurried. Unbalanced IMO. Low resolution--Lmbuga 13:24, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:26, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Wraxall 2013 MMB 96 Christmas Tree.jpg

Wraxall 2013 MMB 96 Christmas Tree.jpg

  • Nomination Christmas tree. Mattbuck 06:43, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Unfortunalty good idea but a bit dark --Billy69150 09:55, 3 April 2015 (UTC) it need a crop at right for to avoid the door --Christian Ferrer 21:44, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
    ✓ Done Mattbuck 07:52, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer 08:35, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unfortunate crop: top is missing. --Palauenc05 20:35, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
    There was a not insignificant amount of tree beyond what is visible. Mattbuck 20:15, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Palauenc05 --Billy 17:08, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:28, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Tip_of_Trullo_in_Alberobello_2015.jpg

Tip of Trullo in Alberobello 2015.jpg

  • Nomination Tip of Trullo in Alberobello 2015 --Livioandronico2013 10:46, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol support vote.svg Support Bello. Good quality.--Johann Jaritz 11:02, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose blown sky top right? --Charlesjsharp 12:33, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support Irrelevant --Moroder 07:41, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition seems seems a little bit off center and tilted. Also I don't like the large nearly contrast less light grey areas. There is not much to see. The Bricks in the foreground are not sharp and the back ground is pretty much featureless grey (which might have been good if some more intersesting stuff was in the middle) --Aiwok 13:19, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Irrelevant also for me --Σπάρτακος 12:00, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Acceptable. --Smial 11:29, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 02:30, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Camouflaged oriental garden lizard.jpg

Camouflaged oriental garden lizard.jpg

  • Nomination Camouflaged oriental garden lizard --AntanO 10:15, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Some minor flaws but overall good quality and QI. --Cccefalon 10:25, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Head not sharp --Charlesjsharp 12:29, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 07:42, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, it's nice but the unfocussed flower of the right is disturbing. Head is not realy in focus IMO. --Lmbuga 12:32, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'll assume that the animal is the focus, if yes it is not sharp --Denkmalhelfer 12:41, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl 02:31, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Harburg-Außenmühlenteich.jpg

Harburg-Außenmühlenteich.jpg

  • Nomination Der erste warme Freitag 2015 wird benutzt, um das Jahr im Freien zu feiern. --ArishG 21:53, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol support vote.svg SupportNice mood. QI for me.--Johann Jaritz 06:25, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sky blown out. Aber sowas von, da nützt auch die beste Stimmung nix. --Cccefalon 07:24, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Der Himmel ist nun mal nicht immer blau. Mir gefallen die dezenten Farben sehr gut; aber sicher ist das Geschmackssache. -- Spurzem 08:56, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The Wörnitz Harburger Stadtpark Valley is a romantic place.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 10:59, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 20:38, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Are you all blind-folded by spring mood? The branches are completly eaten away by the overblown sky. This has nothing to do with blue or grey sky, it is just a notable photographic mistake. I thought, I am dealing here with photographers but instead, I have to read a completly stupid support vote The Wörnitz Valley is a romantic place. This is kindergarden in it's purest and poorest form. --Cccefalon 07:47, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Just a little humor to bring joy, it's Spring as you say Smile Sorry for the geolocation errors, That said the pic seems (to me) technically correct, under a spring sky of April.- As said Spurzem "Le ciel n'est pas toujours bleu, en cette période. J'aime les couleurs subtiles très bien; mais cela est sûrement une question de goût"..--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 08:42, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as Cccfalon.--Hubertl 08:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, blown out sky --Denkmalhelfer 13:47, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support der Himmel stört mich nicht. --Ralf Roletschek 11:02, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 02:32, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Ehemaliges_Forsthaus_%28D-5-76-151-106%29_02.jpg

Ehemaliges Forsthaus (D-5-76-151-106) 02.jpg

  • Nomination Forsthouse in Nerreth, Wendelstein Middlefrankonia --Derzno 09:08, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
    Needs perspective correction and fix of the strong CA Poco a poco 10:12, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion ✓ Done new version uploaded. --Derzno 15:35, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
    QI -- Spurzem 07:41, 10 April 2015 (UTC) Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem 08:58, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The CA is gone but the perspective needs an improvement --Poco a poco 10:07, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support--Palauenc05 07:44, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It needs perspective correction. Too tight for my taste--Lmbuga 19:13, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Crop is really pretty tight. Light and colour are quite good imho --Aiwok 10:07, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too dark. --Denkmalhelfer 12:39, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Needs perspective correction --Billy (talk) 16:44, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → More votes?   --Poco a poco 18:50, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Nyala_(Nyala_angasii)_female.jpg

Nyala (Nyala angasii) female.jpg

  • Nomination Nyala (Nyala angasii) female, uMkhuse Game Park, KwaZulu Natal --Charlesjsharp 22:50, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bad light, strong disturbing shadows and overexposed area on one leg --Christian Ferrer 11:14, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment New version uploaded with partial brightening. 2nd opinion please on this harsh oppose. I do not see bad light, or strong disturbing shadows --Charlesjsharp 20:19, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, the tree trunk, on the right side of the pic, brings back very disturbing shadows .--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ (talk) 13:10, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but a part of the tree end on the animal and confuse me. --Denkmalhelfer 13:46, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:35, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Nationaal Park Weerribben-Wieden. Locatie Weerribben. Rijp op eikenbladeren.JPG

Nationaal Park Weerribben-Wieden. Locatie Weerribben. Rijp op eikenbladeren.JPG

  • Nomination De Weerribben-Wieden National Park. Location Weerribben. Hoarfrost on oak leaves (Quercus).
    --Agnes Monkelbaan 17:48, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hoar frost is not sharp enough. --Charlesjsharp 23:02, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done New version.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:56, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment seems over-processed now, but see what others think, --Charlesjsharp 20:23, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Acceptable. --Cccefalon 06:57, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The colours of the previous version are more natural. Frost is a liquid. May be not so sharp --ArishG 05:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC))
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks fine for me but not fully sahrp. --Denkmalhelfer 13:44, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 02:35, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Aleksanterinkatu.jpg

Aleksanterinkatu.jpg

  • Nomination Aleksanterinkatu, Helsinki. --Óðinn 21:23, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient quality. Sorry. The latern at the left is cropped, people and latern at the right too. --XRay 04:34, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment New version uploaded. --Óðinn 04:38, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline?   --Cayambe 16:18, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

File:SAAP Hyd.jpg

SAAP Hyd.jpg

  • Nomination Entrance of erstwhile Sports Authority of Andhra Pradesh.--Nikhilb239 08:04, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient quality. Blurred, perspective distortion, not sharp enough (18mm with this lens is very often a problem!) --Hubertl 08:28, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I disagree. The image is somewhat tilted, what can be fixed easily. But where is the blur? Sharpness is completely acceptabel. --Smial 10:52, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose please see my note: very bad perspective distortion on the left side.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 13:17, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose With PEL, and wrong lighting IMO.--Jebulon 20:28, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:36, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Fields,_İmamoğlu_06.JPG

Fields, İmamoğlu 06.JPG

  • Nomination Fields in İmamoğlu, Adana - Turkey. --Zcebeci 12:33, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think it is tilted. Colours also a bit oversaturated. --Kadellar 15:01, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
    No saturation was applied. Pls see its other versions too. It was a sloppy land and therefore it may look like a bit tilted. Thanks for your kind review. --Zcebeci 00:03, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support QI for me. I do not see tilt and the colours are good. --Halavar 23:00, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support QI for me.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 10:26, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturated and looks tilted. -- Slaunger 20:31, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturated. I don't like the composition: too much sky (rule of thirds)--Lmbuga 14:06, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 12:52, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 12:33, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Clearly tilted, and I don't use the mountains as point of reference but what it appears to be a flat surface. --C messier 13:44, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry,oversaturated --Livioandronico2013 20:06, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't think it's oversaturated (though I might've saturated it a bit less myself) and I see no tilt. I like the composition. Reminds me of my township pictures. Jakec 20:07, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturated.--Jebulon 20:19, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 6 oppose → Decline?   --Jebulon 20:19, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Emploi du temps (8eme jour après la proposition)

Lun. 13 avr → Mar. 21 avr
Mar. 14 avr → Mer. 22 avr
Mer. 15 avr → Jeu. 23 avr
Jeu. 16 avr → Ven. 24 avr
Ven. 17 avr → Sam. 25 avr
Sam. 18 avr → Dim. 26 avr
Dim. 19 avr → Lun. 27 avr
Lun. 20 avr → Mar. 28 avr
Mar. 21 avr → Mer. 29 avr