Commons:Featured picture candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
This project page in other languages:

Alemannisch | asturianu | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | English | español | suomi | français | galego | 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, 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

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

All set nomination pages should begin "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/", e.g. "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/My Nomination".


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:Hotel Daniel Skulptur Erwin-Wurm-Boot DSC 9082w.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 May 2014 at 22:02:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sculpture by Erwin Wurm on the roof of hotel Daniel, 3rd district of Vienna
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- P e z i (talk) 22:02, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Sculpture based on the shape of a sailing boat by Austrian artist Erwin Wurm. Situated on the roof of hotel Daniel, 3rd district of Vienna
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- P e z i (talk) 22:02, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de Santiago Tlatelolco, México D.F., México, 2013-10-16, DD 38.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 May 2014 at 17:04:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church of Santiago Tlatelolco, home of the Colegio de Santa Cruz de Tlatelolco (first European school of higher learning in the Americas), Mexico City, Mexico.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Church of Santiago Tlatelolco, host of the Colegio de Santa Cruz de Tlatelolco (first European school of higher learning in the Americas), Mexico City, Mexico. All by me, Poco2 17:04, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 17:04, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Berthold Werner (talk) 17:29, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Heh Poco, the standard for church interiors is forty megapixels these days, not fourteen :-). I would have liked to see more detail, and the bright lights handled a little better, but we aren't all Diliff. The subject has wow enough for me. -- Colin (talk) 20:07, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 22:07, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Capri BW 2013-05-14 17-20-55 DxO.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 May 2014 at 16:59:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Capri, Marina Grande

File:Drikke fontaine i Aarhus Rådhus.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 May 2014 at 14:08:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Drinking fountain between the benches in Aarhus City Hall

File:Elfbergen Gaasterland Oorlogsmonument 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 May 2014 at 17:39:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Elfbergen Gaasterland Oorlogsmonument
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Elfbergen Gaasterland War Memorial. created by Famberhorst - uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by Famberhorst -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:39, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:39, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Don't see anything extraordinary about this image. (The long exposure and focal length choice is odd) -- Colin (talk) 11:55, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The marker does not stand out in any featurable way. Saffron Blaze (talk) 13:43, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Famberhorst (talk) 16:06, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Ta Phrom, Angkor, Camboya, 2013-08-16, DD 39.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 May 2014 at 15:48:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior of the Ta Phrom temple in Angkor, Cambodia.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Interior of the Ta Phrom temple in Angkor, Cambodia. All by me, Poco2 15:48, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 15:48, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment percpectives (left and right are leaning out) -- Christian Ferrer 18:11, 23 april 2014 (UTC)
    ✓ Corrected, which does not mean that everything is vertical now (right side), because it isn't vertical in reality Poco2 21:56, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sharpness id not the best on the edges, however I like it very much. -- Christian Ferrer 04:49, 24 april 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition, lighting and sharpness not really saying "wow" to me. Location is very wow. -- Colin (talk) 21:44, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Colin. I don't understand the composition.--Jebulon (talk) 10:00, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice chaos! --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:23, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Facade på Aarhus Rådhus.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 May 2014 at 11:35:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Facade of the City Hall in Aarhus on Park Alle

File:Berlin - Schloss Bellevue2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 May 2014 at 19:53:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Berlin: Bellevue Palace
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info High resolution image (about 30 MP) of Bellevue Palace, official residence of the President of Germany, all by Taxiarchos228 -- Wladyslaw (talk) 19:53, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 19:53, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support yes, this is OK! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Happy to support as well, but please fix the dust spots in the sky and perhaps lighten the shadows on the left. Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:08, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
    • I´ll do this soon. --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:20, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Saffron Blaze: sky should be cleared completely now. The shadows are IMO not disturbing for the impression itself and everything within the shadows is visible clearly. So it would be too much brightening I think. The curves are already adjusted and well-balanced. --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:27, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:15, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support At the first glance I thought to have found a stitching error at the right part of the building - but that's no error, the building looks a bit strange there also on other photos . Nice panoramic view at good light. --Tuxyso (talk) 06:38, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could you please correct the tilt or the distorsion (please see note) ? Thanks in advance.--Jebulon (talk) 09:37, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
If you look at the 100%-view you'll see that the image is horizontal straightened. Nevertheless the builings is located at a small slope so it might seem a bit angular. But this is reallity. The Bellevue Palace isn't even Versailles ;-) --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:16, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for answer, but even at 100%, the roofs looks tilted... Anyway, you know the place better than me so I have no reason to doubt. Do you want a cliché ? This leaning roof does not look very "preussisch" ! Seriously, I'm not bothered with the shadow, and it is a very good picture, now in use as QI, VI and future FP in the relevant article of the french WP (french caption added, BtW).--Jebulon
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 16:55, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:34, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very detailed. However, the light is harsh compared to File:Bellevue Palace Berlin 02-14.jpg -- Colin (talk) 12:05, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 22:20, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:La Grace (ship, 2010), Sète, Hérault 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 May 2014 at 10:30:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

La Grace in Sète.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Christian Ferrer
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer 10:29, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Subject not isolated from very busy background and in least dramatic form (at port, sails furled). See Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles#Water for examples of featured ships. See File:La Grace-At Sea1-full.jpg for more impressive capture of this replica ship. And Google Images too. -- Colin (talk) 11:28, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the title/name of the image is just wrong, but the picture itself is very good to me, with a lot of things to be seen, like in real in a port. The light is excellent and I'm satisfied with the composition. Maybe the inflatable boat is not the best, but it was here.--Jebulon (talk) 15:46, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Jebulon, I choose this name because it's the yellow boat that we see in first, but you're right, there is a lot of things in this image and others titles are possible. --Christian Ferrer 05:10, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 17:01, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 19:28, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:USO-Sale Sharks - 20131205 - Ballon flottant.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 21:14:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by, uploaded by, nominated by Pleclown -- Pleclown (talk) 21:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This picture was taken during the match opposing the USO to the Sale Sharks, competing in the European Challenge Cup, which was attended by two accredited photographers, thanks to Wikimedia CH. one of the player as let the ball loose, creating this "floating ball" moment, with all the eyes converging to the ball. -- Pleclown (talk) 21:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 06:06, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks like a Flemish painting. Great sports shot. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 17:27, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really good --Baresi F (talk) 21:11, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:43, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hieronymus Bosch for the faces, maybe... But as it is the focal point of the image, I'd wish a ball without chromatic aberration (purple fringe). Thank you.--Jebulon (talk) 15:51, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
    New version. Pleclown (talk) 17:13, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 21:23, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:34, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Memorial J Kubitschek Brasilia statue.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 20:01:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Statue of Juscelino Kubitschek, the founder of Brasilia, in front of the JK Memorial in Brasilia.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 20:01, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon (talk) 20:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 06:17, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 10:16, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:50, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:15, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I like Cayambes pictures very much, especially those one of Brasilia. This is a very good detail shot of this Kubitschek memorial. But the main object is sadly not right sharp. Because this is a very simple subject I have to be strictly than e.g. with aerial views. Please reprocess this image and I'll gladly support it. --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:24, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info New version uploaded, noise and CA reduction and a bit of sharpening. --Cayambe (talk) 21:25, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:30, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Cydalima perspectalis carterpillar.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 19:28:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Archaeodontosaurus - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 19:28, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 19:28, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jebulon (talk) 20:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thank you to TOMER. This animal is very affectionate, if some want to adopt, I can send you. I have thousands in my garden. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:32, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 10:16, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Barcex (talk) 14:19, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice caterpillar. :) But the black background puzzles me. Are you breeding it? --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 16:59, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Ossuary in Sedlec.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 19:23:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Jan Kameníček - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 19:23, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 19:23, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support At least something different !--Jebulon (talk) 20:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Always useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 10:17, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain or Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Good idea and well composed. I'd support if general sharpness were (much) better. But I guess I'm asking too much of a small point and shoot camera... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:21, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Baresi F (talk) 21:14, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 01:59, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 05:29, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. Would be a little nicer without the noise in the dark areas. Lewis Hulbert (talk) 18:57, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ossuary certainly makes for an arresting image but I don't think this one rises above a well taken tourist photo. The technical quality and lighting is satisfactory rather than outstanding, and Sedlec Ossuary has lots of potential (see Google Images). -- Colin (talk) 21:17, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportClockery Fairfeld who, me? 11:31, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Colin. Saffron Blaze (talk) 13:23, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Endangered species Iguana Iguana from Margarita Island.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 18:32:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Endangered species Iguana Iguana from Margarita Island
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 18:32, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Can it be specified whether this is a male or a female individuum? --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:07, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done In description female. Thanks --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 10:47, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Zinnia_flower_in_jaffna.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 14:27:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

a zinnia elegans flower in nallur, jaffna, sri lanka
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by aathavan jaffna - uploaded by aathavan jaffna - nominated by Aathavan jaffna -- Aathavan jaffna (talk) 14:27, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as nom -- Aathavan jaffna (talk) 14:27, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This is just my opinion, but an FP macro (or near macro) should use a near perfect specimen and either focus stack or find a compelling way to use the limited depth of field. This image is just an ordinary photo of a flower. It is not one of our finest works. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:22, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Did you ever bother to compare the number of plant FP we have against the number of arthropod ones, for instance? It makes no sense. Something in the evaluation process is very biased against plant photographs. Your reasoning highlights this. There is no reason to expect plant FPs to be focus-stacked. We don't have so many plant FPs. And I am not supportive of this specific candidate either. Gidip (talk) 18:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • I agree with Gidip.--Jebulon (talk) 21:01, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • We have many arthropod ones because of one or two dedicated individuals. If your concern is systemic bias I will inform you I couldn't care less. BTW, focus stack was just one option. It is not my job to teach people how to photograph flowers in a compelling way. My job is state I don't think this is one of them. Saffron Blaze (talk) 23:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I mostly agree with Saffron on this. I suspect mentioning focus stack may have touched a nerve -- something that isn't really feasible except for cut flowers in the home. But that is merely one technique that one could be used. As an example, there's a rather nice Bing desktop photo of a zinnia you can Google for. There's also an existing File:Zinnia elegans with Bombus 01.JPG featured picture. Unlike animals that fly about, flowers are rather easier to take a frame-filling shot. And there are a huge multitude to choose. So making someone go wow requires something a bit special. Like with sunsets, you might think that having a beautiful subject would make the task easy, but perhaps not. -- Colin (talk) 20:52, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose--maathavan (talk) 13:14, 22 April 2014 (UTC) Invalid vote. User has less than 50 edits --DXR (talk) 16:43, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Bondinho chegando ao Pão de Açúcar.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 14:15:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Halley Pacheco de Oliveira - nominated by Arion -- ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 14:15, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 14:15, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose 1) Picture is blur. 2) No wow. Weird objective, shooting from the top downwards, with a disruptive cable car??? What is the photographer trying to achieve???? --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:11, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • The title is "Cable car arriving at the Pão de Açúcar*" [translator note: Sugar Loaf hill, in Rio de Janeiro]. So he was probably trying to photograph the cable car arriving at the Sugar Loaf station. --G Furtado (talk) 23:13, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per AK. The motif is not compelling. The cable car visually sits on the canopy of trees. Lots of other minor issues that ensure this is not one of our finest works. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:24, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination. Per users. ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 19:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Lagarto (Sceloporus mucronatus), Zona arqueológica de Cantona, Puebla, México, 2013-10-11, DD 03.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 12:31:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lizzard (Sceloporus mucronatus), archeological area of Cantona, Puebla, Mexico.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Lizzard (Sceloporus mucronatus), archeological area of Cantona, Puebla, Mexico. Poco2 12:31, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 12:31, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:23, 21 April 2014 (UTC) Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yes too bright. I wonder how this became QI!!! --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:05, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
    I'd rather make no comment on that. Poco2 16:57, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Don't think the composition is exceptional. The very bright rock/lichen is distracting. -- Colin (talk) 20:35, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Poco2 16:57, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:14 P416 6136.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 12:09:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

English: Roe deer - malePolski: Sarna - kozioł
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because Too many technical issues. Blurness, noise, background problems etc. I would be very, very surprised if this nomination is successful, as the photo clearly does not meet the FP criteria at one glance. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:18, 21 April 2014 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Velika noč - jedila hren šunka pirhi potica.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2014 at 20:40:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Traditionaln easter breakfast with eggs, ham, and [en:nut roll
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Klemen Brumec - uploaded by ModriDirkac - nominated by ModriDirkac -- ModriDirkac (talk) 20:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ModriDirkac (talk) 20:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Now I am hungry. That aside, there is a very unfortunate loss of sharpness towards the bottom of the image. It is bad enough that it is distracting. The image also seems to be a bit dull as if it could use a bit of brightening. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:30, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Suffering from insufficient DOF (and focus not on the plate) and very high ISO. The edit that reduced noise also seems to have reduced contrast and actually applied negative Clarity according to the EXIF (which I can understand being done selectively on a female portrait or dreamy scene, but not food). I'd love to know what the different objects/foods are in the picture. I suspect the lack of a tripod limited what could be achieved here and we've only got a 50%-sized image from a potentially great camera. -- Colin (talk) 17:40, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Saffron Blaze and Colin, sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 10:08, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Interesting observations, thx for feedback. I do not know where description was lost in the upload... Nevertheless, picture is now at least properly categorised.Face-smile.svg--ModriDirkac (talk) 22:10, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Whistlejacket by George Stubbs edit.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 09:15:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Whistlejacket is an oil-on-canvas painting from about 1762 showing the Marquess of Rockingham's racehorse, rearing up against a blank background. Edited by uploader from National Gallery scan to add lost "brownspace" to the left and right of the painting.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by George Stubbs - uploaded by Crisco 1492 - nominated by Nikhil -- Nikhil (talk) 09:15, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Nikhil (talk) 09:15, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Its status on the wikipedias is supported by the strong EV. I don't think that should have the same impact here on Commons. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:27, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Sorry for the late reply. However, I disagree with your opinion. We have many paintings, which have been given FP status on various wikipedias, elevated to FP status in commons. For example this pic got FP staus, this one and many more are there. IMHO, EV is an advantage for a pic in commons, besides technical quality. Nikhil (talk) 04:43, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I am not suggesting EV isn't a consideration on Commons. I am saying a good scan of a high EV paiting should not be the threshold for FP status on Commons. Commons is about the image... and without the written backstory in the WP article as to why this is such an important painting it becomes are rather unremarkable image to me. Saffron Blaze (talk) 13:41, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Hotel Iberostar Málaga Playa Torrox Costa 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 08:58:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hotel Hotel Iberostar Málaga Playa in Torrox-Costa (62 Mpx high res panorama)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info No historic building or church :) High resolution panorama (62 Mpx) of Hotel Hotel Iberostar Málaga Playa in Torrox-Costa
    all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 08:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 08:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support makes me want to go on vacation. Now! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:22, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great detail, subject, composition and lighting, good job! Poco2 09:31, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Btw, could you improve the symmetry (the right side is closer to the camera than the left side)? Poco2 11:29, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    (sorry, forgotten your comment): Yesterday I spent several hours on the improvement of the photo in order to check a suggesion by Colin regarding another projection (Panini General), see my discussion page for details. During the work I also tried to improve the symmetry but finally my disappointing insight, probabaly you can give a comment on it on my talk page, was that I still prefer the version I have nominated here. It simply looks better if I use the trees at the left and right as framing than strictly align the center to the lines on the floor. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:11, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Did you do a version without the trees on the left and right... i.e a few steps closer perhaps? Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:36, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    Unfortunately not. I really like the trees here. --Tuxyso (talk) 17:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    They work as a framing device but the one of the left is a bit distracting given it is the one large dark element in the image. Saffron Blaze (talk) 18:06, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    I though you mean the palm trees but you mean the smaller ones at the very left and right. Nonetheless is does not change the situation that I only have image material from the given positon. Indeed, my idea was to use them as framing. Cropping is no option because the pool building at the left would be cropped. I could try to brighten the left tree, what do you think? --Tuxyso (talk) 18:19, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    Probably ✓ Done: I've brightened the tree at the very left. Do you think it is better now? --Tuxyso (talk) 19:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    Tuxyso, can you spend a comment to my question above about the lack of symmetry? Poco2 20:01, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Poco -- Colin (talk) 10:14, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent sharpening --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 11:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm afraid the panorama distorsion does not work for me, sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 13:39, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • What exactly does not work for you? What had you done better? Where do you see problems with distortion? In the foreground or at the building? --Tuxyso (talk) 13:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Shortly: I should not see this if I where at the place of the camera.--Jebulon (talk) 14:05, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
      • I'm willing to adjudicate if someone will pay me to take the place of the camera. My verification of the perspective and field of view should take around two weeks. Thanks in advance. -- Colin (talk) 21:36, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Thank you, but no need. If some can wait a few months, I'll be there (or close too) in next july.--Jebulon (talk) 11:10, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
        • But don't forget to take new motives besides all the motives I have taken bad photos of (you made a similiar comment on my Alhambra photos) during my visit in Andalusia. Should I add a category Photos of Andalusia by Tuxyso to simplify your work? --Tuxyso (talk) 11:21, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
          • Oh sorry dear Tuxyso, I don't want to hurt you, and your pictures are very good ! I have a mental problem with panorama pictures and subsequent deformations/distorsions, that's all. And the rest of your productions is always very interesting, I don't think I can do better ! That was just a joke, answering to Colin's joke. Sorry again, no offense, really.--Jebulon (talk) 17:12, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
            • This time I have indeed understood the joke from Colin (which is not a natural consequences in a foreign language). But I have clearly understood your statement the way that you will make a better photo when you are in the region. BTW: I have a non-panoramic wide-angle version of the motive but imho the high resolution makes the difference here due to the plenty of details, take e.g. a look on the magazine the girl at the very left is reading :) --Tuxyso (talk) 19:56, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 19:25, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:37, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 06:09, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above. --DXR (talk) 16:59, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:10, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:25, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Scallop Neurological Diagram.svg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2014 at 07:46:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Scallop neurological diagram
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by KDS444 - uploaded by KDS444 - nominated by KDS444 -- KDS444 (talk) 07:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- A little context: this image is a full false color rendition of a similar diagram from a monograph on giant scallops. I realize it looks a little like something out of The Matrix, but this is in fact the actual arrangement of the neural system of a scallop. I have produced it here with lighter color shades representing those parts closer to the viewer, and darker shades as those further away: in this way, one can see that the system is arranged in a single "folded" circle/ loop connected to the various ganglia via nerves, with the animal's "left" half on one side and "right" half on the other (the scallop is, in this sense, "facing" the viewer... Though scallops, of course, don't have faces!). I have also attempted to show all nerves as having 3-dimensional round (cylindrical) shapes (i.e., their actual shapes) and have shown every nerve in its actual position and locus of connection. In the end, the image is highly accurate. And it wasn't easy! Also note that the image has been purged of all raster components. What is left is strictly vector-based. KDS444 (talk) 07:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:18, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent Svg work, easy to underestand and hight EV. We need support it. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 01:56, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Is the original monograph online? And if so, could you give us a link to it? This diagram is very beautiful indeed, but I would just like to check it against the original. Also, do we know for sure that this arrangement is the same in all scallops? Or is the diagram really just for one species of giant scallop? Thanks, Invertzoo (talk) 13:31, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
    • The original image file has the information to the source, but let me give it again here: Drew, Gilman Arthur. 1906. The habitats, anatomy, and embryology of the giant scallop (Pecten tenuicostatus, Mighels). Figure 23/ Plate 12. The diagram is specifically of a giant scallop-- more than that, of course, it is a diagram of one particular giant scallop, the one that Drew used for his own illustration! I know of no reason to expect other scallops to have a very different neurology, though I would be glad to narrow the claim of this image to being that of a giant scallop only. KDS4444 (talk) 00:43, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • So the book dates from 1907. It is online here: [1] By the way, this is usually called "the nervous system" rather than the "neurology". I am studying the images on his plates now. Invertzoo (talk) 01:19, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Comparing this diagram with the original, I have found one nerve (on each side) that has been accidentally omitted, an unbranched one at the front of the diagram, one that runs out almost level with the visceral ganglia. It also it seems to me that the cerebral ganglia need to be far more swollen and rounded-looking, as they are in the original, otherwise they don't even really look like ganglia. And in the original, the anterior pallial nerve comes to more of a point at the top. I am tired tonight but I will look again in the morning and see if I can spot anything else. I must say however in KDS444's favor that the 3-D rendering makes the diagram very much easier to understand than the original. Invertzoo (talk) 01:33, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Let me re-examine my diagram in light of these comments and revise as necessary. It is a quarter past 5:00 in the morning here in L.A., and I am very tired-- later today I will consider a reconstruction along these suggested (and no doubt accurate) lines. Aside: it was the utter confusion I experienced while looking at Drew's original strange image that inspired me to create my own based on his work, a version that wouldn't invoke such cerebral cacophony and confusion. Hopefully this will bear out in the end! KDS4444 (talk) 12:22, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • This diagram that KDS4444 has made is indeed a gorgeous rendering which really shows the 3-D arrangement of the nervous system. However, this morning I have noticed a couple more little things: where smaller nerves attach to larger nerves, if you look at the original you will see that the smaller nerves sort of blend in, with a curved line, rather than attach like one piece of pipe to another, or just sort of stop when the smaller nerve hits the larger nerve. Judging by dissections I have done of other organisms, the original is how things actually look in real life. Another thing: in the original the branchial (gill) nerves are drawn as just ending in mid-air, if you look at the original you will see what I mean. I assume the author did not want to superimpose the enervation of the gills on top of the general enervation diagram, which would make it REALLY confusing. In this new version it looks as if the branchial nerves just taper to points in the distance and that is that. I don't know what the bronchial (gill) enervation is really like, but I would be pretty sure that it is more complicated than that. Many thanks for your hard work KDS4444! Invertzoo (talk) 16:47, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I found a couple more things needing fixing. I would go ahead and label the nerves which are marked as "ppm" in the original. I think "ppn" means posterior pallial nerve (but please check this in the caption for the plate). Also if you look carefully at the original, the palp nerves branch off of the cephalic ganglia itself, not off of the thin nerve running upwards, the "apn", the anterior pallial nerve. What you have labelled the "anterior pallial nerve" is actually the "cpn" (does that maybe stand for the central pallial nerve -- check in the caption of the original plate.) And why does the cerebral commissure change color halfway round it? Is is a ring-shaped structure and should all be the same color. I hate to say it, but I now also see a couple more things that are a bit off. Perhaps I should hold off until you have fixed what I have mention so far? Thanks, and sorry to be a pain, Invertzoo (talk) 20:43, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Paris Palais du Luxembourg façade s printemps 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2014 at 20:34:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by JLPC - uploaded by JLPC - nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 20:34, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support There are two FPs of the Palais du Luxembourg, but this one is very beautiful too. The sky, the fontaine, the people, the trees gives a nice atmosphere.-- Paris 16 (talk) 20:34, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 00:17, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 08:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:22, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice mood and light. --Jebulon (talk) 14:07, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wanted to do a pano one day, but I see that it has already been done very well! --DXR (talk) 14:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 21:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 23:08, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:35, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and thanks to Paris 16 for this nomination and his help on other files. --JLPC (talk) 17:05, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:44, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Norbert Kiss - GP Camión de España 2013 - 08.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2014 at 19:11:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Truck pilot Norbert Kiss at the Spain Truck GP 2013.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Truck pilot Norbert Kiss at the Spain Truck GP 2013 (panning shot). Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Kadellar (talk) 19:11, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kadellar (talk) 19:11, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nikhil (talk) 01:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support Nice panning, sharpness is ok but lighting not the best, overall FP to me Poco2 08:57, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Pleclown (talk) 11:06, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really something special here, more than "technical quality" ! That is why FPC exists, IMO.--Jebulon (talk) 17:15, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 04:16, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Einstein2 (talk) 17:00, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Munich subway station Westfriedhof.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2014 at 16:50:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Munich subway station Westfriedhof
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Munich subway station Westfriedhof- all by --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:50, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:50, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 17:00, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and a suggestion. What if you crop the lower part until you get 1:2 ratio? I feel that if the black line on the floor ends closer to the corner of the image it will look nicer. --Kadellar (talk) 19:08, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I made the same suggestion (perhaps 16:9) earlier today (see note). Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:24, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 20:26, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Paris 16 (talk) 20:42, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow ! And per Kadellar.--Jebulon (talk) 21:00, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive --Jamez42 (talk) 00:15, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice work. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:04, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 08:57, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info and ✓ Done Thanks for your friendly reviews. As suggested I cropped the image a bit - you were right, the result is more convincing. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:19, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sorry, I can't support twice !!!--Jebulon (talk) 13:40, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • I knew it would look better with the crop but this far exceeded my expectations. Very strong visual impact now. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:19, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 11:55, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, obviously. Train at right is a nice touch. --DXR (talk) 14:56, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 15:47, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Visually striking. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:17, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 18:33, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gidip (talk) 18:41, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 19:25, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Outstanding shot! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:55, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:51, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:21, 42 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Rumex pictus 1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2014 at 14:54:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rumex pictus
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Gidip (talk) 14:54, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Gidip (talk) 14:54, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- JLPC (talk) 11:57, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Nice picture, but why did you cut off the other flowers along this stalk?? I would have supported if not for that. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:21, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per AK. The bottom crop creates an unnecessary and unwelcome tension in the image. The overall composition is not convincing either. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:38, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Just for general knowledge, these are fruits. Cheers, Gidip (talk) 18:20, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch für das Deutsche Reich.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2014 at 12:42:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cover of old book

File:Shepherds Bow - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2014 at 22:36:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Ukrainian religious painting, from an iconostasis, showing the Adoration of the Shepherds. Tempera on wood, between 1650 and 1700.

File:2014.03.29.-08-Mannheim Neckarau Waldpark-Wiesen-Schaumkraut.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2014 at 20:29:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. -- Hockei (talk) 20:29, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Hockei (talk) 20:29, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:22, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Photo is oversaturated imo. It looks very unnatural, especially the grasses behind. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 03:05, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I disagree with AK here. I find the light/colours/bokeh are fine. However, it is the tight crop on the bottom that is off-putting. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:40, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but I suggest a less square crop. Gidip (talk) 18:42, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:42, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 22:43, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Jasná Ski Resort - gondola lift Kosodrevina - Chopok (1).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2014 at 09:29:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jasná Ski Resort - gondola lift Kosodrevina - Chopok

File:St Stephen Walbrook Church Interior 2, London, UK - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2014 at 22:29:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:St Stephen Walbrook Church Interior 2, London, UK - Diliff.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by User:Diliff - uploaded by User:Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 22:29, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 22:29, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition is cut down --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:07, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    • What does 'cut down' mean? If you mean cropped, then yes, I carefully cropped the image to get the framing I wanted. But what specifically about the composition makes you oppose? Diliff (talk) 10:05, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
Yes, the seats are cut, that's what I mean --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 13:37, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
I would have preferred more of the seats in the foreground too, but it was not physically possible. My tripod was pushed up against a pillar directly behind the camera, so I could not go back any further. And to tilt the camera down further would result in a lot of distortion. Already, the viewpoint is looking down at perhaps a 60 degree angle at the bottom of the frame. The field of view is extremely large. Diliff (talk) 10:01, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
I underestand the situation. You could merge severals pictures in the future? --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 11:46, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Capturing the whole of an interior like this is not easy. The wide angle-of-view can lead to all sorts of stretched and distorted forms, and features such as columns and chandeliers can look awful. This image shows a good control of these problems and has a strong three-dimensional feel. The level of detail is great, as one would expect from Diliff, and the bright natural lighting is handled well. -- Colin (talk) 10:36, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:18, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question We have one round oculus (close right to the pulpit) , and several oval oculi. Is it normal, or is it a perspective deformation ?--Jebulon (talk) 14:02, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
    • It is normal. Only the 'central' oculus is round, the rest are genuinely oval-shaped. I think they are progressively more oval shaped, but I'm not sure and did not pay enough attention at the time. There may be some perspective distortions at the periphery but nothing that would make a circle look so oval-shaped. 14:12, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
    • OK, convinced. Thank you.--Jebulon (talk) 19:46, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:20, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and following Wilfredo's complaints, I feel that if we could see a bit more of the bench, it would be better, but it's FP for me anyway. --Kadellar (talk) 19:18, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 09:05, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:53, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

File:TF Wildpark Johannismuehle 03-14 img11.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2014 at 07:45:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Harris Hawk (Parabuteo unicinctus) in Wildpark Johannismühle, Brandenburg, Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by A.Savin
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 07:45, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great, but maybe a portrait crop would be even better. --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:13, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 08:27, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much in shadow and want a more detailed image from a captive bird at FP. -- Colin (talk) 13:34, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Notable chromatic noise under the wings and on the breast. Not sharp enough, sorry. No offense Colin, but I don't see why it should be more detailed because captive: anyway, the bird is as mobile as in the nature, no ? It is not a stuffed specimen...--Jebulon (talk) 15:13, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    Not less sharp than some of building photographs getting promoted here (and also supported by you sometimes); yes, quite mobile birdy which does not stand still for more than some seconds; and - yes, some noise but certainly not chromatic (=colour) one. --A.Savin 19:09, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    Don't be angry ! I know what "chromatic" means, I learnt ancient greek when I was young, and the word is the same in French. So, there is chromatic noise, as I said. And I find the bird, especialy the face, not sharp enough, sorry. And yes, I've probably made mistakes in my votes. Didn't you ?--Jebulon (talk) 21:26, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    Actually, I think A.Savin is right, there is noise but it's not chromatic. Chromatic noise would be a mixture of red, blue and green blotches. There's very little of that in the image. It's just luminance noise. Diliff (talk) 12:47, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
    I don't buy the "we have promoted images that are worse than this" argument you've raised here and in another photo. That some weak images get through isn't an reason to promote another weak image. If that argument held, we'd be on a downward spiral towards mediocrity. Perhaps we are :-(. I'd be very surprised if any 10MP unsharp building image got promoted these days. Comparing building and animal photography is pretty silly anyway. Jebulon, a captive bird can be trained to land and stay quite close to people. So it it would be possible to get as close as one desired and the keeper/circumstances allow. With a wild bird, one would be happy to even get the bird to fill the frame of a huge zoom lens. We have lots of highly-detailed head-portraits of captive birds of prey, for example. -- Colin (talk) 21:35, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent composition, nice moment, nice pose. Well done --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:08, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose IMHO not sharp enough for a bird FP. The level of detail is relatively poor - even at the sharper areas. Also f/5 at 130mm could be a problem - the claws a very unsharp. Light is not really good, the background is bumpy. --Tuxyso (talk) 05:23, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 08:20, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I just don't see this as one of our finest works, particularly in the bird category. Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:31, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:19, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 02:44, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, sorry. --Kadellar (talk) 21:00, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Trompe l oeil Emperor's Courtyard Residenz Munich.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2014 at 15:59:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Trompe l'Oeil in Residenz, Munich.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 15:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This facade is flat, round windows are fakes, it is just a trompe l'oeil painting, as a restoration work. Emperor's Courtyard of the Residenz, Munich, Bavaria, Germany.-- Jebulon (talk) 15:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. And the man in the archway is perfectly posed. Or is he fake too? :-) -- Colin (talk) 18:04, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Oh, what a good idea ! I'll think of it next time ! --Jebulon (talk) 18:59, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent composition with harmony feels :) --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 20:37, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 07:48, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 07:52, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:14, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Striking shot. --Baresi F (talk) 08:14, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 08:27, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great! I should have had this idea myself and already a long time ago. Yet I didn't. Good work, Jebulon! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:54, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks Martin Falbisoner. That's because I was a tourist, with a "new eye". I'm fan of pictures of Paris by non Parisians: they see some things I've never seen before ! Anyway: Es lebe München !--Jebulon (talk) 15:09, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:08, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 21:05, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not the quality I'd wish for a building photo. Missing sharpness; artefacts. Not very much wow for me, so I'd have abstained if it at least was a real QI. --A.Savin 21:29, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
      • I agree the image isn't as sharp as we might want and we have lots of megapixel stitched architecture images that show greater detail than this. But unlike QI, FP is judged for wow and artistic qualities which can mitigate against technical issues. When I saw this picture I went wow, both for the effect of the subject itself and also the pose of the man in the archway. It makes a great picture overall. This is the heart of FP, not pixel peeping. But everyone sets their thresholds and balances at different levels so I can accept some think the technical deficiencies (whether sharpness or noise) are too much. -- Colin (talk) 10:29, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
        • About sharpness: please remember this is not "architecture", but "painting". What you see is a flat wall, one cannot compare with any other facade. The painted lines are not as "pin" if it was a real relief (on purpose IMO).--Jebulon (talk) 14:58, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
          • I appreciate that, and studied the real bits too. There is some grain/noise that removes sharpness -- not sure if due to processing like Tuxyo suggests. But ultimately I guess we are looking a raw captured pixels rather than a downsized image, and it is rarely perfect at that level. Maybe you should try your hand at stitched panorama! -- Colin (talk) 15:42, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
          • I don't think I'm able ! Actually I don't know how to do. But since a few day, I work with some collaborators who know how to do, and I'll ask them (they make professional interactive panorama pictures ! You point at a spot, and you have a close-up !). I'll see what kind of softwares they use.--Jebulon (talk) 17:08, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (weak) I also like the innovative composition as said by other reviews. But imho the problem of the photo is the bad light. It looks for me as if you extremely pushed the shadow parts of the building which lead to some unfavorable noise at the facade. Probably you just excluded the sky because it had been burnt out due to back light. For a photo with a strong accentuation on the structure of the facade it is not crisp enough. --Tuxyso (talk) 04:07, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
    • "excluded the sky because it had been burnt out due to back light": well possible; see this small burnt area behind the arch. --A.Savin 05:02, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Nothing is burnt, see histogram.--Jebulon (talk) 09:45, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support  ■ MMXX talk 21:32, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:19, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow imo. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 03:02, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Not sure some people actually know what Trompe-l'œil means Saffron Blaze (talk) 05:39, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 18:37, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 20:20, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The man is a plus and makes it different. --Kadellar (talk) 21:02, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 21:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:35, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose interesting picture, but strong and visible artefacts and noise --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:00, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Blassenstein Erlauftal mit Nebel 02 Panorama.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2014 at 07:19:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fog over Erlauf river, seen from Blassenstein mountain
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Also see the original nomination. Created by User:Uoaei1 - uploaded by User:Uoaei1 - nominated by Uoaei1 -- Uoaei1 (talk) 07:19, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uoaei1 (talk) 07:19, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Baresi F (talk) 08:18, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 08:27, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Better. Yann (talk) 09:44, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Caecilius Mauß (talk) 09:55, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DXR (talk) 11:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:57, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I still think cropping along the top of the dark clouds makes a much more dramatic picture -- the shaft of light from the left then forces the eye into the clouds in the middle of the picture and the dark clouds then frame the picture rather than having a distracting bright part in the top left or blue part in the top right. If you don't want as extreme as 3:1 then keeping the bottom but cropping the top is still better imo. -- Colin (talk) 13:43, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:26, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! --King of ♠ 18:22, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tuxyso (talk) 04:12, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 08:18, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:58, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support  ■ MMXX talk 21:33, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:18, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 02:46, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Am I the only one who feels it is slightly tilted? I added a note. --Kadellar (talk) 21:05, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Dear Kadellar, thanks for the hint, you are absolutely right! I have uploaded a new version to correct the tilt. --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportClockery Fairfeld who, me? 11:34, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Original Crop[edit]

Fog over Erlauf river, seen from Blassenstein mountain

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Uoaei1 - uploaded by Uoaei1 - nominated by Uoaei1 -- Uoaei1 (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uoaei1 (talk) 14:39, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is a very nice scene but the crop isn't good. Too much sky (and vapour trail) and the nearby rocks are distracting. A 6000x2000 crop as indicated would imo make a great panorama. So I suggest that as an alternative. -- Colin (talk) 18:16, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thanks for your valuable proposal! I'd rather take a 2:1 crop instead of 3:1, which well-preserves the rule of thirds and some of the details in the foreground (trees disappearing in the fog). What is your opinion about this? --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:00, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral While I do love the one area of the trees, I am having a hard time understanding the level of support for this scene (see above). An oppose at this point would be rather arrogant if not petulant. Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:57, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't understand the logic of this new suggestion. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 02:46, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps because it is the original nomination not a new one. Saffron Blaze (talk) 05:36, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Summer fields near Rosehearty, Aberdeenshire, Scotland - pomprint.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2014 at 06:25:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Summer fields near Rosehearty, Aberdeenshire, Scotland - pomprint.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Steve Allen - uploaded by TeleComNasSprVen - nominated by TeleComNasSprVen -- TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 06:25, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 06:25, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In thumbnail view, oversatured, white balance... --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 12:32, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree the green is a bit vivid but don't see any white balance issue. I've suggested a 2.4:1 crop that I think is much stronger. -- Colin (talk) 18:26, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Sure, but would it be more appropriate to upload a crop as a separate file derivative work? I wouldn't want to touch the original, to keep the loss minimal and other concerns, but if you decide to make a cropped version we can link it here and vote on that. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 18:58, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Of course yes, you could upload in another version in this nomination --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:10, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:18, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Strong oppose --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 03:01, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Because strong oppose doesn't get more weight. This looks like a cartoon due to colours. Saffron Blaze (talk) 05:41, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Sorry, I'm new to the FP process, but why is looking like a "cartoon" a problem for an image? TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 06:01, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
The colours are oversaturated. While I am here... not fond of the crop/composition either... image is split in half. Saffron Blaze (talk) 06:31, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Dean Franklin - 06.04.03 Mount Rushmore Monument (by-sa)-3 new.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2014 at 00:47:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mount Rushmore Monument

Alternative[edit]

Mount Rushmore Monument

@Saffron Blaze: ✓ Done. Also wanted to know. ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 13:40, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support better! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:59, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. Compares well with some of the finer takes on this scene I could find on the internet. Saffron Blaze (talk) 13:54, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Baresi F (talk) 21:23, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That's better. --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 20:37, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:19, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:16 wood samples.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2014 at 20:23:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

16 types of wood
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Anonimski - uploaded by Anonimski - nominated by Anonimski
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as nominator. - Anonimski (talk) 20:23, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting idea. --King of ♠ 06:59, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don' t know why I support so tardily...--Jebulon (talk) 13:44, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'm not really wow-ed by the visual impact - which is imo impossible to achieve given the subject. But the interesting idea, the convincing conceptualization, high quality execution, and impressive documentation make me give my support. Very high EV, too! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:05, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as per Martin F. Yann (talk) 05:05, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Stadthalle Mülheim Panorama Blaue Stunde 02 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2014 at 19:39:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Town Event Hall ("Stadthalle") of Mülheim an der Ruhr at blue hour
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 19:39, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 19:39, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, too dark. Yann (talk) 07:41, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
    • IMHO it is not that bad, even dark structures are still visible. Yann, have you looked on the correct version? Yesterday I've uploaded a brighter version, probably you've seen an old version in the cache. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:34, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's too dark. Trust us on this one. Daniel Case (talk) 02:52, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Daniel it is not the question if I trust you and Yann or not. If it is the perception of you then I take it seriously. Nonetheless a few questions: What is the best brightness for such a shot? As you can see it is not a classical cityscape - you have only lights which brighten the main building and few lights at the left part of the bridge - the dark parts are trees. In short: Longer exposure with HDR or earlier shot? I've exposed in a way that the bright parts of the building are barely not burnt. Additionaly the sun sets behind the right part of the building thus you have at the beginning of the blue hour a strong brightness gradient on the sky. Another possibility had been to take the shot early in the morning before sunrise (sun behind me), but I do not know if the nice lighting of the building is there at that time. What would you suggest? --Tuxyso (talk) 07:41, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • In my opinion, the darkness is correct. It is night, and this emphasizes the situation. A night shot, in which can be seen more than is lit, I think is unrealistic. This composition with the lights reflected in the water and the rest of the twilight hour I find a good balance.--XRay talk 08:23, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
There's no EV in this one because we can't really see the shape of the building behind the lights. Therefore the darkness is not correct. Daniel Case (talk) 03:29, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Yann, Daniel, XRay and others: I am always surprised about the dynamic range of my D7000. I've created an alternative version with shadow and brightness correction. IMHO noise stays at an acceptable level:
    Stadthalle Mülheim Panorama Blaue Stunde 02 2014 Alternative.jpg. Do you think that version is better and could have a chance here? --Tuxyso (talk) 08:36, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:23, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Town Event Hall ("Stadthalle") of Mülheim an der Ruhr at blue hour

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Alternative nomination, with improved shadow details. After certain consideration I also think that this one is better than the previous nom. I look forward to your comments. --Tuxyso (talk) 13:04, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tuxyso (talk) 13:04, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:19, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 18:23, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support So ... much ... better! I love the eight-point flares around the street lamps and the reflections in the river! Daniel Case (talk) 03:35, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:23, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:17, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Technically sound but monotonous due to the one colour of light. Saffron Blaze (talk) 05:47, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Monotonous for you, for me a very nice color contrast between orange and blue which well brings out the building. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:02, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose This version is by far better, but still I cannot see anything here that blows me away, it is a good quality night shot Poco2 09:17, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:16, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dark, mono and boring. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 13:25, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Better than the other, but still a bit dark. The composition is not special either. Yann (talk) 19:18, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ukas (talk) 04:03, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon (talk) 19:25, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:An ocean of motion about Spanish commotions or the windy explosion of pot-hous oration LCCN2003681692.tiff, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2014 at 15:51:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cartoon of British views on the war against Spain, Pyne 1790-1810.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by William Pyne, scanned by the Library of Congress - uploaded by
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as nominator; see this jpeg version if you prefer to use the Commons ZoomViewer. This is a difficult document to digitize due to size (45 inches or 1.14 metres wide) and this is part of the reason for nominating it as an exemplar of the excellent work of the archivists at the Library of Congress in releasing the British Cartoon Prints Collection. Pyne was notable for establishing the Royal Watercolour Society. This cartoon is historically significant as it was made at the time of the Anglo-Spanish War (1796–1808) showing stereotypes of the Spanish as expressed by different classes of the British population. It is a rare example of William Pyne's humorous cartoons (the only political cartoon of his that I can find on Commons), the majority of his published work being palace illustrations and British costumes. The digitization shows detail of costumes and characters, sufficient for each to be taken as a separate detailed illustration. The full size image shows natural foxing due to age, and creases from being folded up, which it was designed to do, but these do not detract from the impact or quality of the etchings. The main humour of the text is to poke fun at the Spanish, with the cobbler calling them "fish-eating rascals" and the journalists for the Spanish Gazette having nothing to report (on the left) while the British cryers (on the right) are exhausted from having ten years worth of incidents to report in one day. I would hope that a consequence of bringing attention to this cartoon would be to help improve Wikipedia articles about Pyne, at the moment the article about his life exists only in English and is a stub. -- (talk) 15:51, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Remember add a short description in image hint look up .tiff|600x300px|SHORT DESCRIPTION]] --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:06, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Missed that, added one now. -- (talk) 16:13, 15 April 2014 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Capilla de Lourdes.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2014 at 15:01:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Capilla de Lourdes
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice scene but overprocessed and soft at 6MP. Why are the colours so different in File:Lourdes Chapel.jpg which appears to be the same photo but without the bird removed. The trees in the nomination photo have a white outline against the sky, compared to the other photo. The sloping white faces of the church are near white in the second photo but considerably darker in this nomination, suggesting the highlights are lowered too much -- a white surface facing the sun would be expected to be white. This makes the tonal range compressed. The scene could be fantastic at a slightly better time of year when the trees are less bare. -- Colin (talk) 12:23, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The other version is a pratice test with CaptureNX2 without real colors and with a fake bird. You can download the NEF file and try by yourself develope the jpg, if you want (you can find the link in file description) --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 18:01, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
I'm not particularly impressed that this is the second fake you've uploaded to Commons. At least File:Lourdes Chapel.jpg now admits this, but wouldn't it be better to request its deletion. -- Colin (talk) 20:14, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
This nomination is not a fake. Why delete File:Lourdes Chapel.jpg? If you consider that in commons should not be altered images, please also nominates all pictures in Photomontages of animals and Photomontages, You are free to nominate it to deletion. ;). By the way, it's a good idea to focus on this nomination. A hug --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 12:17, 17 April 2014 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Crown Queens Bavaria Schatzkammer Residenz Munich.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2014 at 14:33:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Crown of the Queens of Bavaria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Biennais, Nitot and Leblond - Photographied, uploaded and nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 14:33, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support New in "Commons", a masterpiece of the french 19th-century jewelry, made in Paris for Queens of Bavaria in 1806-1807 (altered in 1867), when the bavarian electorate was erected as a kingdom, allied of Napoleon. In use until 1918. Gold, silver, pearls, diamonds and other gems. On display (behind a glass...) at the "Schatzkammer", in the Residenz of Munich, Bavaria, Germany.-- Jebulon (talk) 14:33, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 16:17, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry. IMO it would better with the full base (at the bottom).--XRay talk 16:40, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Frankly, such a reason for oppose to this kind of image leaves me speechless...--Jebulon (talk) 19:11, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Ups. Sorry. It's a good picture, but IMO it looks incomplete with a significant part of the base.--XRay talk 17:37, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could you elaborate a bit on the shooting conditions? I obviously have no business with this sort of photography and will therefore not make a vote, but the exif leaves me a bit wondering. Did you hand-hold it for 0.2s or could you push it against something stable? It looks a bit soft (in the sense of denoised) to me for a ISO 400 image. --DXR (talk) 20:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Speechless again... Lack of base of the cushion, and questions about Exif Data, that's only what suggests this picture ? I took this image hand hold (or maybe I used the glass as stable surface, I don't remember). I post processed with Lightroom5, and after that with GIMP. I used luminance and color denoising with Lightroom5, adjusted sharpness a very little, and the white balance too. After that, with GIMP, I used the selective blur tool in order to correct the noise of some pearls, one after the other. I removed some disturbing elements in background by cloning out, and corrected the perspective a very little bit. This image was taken without tripod nor flash in a museum full of tourists, behind a glass, it is as difficult as it is interesting, a real challenge.--Jebulon (talk) 21:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
      • I'm not looking to get into an argument here, but I'm not sure you should be "speechless" that an image of a crown, even if it's admittedly a beautiful one, will not blow everyone of his feet if nominated as a commons FP. As I said, I will refrain from voting, but I think my question regarding the quality was legitimate and your comments help assess the quality of your work here in a postive way. --DXR (talk) 21:31, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The fact that it was challenging to capture this picture does not add any value to the photo. Photographers often mistakenly think it does but I'm afraid it doesn't. Some get rewarded because they were lucky, some work hard and and the outcome is slightly above the average. That's life.. --85.253.101.104 21:24, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
    Nonsense imo. Of course it makes a difference, but IP commenters have usually presented themselves to be fairly stubborn in their opinions, so what's the point of debating here... --DXR (talk) 21:31, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
    • As for me, I just asked for assessments, nothing else. I gave explanations because I was asked for. I don't think long discussions make a photo better (I tend to think the contrary). Shall I suppress Exif Data next time ? That's the question... Something like "Love it, or leave it"--Jebulon (talk) 21:59, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For once I'm not bothered by the bottom crop ... because the base blends so well into the background that you might not notice unless it's pointed out. And, really, the crown captures so much attention you won't mind. Daniel Case (talk) 17:17, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 10:57, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol support vote.svg Support given the circumstances quality is very decent. High EV! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:43, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The cropped base allows the attention to concentrate on the crown. Enough of the base is there to let the imagination (our brain) 'see' the missing part. Very good technical quality and high EV. --Cayambe (talk) 19:21, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 22:14, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose I understand the challenging conditions (I've been there) and I appreciate the editing work of Jebulon done here but the quality is still not at QI level to me (yes, I doubt it can get better, but that's a different topic): not enough DoF, dark halos around the pearls in the background, some of the reflections don't look natural to me, it is ccw (taking the cross in the top as reference) and overall lack of sharpness. I wouldn't manage it better, but I just judge the result. Poco2 09:22, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment As one can see here, the so-called tilt is in real. I think there are also positive things to say "in pro" for this picture, but even negative, I thank you for your detailed and useful review, apart of the tilt, nothing of what you say is really wrong... BtW, it is already a QI...--Jebulon (talk) 13:59, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
      • Sorry, I meant FP level instead of QI level, I guess I spend too much time at QI... And, of course there are positive things to say about it, and as said, I will not even try to get this shot. Poco2 22:07, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:37, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:20, 24 April 2014 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 21:01, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Animales-aiguamolls l'emporda-2013 (8).JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2014 at 08:38:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 12:59, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Mammals


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]

Sat 19 Apr → Thu 24 Apr
Sun 20 Apr → Fri 25 Apr
Mon 21 Apr → Sat 26 Apr
Tue 22 Apr → Sun 27 Apr
Wed 23 Apr → Mon 28 Apr
Thu 24 Apr → Tue 29 Apr

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

Tue 15 Apr → Thu 24 Apr
Wed 16 Apr → Fri 25 Apr
Thu 17 Apr → Sat 26 Apr
Fri 18 Apr → Sun 27 Apr
Sat 19 Apr → Mon 28 Apr
Sun 20 Apr → Tue 29 Apr
Mon 21 Apr → Wed 30 Apr
Tue 22 Apr → Thu 01 May
Wed 23 Apr → Fri 02 May
Thu 24 Apr → Sat 03 May

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/April 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/April 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.