Commons:Featured picture candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from Commons:FPC)
Jump to: navigation, search
This project page in other languages:

Alemannisch | asturianu | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | English | español | suomi | français | galego | हिन्दी | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lëtzebuergesch | молдовеняскэ | norsk bokmål | português | polski | română | русский | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | 粵語 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Skip to current candidates Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates


FPCandiateicon.svg

Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures.

Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, and current month.

For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election.

Formal things[edit]

Nominating[edit]

Guidelines for nominators[edit]

Please read the complete guidelines before nominating.

This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:

  • Licensing - Images licensed with solely "GFDL" or "GFDL and an NC-only license" are not acceptable due the restrictions placed on re-use by these licenses.
  • ResolutionImages (with the exception of animations, videos, and SVGs) of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are 'strong mitigating reasons'. Note that a 1600 × 1200 image has 1.92 Mpx, just less than the 2 million level. A 1920 × 1080 image, commonly known as Full HD, has 2.07 Mpx, just more than the 2 million level.
Graphics on Commons are not only viewed on conventional computer screens. They may be used in high-resolution print versions, and the images may be cropped to focus on portions of the image. See Commons:Why we need high resolution media for more information.
  • Scans – While not official policy, Help:Scanning provides advice on the preparation of various types of images that may be useful.
  • General quality – pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality.
  • Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer. Digital manipulation for the purpose of correcting flaws in an image is generally acceptable, provided it is limited, well-done, and not intended to deceive.
    • For photographs, typical acceptable manipulations include cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and colour/exposure correction. More extensive manipulations, such as removal of distracting background elements, should be clearly described in the image text, by means of the {{Retouched picture}} template. Undescribed or mis-described manipulations which cause the main subject to be misrepresented are never acceptable.
    • For historic images, acceptable manipulations might include digitally fixing rips, removal of stains, cleanup of dirt, and, for mass-produced artworks such as engravings, removal of flaws inherent to the particular reproduction, such as over-inking. Careful colour adjustments may be used to bring out the original work from the signs of ageing, though care should be taken to restore a natural appearance. The original artistic intent should be considered when deciding whether it is appropriate to make a change. Edits to historic material should be documented in detail within the file description, and an unedited version should be uploaded and cross linked for comparison.
  • Valueour main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that:
    • almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others,
    • night-shots are pretty but normally more details can be shown on pictures taken at daytime,
    • beautiful does not always mean valuable.


Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents

There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolours, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject.

Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the original painting are generally not considered featurable.

Works that may be scanned include most works created by processes that allow for mass distribution. For instance, illustrations published with novels. For these, it is generally accepted that a certain amount of extra manipulation is permissible to remove flaws inherent to one copy of the work, since the particular copy – of which hundreds, or even thousands of copies also exist – is not so important as the work itself.

Works created to serve a purpose include diagrams, scientific illustrations, and demonstrations of contemporary artistic styles. For these, the main requirement is that they serve their purpose well.

Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable:

  • Notable in its own right: Works by major artists, or works that are otherwise notable, such as the subjects of a controversy.
  • Of high artistic merit: Works which, while not particularly well known, are none the less wonderful examples of their particular type or school of art.
  • Of high historic merit: The historical method values very early illustrations of scenes and events over later ones. Hence, a work of poor quality depicting a contemporaneous historical event can be nonetheless important, even if the artistic merit is relatively low. Likewise, scans or photographs of important documents – which may not be at all artistic – nonetheless may be highly valuable if the documents are historically significant. The reason for the image's historical importance should be briefly stated in the nomination, for those reviewers unfamiliar with the subject.
  • Of high illustrative merit: Works that illustrate or help explain notable subjects, for instance, illustrations of books, scientific subjects, or technical processes. The amount of artistic merit required for these will vary by subject, but, for instance, an illustration that makes the working of a complicated piece of machinery very clear need not be notable as a piece of artwork as well, whereas an illustration for a book might well be expected to reach much higher artistic standards.

Digital restorations must also be well documented. An unedited version of the image should be uploaded locally, when possible, and cross-linked from the file hosting page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced."

Photographs

On the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.

  • Focus – every important object in the picture should normally be sharp.
  • Exposure refers to the shutter diaphragm combination that renders an image with a tonal curve that ideally is able to represent in acceptable detail shadows and highlights within the image. This is called latitude. Images can be on the low side of the tonal curve (low range), the middle (middle range) or high side (upper range). Digital cameras (or images) have a narrower latitude than film. Lack of shadow detail is not necessarily a negative characteristic. In fact, it can be part of the desired effect. Burned highlights in large areas are a distracting element.
  • Composition refers to the arrangement of the elements within the image. The "Rule of Thirds" is a good guideline for composition and is an inheritance from the painting school. The idea is to divide the image with two imaginary horizontal and two vertical lines, thus dividing the image into thirds horizontally and vertically. Centering the subject is often less interesting than placing the subject in one of the "interest points", the 4 intersection between these horizontal and vertical lines intersect. Horizons should almost never be placed in the middle, where they "cut" the image in half. The upper or lower horizontal line is often a good choice. The main idea is to use space to create a dynamic image.
    • Foreground and background – foreground and background objects may be distracting. You should check that something in front of the subject doesn't hide important elements and that something in background doesn't spoil the composition (for example that the streetlight doesn't "stand" on someone's head).
  • Movement control refers to the manner in which motion is represented in the image. Motion can be frozen or blurred. Neither one is better than the other. It is the intention of representation. Movement is relative within the objects of the image. For example, photographing a race car that appears frozen in relation to the background does not give us a sense of speed or motion, so technique dictates to represent the car in a frozen manner but with a blurred background, thus creating the sense of motion, this is called "panning". On the other hand, representing a basketball player in a high jump frozen in relation to everything else, due to the "unnatural" nature of the pose would be a good photograph.
  • Depth of field (DOF) refers to the area in focus in front of and beyond main subject. Depth of field is chosen according to the specific needs of every picture. Large or small DOF can either way add or subtract to the quality of the image. Low depth of field can be used to bring attention to the main subject, separating it from the general environment. High depth of field can be used to emphasize space. Short focal length lenses (wide angles) yield large DOF, and vice versa, long focal lenses (telephotos) have shallow DOF. Small apertures yield large DOF and conversely, large apertures yield shallow DOF.

On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, colour, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.

  • Shape refers to the contour of the main subjects.
  • Volume refers to the three dimensional quality of the object. This is accomplished using side light. Contrary to general belief, front lighting is not the best light. It tends to flatten subject. Best light of day is early morning or late afternoon.
  • Colour is important. Over saturated colours are not good.
  • Texture refers to the quality of the surface of the subject. It is enhanced by side lighting… it is the "feel" to the touch.
  • Perspective refers to the "angle" accompanied by lines that disappear into a vanishing point that may or may not be inside the image.
  • Balance refers to the arrangement of subjects within the image that can either give equal weight or appear to be heavier on one side.
  • Proportion refers to the relation of size of objects in picture. Generally, we tend to represent small objects small in relation to others, but a good technique is to represent small objects large contrary to natural size relationship. For example, a small flower is given preponderance over a large mountain…. This is called inversion of scales.
Not all elements must be present. Some photographs can be judged on individual characteristics, that is, an image can be about color or texture, or colour AND texture, etc.
  • Noise refers to unwanted corruption of colour brightness and quality and can be caused by underexposure. It is not a desirable quality and can be grounds for opposition.
  • Symbolic meaning or relevance … Opinion wars can begin here … A bad picture of a very difficult subject is a better picture than a good picture of an ordinary subject. A good picture of a difficult subject is an extraordinary photograph.
Images can be culturally biased by the photographer and/or the observer. The meaning of the image should be judged according to the cultural context of the image, not by the cultural context of the observer. An image "speaks" to people, and it has the capacity to evoke emotion such as tenderness, rage, rejection, happiness, sadness, etc. Good photographs are not limited to evoking pleasant sensations …

You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating.

Video and audio

Set nominations

Sets are temporarily disallowed for technical reasons; will reopen soon.

If a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set.

  • All images should be processed and presented in a similar manner to ensure consistency amongst the set.
  • All images should be linked to all others in the "Other Versions" section of the image summary.
  • If the set of subjects has a limited number of elements, then there should be a complete set of images. This may result in images in this kind of set with no "wow" factor, and perhaps little value on their own. Their value is closely bound to the value of having a complete set of these subjects. The decision to feature should be based on this overall value.
  • If the set of subjects is unlimited, the images should be chosen judiciously. Each image should be sufficiently different to the others to add a great deal of value to the overall set. The majority of images should be able to qualify for FP on their own.
  • All images should be of high technical quality.

Adding a new nomination[edit]

If you believe that you have found or created an image that could be considered valuable, with appropriate image description and licensing, then do the following.

Step 1: copy the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg. Then click on the "create new nomination" button.

All single files:

For renominations, simply add /2 after the filename. For example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2


Set nominations ONLY

Sets are temporarily disallowed for technical reasons; will reopen soon.

Step 2: follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save that page.

Step 3: manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list: Click here, and add the following line to the TOP of the nominations list:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg}}

Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify him/her using {{subst:FPC-notice}}.

Voting[edit]

Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for his/her own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed.

You may use following templates:

  • {{Support}} (Symbol support vote.svg Support),
  • {{Oppose}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose),
  • {{Neutral}} (Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral),
  • {{Comment}} (Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment),
  • {{Info}} (Pictogram voting info.svg Info),
  • {{Question}} (Pictogram voting question.svg Question),
  • {{Request}} (Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request).

You may indicate that the image has no chance of success with the template {{FPX|reason - ~~~~}}, where reason explains why the image is clearly unacceptable as a FP. The template can only be used when there are no support votes other than the one from the nominator.

A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above.

Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:

  • No reason
  • "I don't like it" and other empty assessments
  • "You can do better" and other criticisms of the author/nominator rather than the image

Remember also to put your signature (~~~~).

Featured picture delisting candidates[edit]

Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep It deserves to remain a featured picture
{{Delist}} Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist It does not deserve to be a featured picture anymore.

This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Do not replace the old image with the new image as an FP.
{{Delistandreplace}} Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace Replace the current FP with the proposed replacement.

If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box:


In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include:

  • Information on the origin of the image (creator, uploader);
  • A link to the original FP nomination (it will appear under "Links" on the image description page);
  • Your reasons for nominating the image and your username.

After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list.

As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the original creator, uploader(s), and nominator with a link to the delisting candidate. {{subst:FPC-notice-removal}} can be used for this purpose.

Featured picture candidate policy[edit]

General rules[edit]

  1. The voting period is 9 complete days counted from the nomination. After the end of this period the result will be determined. Votes added on day 10 and after are not counted.
  2. Nominations by anonymous contributors are welcome
  3. Contributions to discussion by anonymous contributors are welcome
  4. Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Exception: registered users can always vote in their own nominations no matter the account age and number of edits.
  5. Nominations do not count as votes. Support must be explicitly stated.
  6. Nominators and authors can withdraw their nominated pictures at any time. This is done by adding the following template: {{withdraw}} ~~~~
  7. Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project.
  8. Rules of the 5th day based on vote counts on day number 5 (day of nomination + 5)
    1. Pictures are speedy declined if they have no support (apart from the nominator).
    2. Pictures are speedy promoted if they have 10 support votes or more and no oppose votes. (Note that if it takes more than five days to reach this threshold, the picture can be promoted as soon as it is reached.)
    3. Once either speedy criterion is reached, the voting period is considered closed, and no more votes may be added.
  9. Pictures tagged {{FPX}} may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied, provided there are no support votes other than that of the nominator.
  10. Pictures tagged {{FPD}} (FP-Denied) may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied.
  11. Only two active nominations by the same user (that is, nominations under review and not yet closed) are allowed. The main purpose of this measure is to contribute to a better average quality of nominations, by driving nominators/creators to choose carefully the pictures presented to the forum.

Featuring and delisting rules[edit]

A candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:

  1. Appropriate license (of course)
  2. At least 7 supporting votes
  3. Ratio of supporting/opposing votes at least 2/1 (a two-thirds majority); same for delist/keep votes
  4. Two different versions of the same picture cannot both be featured, but only the one with higher level of support, as determined by the closer. Whenever the closer is not sure which version has consensus to be featured, he/she should attempt to contact the voters to clarify their opinions if not clear from the nomination page.

The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5. There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations.

The FPCBot handles the vote counting and closing in most cases, current exceptions are candidates containing multiple versions of the image as well as FPXed and withdrawn nominations. Any experienced user may close the requests not handled by the bot. For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished. Also note that there is a manual review stage between the bot has counted the votes and before they are finally closed by the bot, this manual review can be done by any user that are familiar with the voting rules.

Above all, be polite[edit]

Please don't forget that the image you are judging is somebody's work. Avoid using phrases like "it looks terrible" and "I hate it". If you must oppose, please do so with consideration. Also remember that your command of English might not be the same as someone else's. Choose your words with care.

Happy judging… and remember... all rules can be broken.

See also[edit]


Table of contents[edit]

List may contain works considered Not Safe for Work (nudity).

Nominators are requested, out of courtesy, to include the {{nsfw}} template with such images. Users may select the gadget in user preferences "Deferred display of images tagged with {{nsfw}} on COM:FPC" to enable the template's effect of hiding the image until selected.

Contents

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Borgund Stave Chuch in Lærdalen, 2013 June.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2014 at 14:22:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SBorgund Stave Church in Lærdalen in Lærdal municipality, Sogn og Fjordane, Norway in 2013 June.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Ximonic - nominated by Nikhil
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Nikhil (talk) 14:22, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Shirvan Domes.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2014 at 14:08:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The mysterious 15th century Shirvan Dynasty mausoleum and graveyard in Shamakhi, Azerbaijan.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Walter Callens - uploaded by Azeri| - nominated by Azeri -- Azeri (talk) 14:08, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Azeri (talk) 14:08, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very interesting and valuable photograph. Composition is very good too but I'm not convinced of the technical quality and the small size. It also seems tilted to the right.--MrPanyGoff 15:15, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
I think its the terrain or even the structure that is tilted, as you can see in the background the graveyard is located on hilly terrains. Azeri (talk) 15:26, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Ottoman surrender of Jerusalem restored.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2014 at 19:57:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ottoman surrender of Jerusalem restored.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by American Colony (Jerusalem) - uploaded by Xavexgoem - nominated by kasir -- Kasir (talk) 19:57, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kasir (talk) 19:57, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uberprutser (talk) 20:33, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 01:17, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ArildV (talk) 11:38, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Interesting picture with good quality. Azeri (talk) 14:17, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de San Pantaleón, Ohrid, Macedonia, 2014-04-17, DD 35 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2014 at 19:14:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Saint Panteleimon monastery is situated on Plaošnik, an archaeological site and holy place in Ohrid, Republic of Macedonia. It is attributed to Clement of Ohrid, a disciple of Saint Cyril and Saint Methodius at the request of Boris I of Bulgaria in the 9th century. Apart from the monastery's many reconstructions during the Ottoman empire, it has recently undergone extensive reconstruction and excavation. Reconstruction finished by August 10, 2002 and most of Saint Clement's relics were returned to the church.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Saint Panteleimon monastery is situated on Plaošnik, an archaeological site and holy place in Ohrid, Republic of Macedonia. It is attributed to Clement of Ohrid, a disciple of Saint Cyril and Saint Methodius at the request of Boris I of Bulgaria in the 9th century. Apart from the monastery's many reconstructions during the Ottoman empire, it has recently undergone extensive reconstruction and excavation. Reconstruction finished by August 10, 2002 and most of Saint Clement's relics were returned to the church. All by me, Poco2 19:14, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 19:14, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose QI and good ev, but no wow.--ArildV (talk) 11:39, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

File:A Aranha-de-prata (Argiope argentata) se alimenta, antero-dorsal sig.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2014 at 17:09:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Silver Argiope (Argiope argentata) feeds on insect caught in riparian forest, anterior-dorsal view - Bonito MS Brazil

File:Baleia Jubarte.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2014 at 16:56:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and - uploaded by Jonathan Wilkins - nominated by Arion -- ArionEstar (talk) 16:56, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArionEstar (talk) 16:56, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Not bad but focus is not perfect (I think it is just behind the whale). Some noise from over-sharpening.--ArildV (talk) 11:45, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Kievitsbloem (Fritillaria meleagris) 05.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2014 at 15:14:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Fritillaria meleagris. Very rare and legally protected in the Netherlands bulb. created by Famberhorst - uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by Famberhorst -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:14, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:14, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the composition is very good and beautiful.--ArildV (talk) 11:47, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Kickxia floribunda 1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2014 at 08:54:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Kickxia floribunda 1.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Gidip (talk) 08:54, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Gidip (talk) 08:54, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 17:55, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I'm not entirely convinced by the choice of DOF here.--ArildV (talk) 11:50, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Mallorca - Leuchtturm am Kap Formentor6.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2014 at 06:23:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lighthouse at Cap Formentor, Mallorca (Spain)

File:Brantôme 24 Reposoir XVIe 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Jul 2014 at 08:37:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Brantôme, Reposoir XVIe, France.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by JLPC - uploaded by JLPC - nominated by -- Christian Ferrer Talk 08:37, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 08:37, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral DoF is a bit shallow (right edge is unsharp) but the cut-by-the-frame tree on the right is what really keeps me from supporting. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 10:13, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Technically very good (sharp, light colors, framing). The background is a little distracting, but this is, I believe, inevitable. Wow is low for me though. Sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 16:34, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Butter-Tubs-Pass-2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Jul 2014 at 05:34:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Alternative view on the Butter Tubs Pass
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info c/u/n by Kreuzschnabel -- Kreuzschnabel (talk) 05:34, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Alternative view on the Butter Tubs Pass from a different point of view, showing the road not that dominant in the foreground. Light has changed a bit during those few minutes, not for the worst I think. Hopefully, the sheepfold in the lower right is interesting enough a detail. Oh yes, and this one is cropped to 3:2 ratio as well for those who don’t like µFT’s native ratio :-) On support, I will withdraw the other nomination.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kreuzschnabel (talk) 05:34, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support much better composition than the other nomination. The reading of the image is much more pleasant here. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 09:13, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Better but some vegetation in the foreground would make it FP. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:39, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There is no more vegetation up there in the moorlands than shown in the image. Grass, bracken, heather, that’s all. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 10:03, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Flowers in foreground, looks weird, see annotation. --Slaunger (talk) 16:44, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Well, they’re unsharp, so the stems melt into the background grass. I don’t think cloning them all out would improve the image. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 17:01, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
      • OK. Thanks for the explanation. --Slaunger (talk) 17:08, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Mønsted kalkgruber exposure fused 2014-07-18.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2014 at 23:01:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mønsted limestone mines
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Slaunger -- Slaunger (talk) 23:01, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info An illuminated path in the largest limestone mine in the world, Mønsted limestone mine in Denmark. The limestone mine has been excavated over a period of almost 1000 years from the early 11th century untill 1978, mainly by using pickaxes or other handheld tools. The mine has over 60 km paths of which 2 km are illuminated. Some paths are like huge halls, others not passageable by a grown man. In the path shown here is clearly seen how thick layers of limestone alternate with thin layers of flint. The photo itself is an exposure fusion between three bracketed exposures with exposure times of 6, 15 and 30 seconds using CA corrected raw files as input into PTgui. In hindsight, I should have had an even shorther exposure time on the most underexposed photo as the point light sources are slightly burnt in even the 6 sec exposure. Done with an aperture of f/10 and ISO 200 (if i go higher I begin to introduce notieable noise with my camera). I have spend a great deal of time playing around with the exposure fusion to highlight the layered structure, which is not quite as evident when you are in the mines, as well as make the representation faithful. It appears lighter than it really is, as the light sources are weak. A ghost is seen in the long time exposure shot wearing a handheld lamp leaving a light trail. Almost unavoidable due to many guests in the mines.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 23:01, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 09:16, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 20:27, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 06:19, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Fabienne Keller par Claude Truong-Ngoc avril 2013.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2014 at 20:03:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fabienne Keller

File:Korsö February 2013 03.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2014 at 12:02:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Korsö torn (tower), Korsö island, Stockholm archipelago.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Korsö torn (tower), Korsö island, Stockholm archipelago. Originally built as a lighthouse in the late 1700s, later used as a military observation tower. The images was taken from a chartered helicopter, as part of Wikimedia Sweden aerial photo project. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 12:02, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 12:02, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Nice pic. Perhaps a little boring centered composition. Weird. When I look at the cliffs in the foreground they appear duplicated or motion blurred. In theory it could be because the vantage point was changing during the shot, while you were focusing on the tower, but I would be surprised if this happened with 1/1000 s exposure unless the helicopter was moving very fast? It could also just be because of the f/4.5 aperture and the associated low DOF. --Slaunger (talk) 12:15, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Slaunger: even a pro lens as the 24-70 has weakness. The border sharpness at long distances is the weakness here. DOF should not be a problem here, because of the distance to the object (at least 200 meters altitude above the sea, and some distance from the tower and the island). There is no downsampling and almost no crop here, normally you do not see 24mp aerial images. Here is a 3 mp version of the same photo, looks very sharp.--ArildV (talk) 13:43, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
      • @ArildV: You are right. Thanks for explaining. As you know, I am often hit by the limits of my own mediocre lenses:) --Slaunger (talk) 13:55, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 17:39, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Menshikovsky Palace in Oranienbaum 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2014 at 11:36:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Menshikovsky Palace in Oranienbaum 01.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Main building of Grand Menshikovsky Palace in Oranienbaum. Built in 1711—1727 by Giovanni Maria Fontana.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded & nominated by Florstein -- Alex Florstein (talk) 11:36, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain -- Alex Florstein (talk) 11:36, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Very good light and very colorful. Tending to support. Seems a liitle overstaurated to me. How much has been done in postprocessing? Why only 10 Mpixels with a 16 Mpixel camera? How come the sky is so dark at 2 pm? --Slaunger (talk) 11:50, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
    • The picture was edited, cropped and resized a bit, of course. But anyway, I think 10-12 Mpixels is enough for most cases. Such tone of sky can often be seen in our latitudes. --Alex Florstein (talk) 12:05, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
      • OK, thanks for the explanation. How about the saturation. Has that been increased significantly? ---Slaunger (talk) 12:11, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
        • Basic colors and shades are not spoiled. Saturation was slightly adjusted after your first comment. --Alex Florstein (talk) 12:18, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it now with the slightly less aggressive color toning. --Slaunger (talk) 12:26, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Too much sky and too much lawn. Choose a tighter crop, especially on top and bottom. --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:39, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree, that a slight crop above and below could improve it a bit. But please, only a little such that you get 1/3 lawn, 1/3 building (up to beginning of tower), 1/3 sky (including tower and top of trees). --Slaunger (talk) 12:51, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Composition shall remain the same. --Alex Florstein (talk) 13:09, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Contrary to the image down, the 50mm make the proportion of the image more acceptable (IMO) and decrease the effect of pile of the perspectives -- Christian Ferrer Talk 21:46, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 23:40, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Perfect image and lighting. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 05:03, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK. May be too much green (gras). --XRay talk 05:31, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 18:39, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

File:OY-DIZ SAI KZ IV landing Danish Air Show 2014-06-23.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2014 at 11:30:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SAI KZ IV
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Slaunger -- Slaunger (talk) 11:30, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The only still functional KZ IV ambulance aircraft with registration OY-DIZ landing at Danish Air Show 2014. Built by Skandinavisk Aero Industri with first flight on May 4, 1944. Restored to its wartime configuration after a crash in 1977. In 1949, the OY-DIZ was christened with the name Folke Bernadotte in honour of the Swedish count who had used this very aircraft to make a diplomatic visit to Germany to negotiate for the release of Danish prisoners in German concentration camps near the end of the war. For more information about the technical circumstances of the photo, see this discussion from EN FPC, where it has just been promoted.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 11:30, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Too much grass however you can't crop it more because it is already promoted in EN FPC and already a cropped picture (and maybe you don't want). -- Christian Ferrer Talk 21:22, 19 July 2014 (UTC) and the 131mm increase (IMO) the effect of the perspective and give too much importance to the grass. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 21:38, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for you review. No, I will not change the crop in this file, because it is already featured elsewhere, but of course I could upload a new file, which was cropped. But I like the grass as it is. Gives balance to the composition in my opinion in accordance with rule of thirds. --Slaunger (talk) 21:49, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • @Christian Ferrer: You mention how the 131 mm focal length affects the perspective (in I suppose a bad way). I am sorry, but can you elaborate? What would have been a better focal length in your opinion? --Slaunger (talk) 22:08, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
It is not necessarily the focal length the problem, here it is more the association of this focal lenght and this centring and/or crop that makes the composition a little bit unbalenced, I feel as a baby fox who is obliged to raise the head by above herbs to see the plane. In summary the grass is here an obstacle to the reading of the image. How to avoid all this : if I find an answer be sure that I shall tell it you. The no-cropped version is better IMO -- Christian Ferrer Talk 22:27, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
And if you possess a 200mm or higher of course it would have been better. And if you don't have a 200 or 300mm, a photo one or two seconds before, with the plane a bit more in the sky (=less grass) would maybe have been better. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 22:32, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
And in more there is only horizontal lines (plane, grass, sky, background) whitch is certainly increase by your choice of crop....I go to sleep....:) -- Christian Ferrer Talk 22:42, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
@Christian Ferrer: Thanks for your detailed response, Christian. I really appreciate that:) The lens I used was actually a 250 mm, and I could have zoomed more, if I were better at panning:) But I wonder if the end result perspective-wise isn't approximately the same after cropping at 131 mm? It was not really possible for me to get a photo when approaching, due to the presence of very enthusiastic aviation photographers with huge tele lenses standing on small ladders and partially obstructing my view:) You could argue, correctly, that if I had been a bit more pro, I would also have brought a small ladder, and I would have arrived as early as possible to get the best possible position, but this was my first air show photographing. Anyway, sleep well, ChristianSmile. --Slaunger (talk) 23:16, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Slaunger, to develop just a little more my point of view the comparison with the image above is very well. The both images have a centered position of the main subject, the house with the first and the plane with yours. The both images have also 1/3 of sky, 1/3 subject and 1/3 grass on the foreground. However on the first the use of 50mm give an effect of depth. It is typical of the telephoto lens of to crash the different areas (background, subject, foreground, ...). In this one you can see how focal length affects perspective and in more in this exemple we see only 18, 34 and 55mm, imagine with 130, 200mm... -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:41, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
@Christian Ferrer: Thanks for taking your time to elaborate further. I understand much better now what your point is. I do not agree it is a problem in the nominated photo, but I understand what you see as being the problem with the focal length. Anyway, not really something I can change in the nomineated photo, so either you like it as it is or not. And it appears most don't really care, actually, as there are no votes yetSmile. --Slaunger (talk) 16:54, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

File:City Palace detail 01 - Berlin.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2014 at 09:06:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Console detail from the Berlin City Palace
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by MrPanyGoff -- MrPanyGoff 09:06, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MrPanyGoff 09:06, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A no-brainer QI. Excellent light and colors, very low noise, very educational, crisp and clear. But sorry, the wow is just not there for me. --Slaunger (talk) 11:40, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 09:32, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The harsh shadow is a "no go" for me; otherwise good quality. --A.Savin 16:36, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with A.Savin. Too much shadow on the left part of the object and a big dominating shadow on the left of the object. The light is not good. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 20:18, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Honestly, I don't think complaining about the shadow is appropriate here. The light is very good, and with a strong side light which add relief to the sculpture, there needs to be a shadow on the side. Digitaly removing the shadow will certainly not improve the image. Regards, Yann (talk) 04:15, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
      • I do not think digitaly removing the shadow is good. Before taking the photo there should have been a lamp placed at left giving light in the left part of the photo. I know that would probably not have been possible for the photograher (a museum visitor I guess). --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 15:24, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
        • No, because it would remove the shadow on the sculpture, which would ruin the idea. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:02, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
          • Yann, I agree entirely with you regarding the lightning. The lightning is very good as it is. --Slaunger (talk) 20:40, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
I agree that an afterwards removal of the shadow wouldn't improve the image; a shadow is not necessarily an evil, but this one is simply too harsh for me, which is hardly avoidable with an object placed so close to the background. --A.Savin 21:00, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Saxo bateau port Vannes.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2014 at 23:41:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saxophonist in Vannes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 23:41, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Something (somebody) different. A man. A saxophonist simply playing music, on board of an old boat, harbour of Vannes, Morbihan, France. I hope you will like it.-- Jebulon (talk) 23:41, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too cluttered for subject to be obvious. Daniel Case (talk) 03:34, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As they say (in German and in English): "less is more". I see a mess of distracting objects here, the musician almost drowned by the two lifebelts dominating both in colour and size. Fine atmospheric image for a suitable context but no FP for me. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 10:22, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 20:34, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment -- There are too many objects in the picture, its quite distracting. I also dislike the white coloring in the upleft corner. I do like the posture of the musician. Azeri (talk) 14:24, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Guerrero a caballo, Skopie, Macedonia, 2014-04-17, DD 107.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2014 at 20:41:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Warrior on a Horse statue is one of the main symbols of the Skopje 2014 project and is located in the center of Macedonia Square in Skopje, capital of the Republic of Macedonia. Although it is not officially named for him, it is typically thought to depict Alexander the Great. The statue was sculpted by Valentina Stefanovska and completed on September 8, 2011 to commemorate 20 years of the independence of the Republic of Macedonia. The bronze sculpture is 14.5 m tall and it sits on a cylindrical column, which itself is 10 m in height. The column consists of three large ivory sections containing reliefs, each separated by a thinner bronze ring. Each section contains reliefs. The column stands in a fountain and at the base of the column there are 8 bronze soldiers, each 3 m tall and 8 bronze lions, each 2.5 m tall.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Warrior on a Horse statue is one of the main symbols of the Skopje 2014 project and is located in the center of Macedonia Square in Skopje, capital of the Republic of Macedonia. Although it is not officially named for him, it is typically thought to depict Alexander the Great. The statue was sculpted by Valentina Stefanovska and completed on September 8, 2011 to commemorate 20 years of the independence of the Republic of Macedonia. The bronze sculpture is 14.5 m tall and it sits on a cylindrical column, which itself is 10 m in height. The column consists of three large ivory sections containing reliefs, each separated by a thinner bronze ring. Each section contains reliefs. The column stands in a fountain and at the base of the column there are 8 bronze soldiers, each 3 m tall and 8 bronze lions, each 2.5 m tall.. All by me, Poco2 20:41, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 20:41, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fine idea and nicely done. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 07:02, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Brilliant exposure control, colors and composition. Large wow. --Slaunger (talk) 11:54, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Very impressive, but the sculpture is too dark, and its face is hidden by its hand. --Uoaei1 (talk) 16:52, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
    I see your point but there was IMHO no better angle to photograph the monument. I have spent hours there and have uploaded multiple pictures. The sculpture is not lighted in the top, I cannot change that and for composition purposes it was important to achieve a certain symmetry in the fountain (with the lion in the middle). Furthermore from this angle there was the better composition in the background. Poco2 19:09, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 09:20, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose it's a pity, but per Uoaei1. --Ivar (talk) 05:46, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support it's a pity for the hidden head however wow -- Christian Ferrer Talk 17:37, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ArildV (talk) 11:52, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Tarfala valley panorama.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2014 at 19:34:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tarfaladalen
  • You can see Sweden's tallest mountain, and several famous glaciers (notably Storglaciären, which has the world's longest data record). The phenomenon on the left is just a normal consequence of the panoramic projection and the fact that you don't have a straight horizon. Another thing is that the valley increases in altitude from left to right in the panorama. The picture also gives a overview of the research station's location. Alexandar Vujadinovic (talk) 07:37, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • The picture may show interesting items, still it is not outstanding itself IMHO. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 11:40, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question I find it interesting, that it has a big contrast alternating very much between almost white and almost black. I am wondering if the contrast is a little too high? Does it really look so black and white? I seems some features are missing, especially in the dark areas, where I believe shadows could be highlighed more. The researh station buildings has very little colors. Are they really colorless or could the image simply use a little more saturation? --Slaunger (talk) 12:01, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • That's how the place looks like during summer - large albedo variation everywhere. Of course, if I did a vegetation-only shot, I would have used the Levels tool to tweak the photo, but doing something here would just create an unrealistic picture. If you want a closer look at the research station and the vegetation (the whole valley is above the tree line), see the Tarfala category that I made... Alexandar Vujadinovic (talk) 13:16, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment OK. Thanks for the explanation. I just wanted to be sure. To better understand the geographical context, could you please add a geocode? --Slaunger (talk) 21:46, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very interesting landscape. --Slaunger (talk) 22:28, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Looking at the louds in the background on the left, this image seems to be tilted ccw. --Uoaei1 (talk) 16:53, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I saw that too now, and I have fixed it by following approximately the average tilt of the clouds for the re-aligning. Alexandar Vujadinovic (talk) 21:12, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 21:35, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 20:36, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I have been there and I think the panorama capture the landscape very well.--ArildV (talk) 08:48, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gidip (talk) 12:54, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Gloriette Schönbrunn Wien (Zuschnitt).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2014 at 14:21:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gloriette in Vienna, Austria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Der Wolf im Wald -- Wolf im Wald 14:21, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain as author. -- Wolf im Wald 14:21, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolf im Wald 22:36, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I prefer this version, because no reflection in the water seems better than the incomplete one. But I would also support the alternative. --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:37, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment IMO, the nominator has to chose first between alternatives when he nominates. Alternative versions is for improved pictures after comments. --Jebulon (talk) 20:23, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I didn't want to influence the voters and I didn't want to conceal the alternative! I prefer the first one because of the incomplete reflections of the alternative. :-) -- Wolf im Wald 22:36, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Mag der Autor sein eigenes Bild nicht? Wieso sollen es wir andere es denn mehr mögen? ;-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:43, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Ich hasse das Bild :P! Im Ernst: Ich finde das Bild ohne Wasser mittlerweile cooler, weil die Reflexion - wegen der Rasen-Reflexion - so weit unten ist und sie zudem aus technischen Gründen unschön abgeschnitten ist. Daher habe ich ursprünglich nur das Bild ohne Wasser zur Wahl gestellt und schließlich das andere nachträglich ergänzt, weil es sowieso ergänzt worden wäre und ich es den Abstimmenden nicht vorenthalten wollte, damit ein authentisches Abstimmungsergebnis zustande kommt, welches nicht zustande kommen würde, wenn das andere Bild erst nach Tagen ergänzt werden würde und somit einen kürzeren Abstimmungszeitraum hat. -- Wolf im Wald 22:36, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support either (rather prefer the alternative) - Both fine images . Coat of Many Colours (talk) 00:54, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Extremely detailed. Good light. And I am wowed by symmetrical building like this. --Slaunger (talk) 12:07, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This one is better. Yann (talk) 09:30, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Gloriette in Vienna, Austria

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Der Wolf im Wald -- Wolf im Wald 14:24, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain as author. -- Wolf im Wald 14:24, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Mag der Autor sein eigenes Bild nicht? Wieso sollen es wir andere es denn mehr mögen? ;-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:43, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Siehe oben. -- Wolf im Wald 22:36, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support any version. Nikhil (talk) 02:12, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I prefer the alternative. Even with the reflection cropped, it makes a more balanced composition imo. --Kadellar (talk) 12:01, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Do not like the partial reflection in the alternative. --Slaunger (talk) 12:09, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 05:31, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Französische Botschaft Wien.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2014 at 14:11:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

french embassy in Vienna, Austria
Old version
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Der Wolf im Wald -- Wolf im Wald 14:11, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolf im Wald 14:11, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:33, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Please have a look to the annotation. Thanks.--Jebulon (talk) 16:35, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Unfortunately from the frontal perspective, you can't take a photo without the buliding on the left. -- Wolf im Wald 16:41, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Due to the weird tilt pointed out by Jebulon. --Slaunger (talk) 12:20, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
New version
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Far much better, very good correction !--Jebulon (talk) 20:18, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Corrected version is so much better I would overwrite as non controversial. Not even sure how you did that. Saffron Blaze (talk) 00:11, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support alternative per Saffron Blaze. Nikhil (talk) 02:13, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Looks underexposed to me. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 07:06, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Very high detail level, good colors and composition. Wow not quite as high for me as in your nomination above. The pole is a little distracting as well (yet unavoidable). The crop of the sky is also a little tight for me. --Slaunger (talk) 12:24, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I prefer the edit, thanks to Paris 16! Pictogram voting question.svg Question Can I simply overwrite the original image, so that only this edit is nominated? I think that the edit is clearly better than the original image and nobody will think different. It would be better for the servers only to have one version and to delete the other one. -- Wolf im Wald 05:01, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Bitte überprüfe Weißabgleich und Belichtung. Irgendetwas scheint da noch nicht zu stimmen. Ansonsten: schönes Foto :-) --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:07, 21 July 2014 (UTC) 
    Pictogram voting question.svg Question Hallo Frank, was meinst du genau? Ist vielleicht dein Bildschirm falsch eingestellt? Grüße, -- Wolf im Wald 08:24, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
    Deutsch: Weißabgleich sieht für mich OK aus, aber mir kommt's unterbelichtet vor (siehe auch Kommentar von Kreuzschnabel oben).
    English: looks underexposed to me as well
    --El Grafo (talk) 15:09, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Macaca sylvanus at the Ouzoud Waterfalls (1).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2014 at 13:49:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Barbary macaque (Macaca sylvanus) at the Ouzoud Waterfalls, Morocco.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, nominated by M0tty (talk) 13:49, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- M0tty (talk) 13:49, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could you please try to get rid of the overexposed background somehow, e.g. by cropping the left side etc. The face is very good, but the background is distracting. --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:19, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment White balance seems a bit yellow. Yann (talk) 06:06, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done White balance corrected --M0tty (talk) 09:46, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
  •  Not done It's not possible to get rid of the overexposed background, sorry. --M0tty (talk) 09:46, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Pilatus P3-03 P3-Flyers HB-RBP OTT 2013 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2014 at 12:40:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pilatus P3-03 of the P3-Flyers aerobatic team (built in 1958)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by me. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 12:40, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain as author. I nominate this photo as one of my favourites from this occasion because I really like how the smoke from the previous display creates contrast for the prop and undercarriage and makes the silhouette stand out. I'd be interested in hearing your opinion on this. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 12:40, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry Julian H., and of course don't take it personaly, but I feel the exact opposite sensation: I find the smoke really disturbing (thumbnail, full size, before and after reading your explanation), even if your plane is very nicely taken and absolutely sharp. Just my opinion. (I've often noticed that a first negative vote prevents other votes, a fortiori support votes. Please to other reviewers here: don't be influenced by my "contra", and feel free to support: I'm interested too in hearing opinions !)--Jebulon (talk) 14:22, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree with Jebulon that the smoke does not do much good to it, but I think still think it has good wow, because it is taken in flight at low altitude, the light, colors and detail level are really good, and the aircraft model is interesting. I also like, that the wheel are being retracted(?). The file page is really good too. --Slaunger (talk) 22:01, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Jebulon however also per Slaunger :) -- Christian Ferrer Talk 09:05, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
    And per Julian, after to have read his comment I think me too that the smoke is a more for the picture. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 09:09, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 09:27, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

File:POL-A1a-Bilet Skarbowy-5 Zlotych (1794 First Issue).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2014 at 10:53:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Anonymous creator, historical Polish official treasury note from the National Numismatic Collection at the Smithsonian Institution, scan by Godot13 - uploaded by Godot13 - nominated by Maire -- Maire (talk) 10:53, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Polish "Bilet Skarbowy" (treasury note) - 5-zloty, dated 8 June 1794. This note is from the first issue of banknotes by the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth and was authorized by Tadeusz Kościuszko. The file is already a FP at en-wiki and a part of a valued set here. To anticipate certain doubts - the cut-off top is actually a feature. As an anti-counterfeiting measure, in those times the top margin was cut off and kept together with the serial number of the note, so that by comparing them later to the rest of the note it could be determined if the note was genuine or not.

File:Rana temporaria portrait 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2014 at 06:41:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Common frog (Rana temporaria)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Uoaei1 -- Uoaei1 (talk) 06:41, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uoaei1 (talk) 06:41, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Good image. Kleuske (talk) 08:31, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Good, but the description should be better (only the head).--XRay talk 05:33, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The blurred leaves at the bottom are distracting. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:55, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A large part of the picture is not in focus. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 20:38, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Yogapith, Mayapur.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2014 at 03:06:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Chaitanya Mahaprabhu temple in Mayapur, West Bengal

File:Frans Hals - Portrait of Jacob Olycan - Mauritshuis 459.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2014 at 01:07:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jacob Olycan

File:Steinway & Sons upright piano, model 1098, manufactured at Steinway's factory in New York City.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2014 at 00:44:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Upright piano (model 1098) made in the United States

File:Paris, Notre Dame -- 2014 -- 1458.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2014 at 20:11:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kings of Juda at the front of the cathedral of Notre Dame in Paris, France
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XRay - uploaded by XRay - nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 20:11, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 20:11, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Excellent image. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 21:29, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 22:47, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 01:08, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 05:22, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is outstanding among the other many pictures of Notre Dame. Just one comment: I would prefer a less tight crop on top. --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:46, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 07:06, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Just great. For Uoaei1, imo the crop is perfect because if you continue going up you include more elements and they'd be disturbing (gothic details are everywhere). --Kadellar (talk) 12:54, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good --Rjcastillo (talk) 13:11, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 16:33, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. I see this twice a day, and your picture is really a success. Beware of overcorrection: both sides of the Cathedral are leaning out a bit in real, due to the weight of the towers. Quizz: where is Viollet-le Duc ? (not for XRay, he knows the answer)!--Jebulon (talk) 16:41, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Maire (talk) 16:54, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Top Poco2 21:26, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kasir (talk) 19:04, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Amazing quality! Azeri (talk) 14:19, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Torre Lúgano, Benidorm, España, 2014-07-02, DD 57.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2014 at 18:21:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Lahn, Allerheiligenberg.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2014 at 14:28:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lahn and Allerheiligenberg near Niederlahnstein.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me Kleuske (talk) 14:28, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain -- Kleuske (talk) 14:28, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • temp: Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose this image have a sharpness problem. A lot of areas are too soft. Can you try to fix it? And why do you vote only Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain ? Do you don't like your own image? Why do you think other voters like the image more then you? ;-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:33, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
    • I'd like the judgement of others. I think it's good, but that is a no-brainer and not very interesting. Kleuske (talk) 09:16, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sharpness on the poor side (I don't think it's sufficiently fixable afterwards); not particularly interesting comnposition (not sure what shall be the eyecatcher: the bridge, the rocks, or the church), though the "stormy" weather is well captured. --A.Savin 23:35, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
    • time for a better lens. Thanks for the comment. Kleuske (talk) 09:16, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Seagull July 2014-2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2014 at 10:46:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Yellow-legged gull yelling (Larus michaellis) Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:46, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:46, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Nog een grote bek, ook... Face-smile.svg Kleuske (talk) 14:31, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 15:43, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 15:48, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I was waiting for this nomination since I saw this picture on your user page... Up of the bird bar, no doubt.--Jebulon (talk) 18:35, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:37, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent composition. --Slaunger (talk) 20:51, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Please add some for information on the file page regarding the location, e.g., a geolocation. --Slaunger (talk) 20:54, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 21:27, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 02:03, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 05:33, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kasir (talk) 19:04, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gidip (talk) 12:53, 22 July 2014 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:00, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Porto Covo January 2014-10a.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2014 at 10:44:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Winter sea at Porto Covo, west coast of Portugal. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Citron (talk) 11:01, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Looks nice, but I would crop a bit of sky so that the horizon is at 1/3 of the height from the top. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:19, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support that looks much more interesting than the current FP of that place ;) Kruusamägi (talk) 14:25, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:39, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 15:43, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon (talk) 18:39, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wow! (A much longer exposure would be interesting too) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:39, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • +1 !! Tripod, stopping down (and/or ND filter) and I believe you'd flood this page with FP to be. I'd also try with wide angle, but at the risk of endangering your life ;). - Benh (talk) 19:35, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very nice scene, but the details seem to be rather soft, a bit like too strong denoising. Have you done something like that to the image (or is it a .jpg out of camera)? If yes, I am wondering whether you would consider uploading an un-/less treated version --DXR (talk) 19:39, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Yes I was about to point the exact same issue : too strong NR as far as I can tell. also, to complete my previous comment : [1], [2] and [3]. - Benh (talk) 19:43, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info -- No NR at all. Maybe motion blur and water droplets in the air? Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:07, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
      • That's strange. Does the software you use maybe do some NR by default? This looks as heavily NR-edited as a jpeg directly from the camera. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 20:37, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
        • I'm too lazy to use Raw. I'll check the settings again, thanks. Anyway I remember well this stormy day and there was haze on the air. Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:25, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
          • Then we'll have to live with that. It's not a huge problem. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 21:55, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support But would also prefer a tighter crop from above. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 20:37, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment yes, a "golden crop" works better for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:38, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Der Wanderer über dem Nebelmeer must be there somewhere. --Kadellar (talk) 13:04, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Yes, he is taking the shot! Not Mr. Caspar Friedrich himself but a Portuguese descendant... Alvesgaspar (talk) 13:33, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Yes indeed, thanks for that. I knew it reminded me of something, but just couldn't place it. Suich an excellent image (supported by me above) Coat of Many Colours (talk) 07:46, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 21:30, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK, but please add geo location.--XRay talk 05:36, 20 July 2014 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:00, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Rubus ulmifolius, flowers and buds, Vias, Hérault 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2014 at 05:13:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rubus ulmifolius, flowers and buds.

File:Raymond Monvoisin - Retrato de Juan Manuel de Rosas.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Jul 2014 at 23:07:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Raymond Monvoisin - Retrato de Juan Manuel de Rosas.

File:Gaspare Fossati - Louis Haghe - Vue générale de la grande nef, en regardant l'occident (Hagia Sophia - Ayasofya Mosque nave).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Jul 2014 at 21:55:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ayasofya Mosque (Hagia Sophia)

File:Liverpool Anglican Cathedral West Window, Liverpool, UK - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Jul 2014 at 18:46:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The western window of Liverpool Cathedral, England
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 18:46, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 18:46, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 19:22, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 20:21, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Because it's below your other picture, this one isn't "so" impressive, but FP anyway imo. --Kadellar (talk) 23:35, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:22, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 14:13, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:40, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The bottom crop is though improvable I believe Poco2 21:34, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Znojmo a Dyje (Znaim und Thaya) - panorama.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Jul 2014 at 09:56:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Znojmo (Znaim), Moravia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 09:56, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 09:56, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kasir (talk) 17:47, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I really like the left side with the river and dam but the right side is not really appealing, maybe a panorama with more of the violage would have been better Poco2 21:46, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gidip (talk) 12:53, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Curit - Shinkolobwe.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2014 at 23:42:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Curite from Shinkolobwe

File:Johannes Vermeer - Girl with a Pearl Earring - Maurtishuis 670.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2014 at 17:41:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Dutch "Mona Lisa"
There is already a Featured Picture of this painting here at Johannes Vermeer (1632-1675) - The Girl With The Pearl Earring (1665).jpg, but this image has several serious issues in my opinion 1 unsourced and undocumented 2 revoltingly saturated, our poor little meisje in the last throes of terminal hepatitis, and 3 (astonishingly) cropped at the right. An attempt by me to overwrite it with the new Mauritshuis was met with resistance from City Hall, so I am following the letter of the guidelines and offering a new file and a fresh nomination. This enterprising legacy high resolution file File:Johannes Vermeer - Girl with a Pearl Earring - WGA24666.jpg would also be worth attention were it not for the inauthentic rosy complexion, harbinger this time perhaps of the dreaded Plague so rampant in cities of the time not to mention the editor's personal preference in erm ... pink.
Current project (City Hall permitting) is to engage with others writing up the Mauritshuis collection for Commons and I may bring some others here depending on the progress of this nomination Coat of Many Colours (talk) 17:41, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I've requested a "rename" of the file and corrected once here, "Mauritshuis" instead of "Maurtishuis".--Jebulon (talk) 19:39, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Cheers. Thanks for that. My damn eyes and drinking too much I expect. Oh well. The Commons administratot will actually make the adjustment., It's really very difficult for me to cope with that kind of thing, so I would appreciate it if someone could make the adjustments for mew. I think stuff might have got lost here. 20:34, 15 July 2014 (UTC)Coat of Many Colours (talk)
The image has gone. I simply can't manage the small print. This is the link to the newly named file File:Johannes Vermeer -Girl with a Pearl Earring - Mauritshuis 670.jpg. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 20:39, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Wouldn't Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace be appropriate here? — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 21:02, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Typically I am against de-listing and replace, but in the case of painting I am not opposed. Saffron Blaze (talk) 14:26, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace Much better than current FP. Yann (talk) 15:29, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Raymond Poincaré officiel.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2014 at 16:37:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Raymond Poincaré official portrait
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Héliogravure Braun- uploaded, stitched, restored and nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 16:37, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support New in "Commons". This is a photogravure (heliography) of the presidential portrait of Raymond Poincaré (1860 - 1934), which was the head of state of France during all the World War I (1913 - 1920). He had no real constitutional powers, but he managed very well several governments, and achieved in maintaining the unity of the country. In France, he is a symbol of tenacity during difficult moments. Restored by me. High size, quality, and value(s), IMO.-- Jebulon (talk) 16:37, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 18:10, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The black spot in his moustache looks weird. Yann (talk) 04:21, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Thanks for interest. Better now ? --Jebulon (talk) 08:37, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes. Yann (talk) 13:25, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support unpleasant person, very pleasant (and well done) restoration! ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:53, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kadellar (talk) 15:05, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:59, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 16:18, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 17:45, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Chucho Valdés & The Afro-Cuban Messengers - 29.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2014 at 12:11:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Reinaldo Melián, trumpeter of Chucho Valdés & The Afro-Cuban Messengers, at a concert in Teatro Circo Price, Madrid, Spain.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Reinaldo Melián, trumpeter of Chucho Valdés & The Afro-Cuban Messengers, at a concert in Teatro Circo Price, Madrid, Spain. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Kadellar (talk) 12:11, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kadellar (talk) 12:11, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 12:52, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 14:23, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive capture of an impressive moment --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 07:22, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another great musician picture. Daniel Case (talk) 02:08, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I am not sure to like his music, but the picture is great! --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:55, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice moment Poco2 21:51, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gidip (talk) 12:52, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Porton de entrada Cementerio de Colon.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jul 2014 at 11:58:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Main gate Cementerio de Colón
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ivan2010 - uploaded by Ivan2010 - nominated by Ivan2010 11:55, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivan2010 11:55, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 12:56, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not bad, but too many distracting elements in the picture; not the best light & detail either. --A.Savin 15:39, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per A.Savin -- Colin (talk) 18:55, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per A.Savin. The foreground objects and background multistorey cut by the frame ruin the composition for me. Not a bad shot but doesn’t reach FP level. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 07:07, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 20:43, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Mallorca - Cap Figuera1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2014 at 22:28:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Figuera Bay, Mallorca
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 22:28, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 22:28, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think it could have been even more impressive if you had shown more of the mountains on the left. --Kadellar (talk) 22:40, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 09:44, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nkansahrexford (talk) 12:23, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Is there a way to have a bit more of sky? Poco2 15:22, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
In genereal I could add some sky. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:51, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- I see nothing featurable here; only a tightly cropped bay with average lighting.Fotoriety (talk) 00:30, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Fotoriety: why a average lighting? because everythink is visible clearly in beautifull colours? what would be a good lighting? --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:23, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Oh, sorry for asking you. I just see that you're just a voting puppet (with 0 uploads). So there is no reasonable anwser to expect. --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:27, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
That's pretty darn offensive. Unlike many editors, i always make an effort to state why i reject (or support) any FP candidates. Just because you have a photo that shows azure waters doesn't mean that you have taken an FP. To me, apart from the waters, the photo has zero wow that is expected of an FP.Fotoriety (talk) 08:12, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
Just your personal opinion without a comprehensible and without an answer to my specific question. I'll bring your attitude to discussion. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:24, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
[Removed unhelpful comments about the creator as requested on both the talk page and COM:ANI. --Slaunger (talk) 21:05, 16 July 2014 (UTC)] If you require further enlightenment about the lighting (if it isn't already obvious enough), then let me inform you that i consider it to be very flat. Furthermore, you have a nominal foreground that adds very little to the framing of the photo and adds minimal depth; you have a headland that has minimal breathing space above it; the scene should evoke feelings of relaxation and leisure, but is instead emotionless and static. [Removed as well --Slaunger (talk) 21:07, 16 July 2014 (UTC)] Fotoriety (talk) 13:42, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
composition is poor because of? A similar view like File:Pollença - Ma-2210 - Cala Figuera 09 ies.jpg I have already made and will upload this evening. --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:11, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
The < shape seems unbalanced and the blunt headland looks oddly contrasted with the sharp triangle at the bottom. The left crop seems rather arbitrary. There is a lot of sharp detail but at screen-size the view of the cliffs are rather flat: the lighting is not bringing out the shape of the hill. The image is so detailed I wonder if another crop might help -- I'll play around with it tonight if I get a chance. -- Colin (talk) 12:50, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral There is a great shot in the bottom left area and a good one on the right, but together, they don't work well in my opinion. It's hard to explain why, but a lack of sky might be a factor, as well as less depth than many other possible compositions. Unrelated to the composition: The rock has halos. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 12:44, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
I am convinced that more sky would be positive for the impression (looking on a small thumb shows why) at all. I'll add some sky this evening. --Wladyslaw (talk) 12:48, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm not impressed with the composition and light. The sky has several dust spots and retouching marks. --Ivar (talk) 17:51, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
And I'm very impressed that nobody of those who critise the light can tell me exactly whats wrong with it. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:40, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
The fact that it's coming from behind you. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 21:06, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
To give a little more detail regarding the light and my previous comment:
What I mean: It is obviously not coming exactly from behind you, but the general direction of the sun appears to be within maybe 30 degrees of the direction of shooting. A higher sun angle also usually doesn't help. It actually hurts in that it increases light-shadow-contrast. More on that further down.
Why I believe that it creates bad lighting: If the light is not noticeably coming from either side, shapes that have some kind of non-flat shape (round stones, the general rounded shapes of most landscape subjects) are not pronounced at all. With the sun almost behind you, it is very hard to tell the three-dimensional shape of objects because there is no difference in brightness depending on the surface angle. For good surface rendering, a sunset on either side of the photographer with soft and very directional light would be ideal, as it would have a contrast between light and shadow side of an object that is large enough to define shapes but low enough to be easily captured with the dynamic range of a camera. It also creates a difference in light temperature, which makes shapes even more beautiful to look at. At the other end of the spectrum would be an aerial photo in the middle of the day, straight down. No matter how the surface changes direction, everything will be equally bright and equal in light temperature and if a small shadow appears somewhere, it will be almost black and have sharp edges so that it can't define a rounded shape. Your photo is of course not equivalent to the second scenario, but it is somewhat close. The left part of any hill-like shape is almost equally bright as the right part of the same shape and shadows have very sharp edges and are pretty dark (they still have detail, but in the general composition, they don't help defining shapes because they are more or less binary: Shadow or no shadow, nothing in-between).
Now I'll note that there are of course scenarios where this kind of light doesn't hurt at all or is actually helpful. For more complex materials like shiny things or water, this doesn't matter, and in cases where there are no interesting round shapes, it might also not be necessary to have soft side lighting. But for a majority of subjects, and three-dimensional landscapes are among those, I think flat midday light is not great. It's obviously a question of taste to some extent, nothing is right or wrong in photography, but I feel like many people agree with the general idea that softer and more angled light produces more pleasing results.
I hope this helps in explaining my previous comment. Grüße, — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 08:33, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info new version with more sky is uploaded. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:40, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral it's obviously taken from a skilled photographer, and yes the place is interesting and the intensely blue water is calling for a dive, but I was about to point the same issue as other opposers : harsh noon lighting, giving both flat subject and washed out colors, which is noticeable especially on the upper left part. IMO, the same exact photo at sunrise/set (should come from the right on the picture) would be a no brainer FP, but maybe author can't return there this easily... - Benh (talk) 09:13, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Noticed no color profile is embedded in the picture. I think it's an easy fix which can only do good to the picture. - Benh (talk) 19:01, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Enseada Botafogo.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2014 at 20:31:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Leandro Ciuffo - uploaded by Chronus - nominated by Arion -- ArionEstar (talk) 20:31, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArionEstar (talk) 20:31, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- I personally would have loved to see more of the green vegetation in the foreground than the blue skies.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Nkansahrexford (talk • contribs) Poco2 15:32, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Impressive view, the cut road on bottom. left and right is a pity. It is a bit soft and there are traces of red CA, that should be fixed. Poco2 15:32, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think it needs a little counter-clockwise rotation. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 12:40, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Fine shot and composition but visible CA towards the edges, buildings on the left leaning in, and overall focus too soft for me considering the image size of just 7.5 Mpix. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 07:12, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's a pity but per Kreuzschnabel --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:08, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination ArionEstar (talk) 17:06, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Südmähren Warte.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2014 at 13:21:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Südmähren Warte (South Moravia Tower), Austria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 13:21, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 13:21, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is tilted cw. The lighting is not the best either but the subject is nice. Poco2 14:22, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lighting angle not optimal. Perhaps another time of day/year would light up the people. -- Colin (talk) 20:28, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lighting IMHO is very appropriate. I’d have turned the camera even more to the left to get more of the shadow but it’s an impressive image for me. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 07:27, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support the shadow on the main subject make it impressive -- Christian Ferrer Talk 21:35, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Wesel, Alte Eisenbahnbrücke -- 2014 -- 676.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 Jul 2014 at 10:49:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the old railway bridge in Wesel, Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XRay - uploaded by XRay - nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 10:49, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 10:49, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:38, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 13:22, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Baykedevries (talk) 20:11, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose because the whole bridge is in shadow. The sky is nice but this is not the time of the day to take this shot most succesfully. Noise reduction (or something similar) a bit strong too. --Kadellar (talk) 22:45, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Neptuul (talk) 07:02, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose exactly per Kadellar. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 12:32, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose idem above.--Jebulon (talk) 19:57, 15 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose light just wasn't favorable. Kruusamägi (talk) 14:22, 17 July 2014 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 22 July 2014 (UTC)


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]

Thu 17 Jul → Tue 22 Jul
Fri 18 Jul → Wed 23 Jul
Sat 19 Jul → Thu 24 Jul
Sun 20 Jul → Fri 25 Jul
Mon 21 Jul → Sat 26 Jul
Tue 22 Jul → Sun 27 Jul

Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)[edit]

Sun 13 Jul → Tue 22 Jul
Mon 14 Jul → Wed 23 Jul
Tue 15 Jul → Thu 24 Jul
Wed 16 Jul → Fri 25 Jul
Thu 17 Jul → Sat 26 Jul
Fri 18 Jul → Sun 27 Jul
Sat 19 Jul → Mon 28 Jul
Sun 20 Jul → Tue 29 Jul
Mon 21 Jul → Wed 30 Jul
Tue 22 Jul → Thu 31 Jul

Closing a featured picture promotion request[edit]

The bot[edit]

Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below. However after the bot has counted the votes a manual review step is used to make sure the count is correct before the bot again picks up the work.

Manual procedure[edit]

Any experienced user may close requests.

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|category=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}}
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg)
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    featured or not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    becomes
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. If it is featured:
    • Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate category of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
    • Also add the picture to an appropriate subpage of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images.
    • Add the template {{Featured picture}} or {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
      • If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
      • If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessements template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
    • Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
      • The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
      • You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
    • Add == FP promotion ==

{{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.

  1. As the last step (whether the image is featured or not), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/July 2014), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.

Closing a delisting request[edit]

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    '''Result:''' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg)
  2. Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
    delisted or not delisted
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted ===
  3. Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/July 2014.
  4. If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
    1. Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
    2. Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes). Also, remove the image from all categories like Featured pictures of ....
    3. Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.