From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

Cette page du projet dans d’autres langues:

Aller directement aux propositions en cours

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.

Version en cours de traduction depuis l'anglais, votre aide est la bienvenue

[edit] 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.

[edit] Guide

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

[edit] Proposer des images

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

[edit] Conditions de la page de l'image

Statut de copyright. Pour être éligible au titre image de qualité l'image doit être téléchargée sur Commons et disposer d'un Bandeaux de licence avec une licence acceptable.
Les images de qualité doivent être catégorisées, et avoir un titre et une description pertinente. Pour les organismes, le nom taxinomique devrait être inclus.
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.

[edit] 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.

[edit] Exigences de qualité

Des critères plus détaillés sont disponibles dans Guide des images.

[edit] Résolution

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 hautes résolution. 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 résolution suffisante. 2 millions de pixels est normalement la limite basse, mais les Critiques peuvent vous en demander plus pour des images « faciles à prendre ». (Ne s’applique pas aux images en format SVG).

[edit] 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, … Tout ces problèmes doivent être gérés correctement.

[edit] 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 contribue à obtenir un résultat de qualité, le sujet doit être piqué, épuré et bien exposé.

[edit] Objectif

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

[edit] Comment proposer une image de qualité

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

Image: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. Il est déconseille d'ajouter plus que deux ou trois images à la fois.

[edit] 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.

[edit] Comment critiquer

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

Image:Nom_de_l'image.jpg|{{/Nomination| Description très brève --~~~~ |}}

en

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

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

Si vous décidez de refuser la promotion l’image nominée, changez la ligne suivante

Image:Nom_de_l'image.jpg|{{/Nomination| Description très brève --~~~~ |}}

en

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

Autrement dit, changez le code /Nomination à /Decline et ajoutez votre signature avec un court commentaire indiquant les critères non satisfait par 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 avec plus de détail vos raisons sur la page discussion du promoteur, tout en restant gentil et encourageant !

Évaluez les plus anciens candidats d'abord, s'il vous plaît.

[edit] Délai de grace et de promotion

Si aucune objection n'est soulevée pendant une période de 2 jours (exactement 48 heures) à partir de la 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).

[edit] Comment exécuter une décision

Le bot QICbot effectue automatiquement les manipulations 2 jours après que la décision ait été rendue et les images ayant reçu le label sont automatiquement placées dans la page Commons:Quality_Images/Recently_promoted en attendant leur insertion manuelle dans la page images de qualité. Aussi ce qui suit n'est indiqué qu'à titre d'information :

If promoted,

Add the image to appropriate group or groups of images de qualité page. The image also needs to be added to the associated sub pages, only 3-4 of the newest images should be displayed on the main page.
Add {{QualityImage}} template to the bottom of image description page.
Move the line with the image nomination and review to Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 2009
Add the template {{QICpromoted|image:imagename.jpg}} to the user's talk page.

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

If declined, move the line with the image nomination and review to Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 2009.

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

[edit] Images non-critiquées (cadre bleu)

Les images proposées qui, 8 jours après leur soumission, n'ont reçu ni critiques négatives ni positives ou pour lesquelles l'évaluation consensuelle n'a pas abouti (égalité entre les voix favorables et défavorables) sont supprimées sans avoir été promues et sont archivées dans Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 2009 et la Category:Unassessed QI candidates est ajouté à l'image.

[edit] 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.

[edit] Comment demander une évaluation consensuelle

Pour demander une évaluation consensuelle, déplacer la ligne contenant l'image vers la section #Consensual review et effectuer les modifications suivantes :

=== ImageNameHere ===

[[Image: Nomdelimageici.jpg |none|180px]]

{{/Discuss| très brève description --~~~~| l'évaluation et vos commentaires sont insrés ici dans le modèle }}

Si cela vous parait trop compliqué, modifiez seulement /Promotion, /Decline en /Discuss et ajoutez vos commentaires immédiatement après l'évaluation. Quelqu'un déplacera la ligne dans la section appropriée ... ou essayez : vous devriez y arriver si vous suivez précisément un exemple existant.

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.

[edit] Règles de l'évaluation consensuelle

Voir Commons:Quality_images_candidates#Rules

Raffraichir l'affichage de la page : purge this page cache

[edit] Nominations

Due to changes in the Mediawiki parser code ~~~~ signatures are only working on this page if you have Javascript enabled. If you do not have Javascript enabled please manually sign with --''yourname'' (ctrl-click)">[[User:yourname|yourname]] 07:11, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] December 3, 2009

Nomination Basilica of the Holy Blood, Brugge - Main nave --Szilas 04:58, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

[edit] December 2, 2009

Nomination Purple Swamphen in Canberra, Australia --99of9 00:44, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Amphitheatre of Tarragona, Spain --Bgag 22:19, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination The cargo Global Helena. --Eusebius 21:58, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Seal rock in San Francisco --Mbz1 19:04, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good. -- Der Wolf im Wald 19:15, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination bulb exposure of a train -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good quality and something different.--Mbz1 19:06, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination trains near Frankfurt am Main central railway station -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Germany 'Regionalbahn' -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Review Comment Some kind of train category too? The image is good. --Korall 17:19, 2 December 2009 (UTC) Comment train category added ;) -- Der Wolf im Wald 19:44, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination DB class 140 -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good--Korall 17:19, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination DB class 185 -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good--Korall 17:19, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination BMW on IAA 2007 -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Mercedes Benz on IAA 2007 -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination 'Europaturm' in Frankfurt -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Refusée Sorry, resolution below 2MP. --Korall 17:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Campfire -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Skyline of Frankfurt am Main -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination 'Reichstag' and television tower in Berlin -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination 'Internationale Automobil Ausstellung' 2007 -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Frankfurt city hall -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Canon EOS 400D -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Very good--Korall 17:23, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination christmas tree in Frankfurt am Main -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Hohenzollernbridge and the Rhine in Cologne -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination market hall in Stuttgart, Germany -- Der Wolf im Wald 16:56, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Mito Art Tower. I added some blue sky for the composition not to be too tight and want to know if its OK. I nominated for deletiobn cause I was unsure of panaroma freedom in Japan but it looks like its staying so I think i can nominate for QI.--Korall 16:35, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Sun flower sea star in tide pools --Mbz1 16:13, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Very nice colour, rare, and good quality --George Chernilevsky 16:31, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Tidepools at Pillar Point at low tide --Mbz1 15:30, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Toyota Land Cruiser for excursions to Wadi Rum --Berthold Werner 07:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Another brushtail possum in Australia --99of9 06:44, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Some noise, but I love this image.--Mbz1 15:40, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Aqueduct of Segovia, Spain --Bgag 03:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion QI --George Chernilevsky 06:32, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Eye of the Sun, Monument Valley, Arizona --Bgag 03:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion very good --George Chernilevsky 06:32, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Female gorilla in San Francisco ZOO --Mbz1 03:14, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Interesting pose. --99of9 00:49, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Female gorilla with 8 months old baby boy gorilla in SF zoo --Mbz1 02:42, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Another nice scene. --99of9 00:49, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Cumulus humilis clouds. --99of9 02:37, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Radiotelescope at the Australian National University --99of9 01:53, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Refusée Sorry but not sharp enogh.--Korall 14:11, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Brushtail possum in Australia. --99of9 01:38, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Very good!--Mbz1 02:43, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] December 1, 2009

Nomination Loch Laich. --Eusebius 21:47, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Very nice atmosphere.--Mbz1 02:46, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Coat of Arms of Borgiallo. --Fale 19:28, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Discussion Comment too simple for QI --George Chernilevsky 19:48, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
I agree with George. --99of9 06:49, 2 December 2009 (UTC) Support If the picture is correct I think it can be QI. I dont mind simplicity.Korall 14:17, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Too simple for me too, I don't think it is in the spirit of the project (although the guidelines were designed for photographs) to promote such trivial designs (which does not mean it is not well executed). --Eusebius 17:12, 2 December 2009 (UTC)) CommentIt is fully possible to promote a picture of an everyday object taken with fully automatic settings of the camera if the result is fine. And hard-to-take shots like flying insects and rare birds get declined if the result is not of good quality. Its the result, not the effort that matters in photography. I cant see why SVG:s should be judged by a different standard. So here we have an image that describes the subject correctly, in the right file format and is properly described. Why not promote?--Korall 18:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Coat of Arms of Avio. --Fale 19:28, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Refusée Comment too simple for QI --George Chernilevsky 19:48, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
I agree with George. --99of9 06:49, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Coat of Arms of Ailoche. --Fale 19:28, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Refusée Comment too simple for QI --George Chernilevsky 19:48, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
I agree with George. --99of9 06:49, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Coat of Arms of Ferrara. --Fale 19:28, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Refusée Comment too simple for QI --George Chernilevsky 19:48, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
I agree with George. --99of9 06:49, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Coat of Arms of Naples. --Fale 19:28, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Refusée Comment too simple for QI --George Chernilevsky 19:48, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
I agree with George. --99of9 06:49, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Coat of Arms of Milan, Italy. --Fale 19:28, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Refusée Comment too simple for QI --George Chernilevsky 19:48, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
I agree with George. --99of9 06:49, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Coat of Arms of Borgiallo. --Fale 18:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion good --George Chernilevsky 18:52, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Coat of Arms of Avio. --Fale 18:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion good --George Chernilevsky 18:52, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Coat of Arms of Ailoche. --Fale 18:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion good --George Chernilevsky 18:52, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Panoramic view of Trento --Fale 18:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Coat of Arms of Ferrara.--Fale 14:06, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion good --George Chernilevsky 14:26, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Coat of Arms of Naples.--Fale 14:06, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion good --George Chernilevsky 14:26, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Botanical Garden Hanbury at Ventimiglia, Italy. --Fale 09:46, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Request: Full ID of plant need (Binominal latina) --George Chernilevsky 10:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Done Carpobrotus edulis, now in the description too ;)Fale 10:04, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Support very good now ;) --George Chernilevsky 10:30, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Plumbago, Botanical Garden Hanbury at Ventimiglia, Italy. --Fale 09:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Refusée Request: Full ID of plant need (Binominal latina) --George Chernilevsky 10:02, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Done Plumbago auriculata. Now is in the description too;) Fale 10:12, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Noisy, main subject is too small. --kallerna 11:11, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Coat of Arms of Milan, Italy. --Fale 09:38, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion good --George Chernilevsky 10:00, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Coat of arms of Olius, Spain. --Xavigivax 08:48, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion good --George Chernilevsky 10:00, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Coat of arms of Algarinejo, Spain. --Xavigivax 08:46, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion good --George Chernilevsky 10:00, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Petra, Siq at the widest place --Berthold Werner 07:09, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good work despite very high lighting contrast. -- Smial 12:46, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Tide pools at low tide--Mbz1 05:42, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion good. Very interesting. -- George Chernilevsky 09:53, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Pillar Point Harbor --Mbz1 04:55, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Ok. --Berthold Werner 07:23, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Hermitage of Sant Joan, Montserrat, Spain --Bgag 04:48, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion The light is rather dull but the picture is ok imho. --Berthold Werner 07:16, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Classical guitar headstock -- Alvesgaspar 00:27, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion good -- George Chernilevsky 09:57, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Illustration of a vernier caliper with legends -- Alvesgaspar 00:21, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Excellent work -- George Chernilevsky 09:57, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] November 30, 2009

Nomination Ginkgo biloba leave --Böhringer 20:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Nice macro --George Chernilevsky 10:06, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Prezwalski horse --Simonizer 20:35, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion good picture --Böhringer 20:39, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Celestine on septarias - France (6.5x6.2cm) --Archaeodontosaurus 17:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Leaf trails --Mbz1 16:18, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion It's hard to decide quality here, but composition is interesting and exposure reasonable. --99of9 06:50, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination A small fall in Golden Gate Park. --Mbz1 15:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Ferry on Saint Lawrence River, Quebec City --Bgag 15:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Interesting image and quality is OK--Mbz1 15:57, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Garden Nasturtium (Tropaeolum majus) --George Chernilevsky 15:27, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good quality.--Mbz1 15:57, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Maison Alphonse Desjardins, Lévis, Quebec --Bgag 14:58, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Barrington Levy singing in Stockholm --Korall 14:16, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Romanesque church of Monastery of San Paio de Diomondi - O Saviñao - Galicia - Spain. --Lansbricae 13:15, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination twilight --Böhringer 13:01, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination welcome --Böhringer 12:56, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Ok. --Berthold Werner 14:49, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Phlogophora meticulosa --Böhringer 12:54, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good for in vivo --Archaeodontosaurus 13:00, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Maniola jurtina --Böhringer 12:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Perfect --Archaeodontosaurus 12:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Braşov (Kronstadt, Brassó) - city hall (Casa Sfatului) --Pudelek 12:04, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Very good. --Cayambe 14:11, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Central bus station in Braşov --Pudelek 12:04, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good quality.--Mbz1 02:48, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Braşov (Kronstadt, Brassó) train station - interior --Pudelek 12:04, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good view. Some CA should be reduced though. -- Smial 00:09, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Old mural - exterior of St. Nocholas church in Braşov (Kronstadt, Brassó) --Pudelek 12:04, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Braşov (Kronstadt, Brassó) - Şchei. Entrance to cemetery --Pudelek 12:04, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Petra, view on Al Khazneh from the siq --Berthold Werner 10:28, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Tree bark with embedded barbed wire --Loadmaster 04:44, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

[edit] November 29, 2009

Nomination Oil storage tanks of the Lippendorf power station --High Contrast 21:02, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination A decorative figure in Dijon. --Eusebius 14:08, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion the harsh contrast and the light from above seem to be problems - other opinions? --Mbdortmund 16:00, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
IMO the light from above makes the image more dramatic, and I like it.--Mbz1 03:10, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Bridge in Le Bono. --Eusebius 10:21, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Russian Navy Romeo class diesel submarine PZS-50(S-49). --George Chernilevsky 09:35, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion good --Pudelek 12:26, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination "Kommuna" rescue ship-catamaran. Has been constructed in 1911-1913 and launch in 1913. Used in in Russian, Soviet and now Russian Navy since 1915. --George Chernilevsky 08:46, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Interesting.--Mbz1 03:07, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination "Kommuna" rescue ship-catamaran. Has been constructed in 1911-1913 and launch in 1913. Used in in Russian, Soviet and now Russian Navy since 1915. --George Chernilevsky 08:46, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Very good.--Mbz1 03:07, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] November 28, 2009

Nomination Napa valley vineyard and winery--Mbz1 23:31, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion nice picture --Pudelek 12:30, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination brandenburg gate in Berlin. -- Wolf im Wald 23:14, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Review Comment I would promote when in full resolution --Berthold Werner 09:51, 29 November 2009 (UTC) * Comment it is over the the recommended resolution (2MP) -- Wolf im Wald 20:07, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Canon EOS 400D body. -- Wolf im Wald 21:48, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Comment I would promote when in full resolution --Berthold Werner 09:51, 29 November 2009 (UTC) * Comment also over the the recommended resolution (2MP) -- Wolf im Wald 20:10, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
But the guidelines also say that "images should not be downsampled". This argument is rarely used as it can be unfair to cheap camera owners, but here the downsampling is quite significant and the picture was taken with a good camera in a controlled environment. --Eusebius 20:26, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Support I agree with all comments above, but result is good for me --George Chernilevsky 06:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Apache Trail, Arizona --Bgag 21:41, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Ice & Crataegus grayana. --kallerna 10:46, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Refusée inappropriate composition, too much of the plant is unsharp IMO --Der Wolf im Wald 20:29, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Frozen Tansy (Tanacetum vulgare). --kallerna 10:46, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Frozen Filipendula-bush. --kallerna 10:46, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Namsan Tower in Seoul. -- Elmor 17:35, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

[edit] November 27, 2009

Nomination Kagura Tai float description, Takayama, Japan --Bgag 20:32, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Birch (Betula pubescens) forest in Finland. --Estormiz 20:08, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Review Comment Great subject and composition, but the CA is very strong. Can you fix that? -- H005 23:44, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Info: I tried with Gimp and Fix-CA -plugin but only made the picture worse --Estormiz 09:10, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Sport complex „Olimpia“ in Braşov (Kronstadt, Brassó) --Pudelek 12:21, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Braşov (Kronstadt, Brassó) - city wall --Pudelek 12:21, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

[edit] November 26, 2009

Nomination The Town tower in Třebíč, in the Czech republic with a gallery, the largest clock-face in Europe and a large onion Dome --Ria 09:39, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Church of Naantali and guest harbour in winter night. --Makele-90 03:53, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Refusée tilted --Pudelek 12:33, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Tower appears vertical to me, but I think there is too much shadow (I know you can't change that easily) --WikiWookie 02:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Port of Naantali main entrance in winter night. --Makele-90 03:53, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Refusée interesing but tilt --Pudelek 12:33, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Nomination MS Independence of the Seas under construction at Aker Finnyards Shipyard, Turku, Finland. Please note a small boat directly in front of the ship. --Makele-90 03:53, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Refusée tilt, unsharp--Pudelek 12:33, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] November 25, 2009

Nomination Tonto National Monument, Arizona --Bgag 13:44, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Review Comment Not very sharp towards the top of the images and some fringing/ca on the left side I think. --Herbythyme 16:36, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Nomination Leaf beetle (Oides fryi) on a leaf near Goomolara Falls, Springbrook, Qld. --WikiWookie 03:22, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

[edit] November 24, 2009

Nomination Marguerite d'Youville Sanctuary, Varennes, Quebec --Bgag 17:53, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Sherbakov's park in Donetsk --Butko 15:28, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

Nomination Romanesque corbel. Facade of San Pedro de Trasalba Galicia - Spain --Lansbricae 12:43, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Critique requise

[edit] November 22, 2009

Nomination Closeup of a mud volcano in the Mud Volcanoes Reservation in Buzău County, Romania. By Radu Ana Maria.Andrei Stroe 22:25, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Good.--Mbz1 05:45, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] November 17, 2009

Nomination Mirò, Women and Bird, Barcelona, Spain --Fale 22:27, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Promotion Comment It has a slight CW tilt, see the features of the building in the background.Andrei Stroe 08:52, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
DoneNow should be fine :) Fale 21:12, 29 November 2009 (UTC) SupportLooks good to me.--Korall 14:25, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Consensual review

[edit] Rules

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

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

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

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

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

Votes by anonymous contributors aren't counted

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

[edit] Consensual Review

[edit] File:P1160243 Calopteryx splendens.jpg

Nomination Banded Demoiselle (Calopteryx splendens). Male. - Darius Baužys 13:36, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Discussion
Support Excellent photo --George Chernilevsky 13:58, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Posterized & noisy. --kallerna 11:09, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes? George Chernilevsky 16:20, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Puebla - Museo Amparo - Tampon lapin Mexica 1500dC.JPG

Nomination Aztec stamp of a rabbit, 1500 CE --Éclusette 14:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Discussion Very noisy and strong compression artefacts. As it is a very interesting object, could you upload a version as it came out of the camera (full resolution etc.), so someone could try to enhance quality? -- Smial 12:52, 1 December 2009 (UTC) Comment It actually comes out of the camera I used, an Olympus Camedia C-2500L from the Ancient Ages of Digital Photography (1999). Maybe it would better suit another category of promoted images such as the valued images ? - Éclusette 14:14, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I did'nt look at the camera model. If this is the full resolution, I'll try to enhance it a bit. Maybe this evening. -- Smial 15:19, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

thanks! - Éclusette (talk) 18:12, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:TomatenRot Böhringer 5.JPG

Nomination Tomate --Böhringer 12:59, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Discussion
Support good.--Mbz1 15:58, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Nice picture, but too much noise. --Eusebius 11:29, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Per Eusebius. --kallerna 11:13, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Rapana_Black_Sea_2009_G4.jpg

Nomination Veined rapa whelk Rapana venosa. A Black Sea beach at sunset --George Chernilevsky 08:46, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Discussion
Supportuseful topic, good picture, lack the size of the subject --Archaeodontosaurus 10:23, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Overexposed parts on the main subject. --Eusebius 11:21, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Petra Jordan BW 26.JPG

Nomination Jordan, Petra, a bedouin girl --Berthold Werner 13:19, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
* Comment Nice image, could you please remove dust spots from the sky?--Mbz1 21:42, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Discussion Done ;-) --Berthold Werner 13:11, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Support I like it --Mbdortmund 15:58, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Quality is ok, but I find the second person distracting in the composition. --Eusebius 11:19, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Support now good -- Smial 12:44, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Support Fine with me.--Mbz1 01:33, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Thomas_Bresson_-_cables_(by).JPG

Nomination Wires in an old NATO station --ComputerHotline 17:00, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Discussion
Support Unusual but a quality image to me --Herbythyme 16:33, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Oppose IMO the light is too harsh. --kallerna 10:38, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes? Eusebius 11:16, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Krokusse violett.jpg

Nomination purple crocuses. -- Wolf im Wald 23:14, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Discussion
Support Very good.--Mbz1 23:31, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Oversaturated. --kallerna 10:36, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Info: I have decreased the saturation. -- Der Wolf im Wald 12:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Support good quality IMO, colours are natural -- George Chernilevsky 11:45, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Support Now is good --Archaeodontosaurus 12:58, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 11:45, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Stamps with reproductions of the paintings by Ivan Aivazovsky.jpg

Nomination Stamps with reproductions of the paintings by Ivan Aivazovsky --Mbz1 21:42, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Discussion
Oppose Sorry, unsharp, bad reflections and (I think) unsure composition. --Eusebius 22:29, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Maybe reflection, but unsharp? It sharp enough IMO.--Mbz1 23:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't think so, but reflection is the primary motivation for my opposition anyway. --Eusebius 23:28, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Oppose fine deatails, but the reflections and some CA kills it imo, sorry --Mbdortmund 16:04, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Info: I uploaded a new version over an old one.--Mbz1 18:57, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

I maintain my opposition, the right part of the stamp is still ouf of focus (can't be corrected I'm afraid). --Eusebius 11:15, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? --Mbdortmund 16:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Jaguar XF SV8 front.jpg

Nomination Jaguar XF SV8. -- S 400 HYBRID 14:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Discussion
Support Very well done (a second time) -- 320td 17:25, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Front too noisy, very badly processed over the roof. --Eusebius 22:45, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
~~Support~~ too noisy? By me it's not too noisy!? -- S 400 HYBRID 14:56, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

As the creator and nominator of the picture, you may not vote. Yes, the flanks and front of the car are noisy, and I think it is a bit too much. But this thing over the roof is what mainly prevents your file from being promoted. --Eusebius 15:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Something on the roof. --Makele-90 00:57, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Background manually blurred, but with very bad result, not only above the roof. -- Smial 17:17, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline? --Makele-90 (talk) 00:58, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Boojum Tree.jpg

Nomination Boojum tree (Fouquieria columnaris) --Bgag 15:54, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Discussion
Support Good. With a slight regret for the small file size. --Cayambe 12:43, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Main subject not so sharp, signal processing issues in the sky, not corrected by the downsampling. --Eusebius 22:42, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes? --Mbdortmund 16:07, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:TexasIndianPaintbrush-0820.jpg

Nomination Texas Indian Paintbrush (Castilleja indivisa) flower. --Loadmaster 23:07, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Discussion
Comment should imo be cropped on the left side and on the top --Mbdortmund 12:12, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
Comment Done. --Loadmaster 23:53, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Support OK --Mbdortmund 20:44, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, overexposed red channel, it is an issue for a red flower. --Eusebius 22:35, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes? Eusebius 11:13, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Nová radnice (New townhall), Náchod 04.JPG

Nomination Tower of New Townhall, Náchod --Kozuch 10:37, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
Discussion
Comment a little tilt to the right --Pudelek 16:15, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → More votes? Eusebius 11:12, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Extra 300L Góraszka 2008.JPG

Nomination An Extra 300 with Robert Kowalik holding the stick. Photo by myself. --Airwolf 23:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Discussion
Comment There are at least five visible dust spots (marked on the image page) and the main subject is far from sharp. Like the composition and angle though - Peripitus 03:37, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Huh, there's got to be something wrong with my monitor, I can barealy see those spots. But I'll try to get rid of them, thanks. Airwolf 06:36, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
Comment After correction i will support this photo --George Chernilevsky 07:54, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → More votes? Eusebius 11:11, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Pano rive droite Ubayette.jpg

Nomination mountains north of Ubayette Valley --Berrucomons 17:41, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Discussion
Comment Overprocessed? Sky too dark, most other parts blurred from noise reduction. -- Smial 23:28, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Comment The sky looks natural to me. Plenty of detail available too. Very scenic. However... there are dust spots in the sky, so I can't support yet, can these be fixed? --99of9 23:30, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Oppose I guess if you fix it you can renominate. 99of9 10:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline? Eusebius 11:10, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] File:Airbus 320-200 Wizz Air.JPG

Nomination WizzAir's Airbus A320. Picture re-nominated, previously declined due to a licencing misunderstanding, photo by myself.--Airwolf 19:14, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Discussion Isn't it slightly tilted to the right? --Tupungato 23:21, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
I can see why you're asking, but I don't think so. Look at the wheels, the nose gear just has to be above the main undercarriage. Airwolf 23:02, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Support. --Cayambe 19:07, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps have a look at the building, perhaps it is a question of perspective correction --Mbdortmund 05:41, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote? Pudelek 12:13, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Emploi du temps (8^eme jour après la proposition)

Wed 25 Nov → Thu 03 Dec
Thu 26 Nov → Fri 04 Dec
Fri 27 Nov → Sat 05 Dec
Sat 28 Nov → Sun 06 Dec
Sun 29 Nov → Mon 07 Dec
Mon 30 Nov → Tue 08 Dec
Tue 01 Dec → Wed 09 Dec
Wed 02 Dec → Thu 10 Dec
Thu 03 Dec → Fri 11 Dec

Commons:Candidats pour les images de qualité