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 | हिन्दी | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lëtzebuergesch | молдовеняскэ | norsk bokmål | português | polski | română | русский | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | 粵語 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Shortcut
COM:FPC
Skip to current candidates Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates


FPCandiateicon.svg

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

Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 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 nonetheless 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. A set should fall under one of the following types:

  • Faithful digital reproductions of works notable in their own right, which the original author clearly intended to be viewed as a set. Examples: pages in a pamphlet, crops (puzzle pieces) of a prohibitively large scan, a pair of pendant paintings. Not acceptable: Arbitrary selection of sample works by an artist.
  • A sequence of images showing the passage of time. They could depict frames of a moving/changing object or a static object during different times of day or different seasons. Examples: diagrams illustrating a process, steps of a dance, metamorphosis of an insect, maps/drawings/photos of the same subject over the years (frame of view should be more or less the same).
  • A group of images depicting the same subject from different viewpoints, preferably taken under the same lighting conditions when possible. Examples: Exterior and interior of a building, different facades of a building, different interior views, obverse and inverse of a banknote/coin. Not acceptable: A selection of different rooms in a skyscraper, the facade of a church plus an organ, any images of fundamentally different scopes.
  • A group of images which show all possible variations of a particular class of object. Examples: Male and female versions of an animal (preferably in the same setting), all known species of a genus. Not acceptable: A few breeds of cats (unless they share a defining characteristic and represent all possible examples of that).

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



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}}

Recommended: Please add a category from the list at COM:FP.

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

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 seven Symbol support vote.svg Support votes at the end of nine days
  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]

Image:Escudo de Osorno.svg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 May 2015 at 18:28:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Coat of arms of Osorno, Chile

File:Iceberg in North Star Bay, Greenland.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 May 2015 at 17:45:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Iceberg in North Star Bay, Greenland

File:Comma butterfly (Polygonia c-album) close up.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 May 2015 at 11:59:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Close up of comma butterfly

File:Den Haag Centraal-1589.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 May 2015 at 09:28:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Centraal Den Haag, tram station

File:Islamic - Al-Aqsa Mosque.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 May 2015 at 06:56:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View Islamic architecture from inside the Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem.

File:Kesari bhath.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 May 2015 at 05:27:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

South Indian cuisine
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by AntanO
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- AntanO 05:27, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- depth field fail, but don't loss relevant detail. Good sharp, try using self shoot 10 secs or focus remote after 5 secs. :) Webysther (talk) 06:41, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The subject is unattractively cropped at right and depth of field is too shallow. --Cayambe (talk) 09:33, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad crop. Yann (talk) 12:29, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dito. --Tremonist (talk) 16:28, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Serra Gardunha April 2015-5.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 May 2015 at 19:38:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Serra da Gardunha is a mountain range in the centre of Portugal known for its production of cherries ... and sightings of ovnis. This panorama was taken from near the top of the range to southeast, in a a cloudy day and almost contre-jour conditions. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:38, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:38, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark overall. --Tremonist (talk) 16:27, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Rahula - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 May 2015 at 17:20:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rāhula, the son of Buddha. Tibetan art, 16th century

File:Simone Marinho - Trindade - 2010 05 08.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 May 2015 at 16:24:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Trindade and Martim Vaz archipelago, Espírito Santo, Brazil.
  • It's always better to work with the RAW. If it exists. --Code (talk) 07:45, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • @Code, Laitche: But is only possible to improve the photo if the creator has the RAW file? 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:40, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • I think that depends on the processing skill, anyway are you trying to contact the creator now? --Laitche (talk) 18:41, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • @ArionEstar: We should give it a try. --Code (talk) 19:08, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Waiting for changes to be made. --Tremonist (talk) 16:16, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

File:St James's Church Interior 2, Spanish Place, London, UK - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 May 2015 at 15:25:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St James's Church, London
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff. Quite a beautiful Roman Catholic local parish church in London, with lots of visual interest in the frame. -- Diliff (talk) 15:25, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 15:25, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Incredible acutance and wonderfull sharpness. -- Christian Ferrer 17:45, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Though with the thumbnail sharpening, it's too much local and too little global contrast imo. I get dizzy looking at that. (Not your/the images' fault) — Julian H. 18:10, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
    • I know what you mean, I thought the same thing looking at the thumbnail. I can try adjusting it but it looks okay at full size IMO. Diliff (talk) 18:22, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
      • Yes, it looks fine at full size. I think it's actually bad luck that the detail frequency of the photo matches the pixel size here in the thumbnail pretty well so that the sharpening works exceptionally well, i.e. is too strong. — Julian H. 18:45, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
        • Resizing the thumbnail seems to help. ;-) Hopefully this isn't too big... Maybe we can find a middle ground if so. Diliff (talk) 18:54, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:32, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, first looking at the thumbnail, I thought "HDR is overdone". A case where the full size looks better than thumbnail... ;) Yann (talk) 21:07, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful piece. Fma12 (talk) 22:46, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Perfect, as usual. --Code (talk) 06:08, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Distortions are not problem, of course. But left lower floor looks left-downward slope and right lower floor looks right-downward slope. Other church interior photos of similar composition are not like that... --Laitche (talk) 14:18, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
    • I noticed this too but to be honest, I don't think it's a problem with the image or the processing. I double-checked the stitching and it's completely rectilinear, with no stitching or control point errors, the lens itself has very minimal distortion, the centre point is the middle of the church and all verticals are vertical. This should mean that horizontals are straight, and if there is a lean, it's because the chairs are not aligned properly with the church. Because this is a very wide angle view, any issues with angles are magnified, particularly with objects close to the camera. There's very little on the floor that you can use as a guide except the chairs, and because these are moveable, it's not possible to assume that they are aligned correctly (from my experience, a lot of church seating is badly aligned!). My only guess is that this is the cause of perception that the floor is leaning. Diliff (talk) 17:26, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
      • @Diliff: Thanks for the comment, I got what you mean. --Laitche (talk) 17:50, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 16:15, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Keble College Chapel Interior 1, Oxford, UK - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 May 2015 at 15:18:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Keble College Chapel

File:NYC Public Library Research Room Jan 2006-1- 3.jpg (delist)[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 May 2015 at 14:37:33
NYC Public Library Research Room NYC Public Library Research Room

File:NYC Public Library Research Room Jan 2006-1- 3.jpg, Left[edit]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist -- Claus 14:37, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Claus Obana, Diliff: I made the sections and moved your vote. If my decision is wrong, please move your vote or all revert what I did. --Laitche (talk) 16:46, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist this one as well. There's a clear patch on the left wall column/ceiling from fixing of the stitching issue in the original (right) image. -- KTC (talk) 23:28, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
    • Huh? But instead of just delisting, it could be fixed, either by myself or someone else... No need to delist an image over a very minor stitching issue. Diliff (talk) 17:27, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
      • Also, could you point out what exactly you mean? The left wall/column looks pretty clean IMO. I don't think even a pixel-peeper would notice any problems with the column unless directly comparing to the version with the stitching problem. Is that really how we should be judging images? Diliff (talk) 17:30, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

File:NYC Public Library Research Room Jan 2006.jpg, Right[edit]

File:William-Adolphe Bouguereau, 1892 - Le Guêpier.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 May 2015 at 12:22:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

William-Adolphe Bouguereau (1825-1905) - The Invasion (Le Guêpier) (1892) Translated title: The Wasp's Nest. 1892 Oil on canvas 83 3/4 x 60 inches (213 x 152.5 cm) Private collection Signed and dated lower right

File:Bernini's Dome in Collegiata of San Thomas in Castel Gandolfo.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 May 2015 at 07:14:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bernini's Dome in Collegiata of San Thomas in Castel Gandolfo
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- LivioAndronico talk 07:14, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LivioAndronico talk 07:14, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 11:19, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor sharpness (and yes, I have examined the picture at 100%). --A.Savin 11:49, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice place, excellent lighting, good management of colors and good symetry. Excellent in thumbnail, disappointing at full size: lack of sharpness, posterization, some parts are too strongly denoised, som parts are too noisy. Please compare with other domes views, you will understand what I mean.--Jebulon (talk) 14:13, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • No problem Jebulon,I don't complained,how sayd Alchemist-hp :"if the criticism is fair and intelligent and helps to improve is always welcome". If it were easy, there would taste Clin. Thanks for your time.--LivioAndronico talk 14:59, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. As Jebulon says, it seems too de-noised, but I wouldn't say it's too soft. It seems okay for sharpness, but the contrast edges seem 'gritty', like they have been oversharpened. As others have mentioned, it we could know the details, step-by-step, of how you process you images, then we might be able to help identify the cause of the poor processing that we frequently see in your images Livio. Diliff (talk) 15:50, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful oppose As I can now personally appreciate, taking an FP-quality image of a dome interior poses challenges. This overcame so many of them. But I see the same noise and processing issues. Daniel Case (talk) 17:00, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Good, but problem with contrasts. --Tremonist (talk) 16:14, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Berlin Hauptbahnhof Ostseite HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 May 2015 at 05:56:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

East facade of Berlin Central Station as seen at early dawn from Alexanderufer.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Code - uploaded by Code - nominated by Code -- Code (talk) 05:56, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info East facade of Berlin Central Station as seen at early dawn from Alexanderufer. The building is reflecting in the water of Humboldt harbour. The building was designed by Meinhard von Gerkan. HDR made of three exposures (f/11, ISO 100, exposure times 1/30, 1/60, 1/125).
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Code (talk) 05:56, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 11:53, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressiv light, composition, quality and high EV.--ArildV (talk) 14:14, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:30, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'm surprised we don't yet have any FPs of this building ... just walking around inside you can find so many striking views. I'd love if we had it against a bluer sky, but as it is this is well-done. Daniel Case (talk) 16:55, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, I'd forgotten that one. I should have clarified that we need an FP of the exterior. Daniel Case (talk) 14:56, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer 17:22, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Laitche (talk) 17:40, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:32, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment. The white balance seems overly warm. I know it was taken at 'early dawn' but I think you could partially correct this and have a slightly more neutral looking image. Diliff (talk) 22:08, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, though HDR definitely would not have been necessary I feel... --King of ♠ 05:47, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 09:06, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 13:22, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 16:13, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Saint Peter's Basilica at night HD.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 May 2015 at 17:48:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saint Peter's Basilica at night
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- LivioAndronico talk 17:48, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LivioAndronico talk 17:48, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:05, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A little too much cut from the bottom, but I like. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 20:15, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LuisArmandoRasteletti (talk) 20:33, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I find the tight crop (top and especially bottom) simply too disturbing. -- Fotoriety (talk) 00:20, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Fotoriety. This is almost an excellent photo. The top, okay, the bottom, no. --Abd (talk) 00:51, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the bottom part isn't excellent. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 06:12, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The top is not excellent neither, the basilica looks like just a flat rectangle, I miss the dome.--Jebulon (talk) 08:52, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others: bottom crop issue. --El Grafo (talk) 11:34, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark overall. --Tremonist (talk) 16:13, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Webysther 20140125062438 - Balão boituva.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 May 2015 at 10:52:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Balloon in Boituva, São Paulo state, Brazil.
@Brateevsky: Пересмотрите ваш голос, пожалуйста. Что значит - "больше Бразилии"? Избранными должны быть изображения, отвечающие требованиям к лучшим изображениям на Викискладе, а не потому только, что для кого-то предпочтительнее иметь как можно больше избранных изображений отдельно взятой страны или города. Если мне как москвичу приятно, когда изображения Москвы становятся избранными, то, по-вашему, это должно означать, что я должен поддерживать каждую такую номинацию потому-де что "больше Москвы"? Вам мало того, что здесь и без того много участников, не способных отличить Викисклад от фликра? Лично у меня такое ощущение, что это был в самом деле единственный аргумент с вашей стороны в поддержку этой номинации, но если я не прав, то объясните, пожалуйста, в чем именно. --A.Savin 17:04, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
A.Savin, ну, я считаю, что фотография может иметь статус Feature picture. По крайней мере, мне она показалось достаточно качественной и интересной. Поэтому я проголосовал "За", хотя у других людей могут быть другие мнения. Заодно я поддержал участника (и он это оценил, сказав "спасибо" за мой голос с помощью технических средств), чтобы это была не последняя качественная фотография по Бразилии. Да, например, по Европе, думаю, очень много фотографий уже есть. Sorry for writing in Russian, you can use Google-translator. :) The summary is — I vote "yes" for this photo because I think it's quality and interesting. “More Brasil” (from me) can encourage the user make more quality photo form Brasil. --Brateevsky {talk} 18:26, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Tudo bem, é por isso que existe tradução automática! :D Concordei a princípio com o fato de que temos que votar com base nos critérios de qualidade e se a imagem é interessante e para mim ficou claro que sua escolha foi motivada por isso. Com o fato de motivar que no Brasil continue sendo produzidas imagens de qualidade é realmente muito bom ouvir isso e propagar, existe uma demanda baixa de voluntários dispostos a produzir boas imagens e disponibilizar de forma gratuita, acredito que isso é um problema cultura que está mudando aos poucos e que é por falta de visão relativa a necessidade de criar um mundo colaborativo, aonde isso vai trazer mais benefícios para as pessoas da comunidade global e não apenas para indivíduos ou sociedades isoladas, de fato, em poucas décadas não vamos ter mais informação isolada e vamos continuar o nosso trabalho. Respeito votos negativos e positivos e todo argumento é extremamente válido, sem eles eu nunca poderia melhorar a qualidade das imagens que estou produzindo atualmente e espero melhor cada vez mais para mostrar o pequeno mundo que vivo (Brasil) para todos. -- Webysther (talk) 23:04, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose beautiful colors and probably a good QI candidate, but the composition doesn't really convince me and the shadows in the foreground are a bit distracting. --El Grafo (talk)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above. And I don't find the subject "featurable", sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 14:30, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow. Daniel Case (talk) 16:46, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per El Grafo. --Laitche (talk) 17:45, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, sorry. --Tremonist (talk) 16:12, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Nuestra Señora de las Rocas y Monasterio de San Jorge, Perast, Bahía de Kotor, Montenegro, 2014-04-19, DD 17.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 May 2015 at 09:38:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the islets Sveti Đorđe (left) and Our Lady of the Rocks (right) off the coast of Perast in the Bay of Kotor, Montenegro. Sveti Đorđe (island of Saint George) is a natural island that hosts the Benedictine monastery of Saint George, from the 12th century, and the old graveyard for the old nobility from Perast and further from the whole Bay of Kotor. On the other side, Our Lady of the Rocks is an artificial island created by bulwark of rocks and by sinking old and seized ships loaded with rocks. The homonymous church, a Roman Catholic temple, dates from 1452.

File:Kršlenica 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 May 2015 at 07:43:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nature Preserve Kršlenica

File:Kršlenica 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 May 2015 at 07:45:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nature Preserve Kršlenica

File:Kowloon Panorama by Ryan Cheng 2010.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 May 2015 at 12:51:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kowloon Panorama
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ryan Cheng - uploaded by Lkiller123 - nominated by Julien1978 -- Julien1978 (talk) 12:51, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Julien1978 (talk) 12:51, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LuisArmandoRasteletti (talk) 17:15, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per this, one of the best banners at Wikivoyage. Daniel Case (talk) 18:19, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too small to see the detail for a panorama.(I presume downscaled to much.) --Laitche (talk) 19:27, 25 April 2015 (UTC) Plus gray bar on the top. --Laitche (talk) 08:36, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment there are stitching errors on the right side --93.144.76.191 23:26, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Gray bar, stitching, low vertical resolution, editing pretty exaggerated. — Julian H. 09:22, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Julian, also horizon not level, buildings not straight vertically. This isn't "featured Wikivoyage banners". We have some standards. -- Colin (talk) 10:27, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

*Symbol support vote.svg Support --LuisArmandoRasteletti (talk) 12:51, 26 April 2015 (UTC) Double vote. Yann (talk) 18:00, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per other opposes. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:05, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice lighting but too small. --King of ♠ 01:27, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Good, but too small. --Tremonist (talk) 16:10, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Columba livia - 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 May 2015 at 12:15:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Columba livia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Rock dove (Columba livia) at Retiro Park, Madrid, Spain. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Kadellar (talk) 12:15, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kadellar (talk) 12:15, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:06, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 16:37, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LuisArmandoRasteletti (talk) 17:16, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:12, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support D kuba (talk) 16:43, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I have next to zero experience with wildlife photography and never used a lens that long, so maybe this is a stupid question, but: It seems that at 1/2500 s there would have been some wiggle room to stop down a bit more in order to get a bit more DOF? I mean, you perfectly nailed the focus on the eye, which is amazingly sharp, but the beak is pretty soft even at screen size (1024×1024 px). Not sure how to vote here yet … --El Grafo (talk) 12:02, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • It is not a question of lack of light. In wildlife photography, when you take a portrait (close up or full body), you want the background to be as blurred as possible, that will usually improve the image. 1/2500 is not strictly needed here, but you'd better use a quick shutter speed with birds, they make really fast small movements that can ruin the image. --Kadellar (talk) 13:13, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • OK, so it's basically the usual trade-off between foreground depth of field and background blur/bokeh you'll have in an (non-stacked/outdoor-) macro as well (with slightly different secondary factors). If this was a butterfly image I'd probably oppose, but considering the movements you mention that might not be a fair comparison. I guess I'll stay Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral on this one. Thanks for the explanation, though! --El Grafo (talk) 14:09, 27 April 2015 (UTC) PS: The eye section is still fascinating me – may I suggest to drop a crop of the eye into Category:Bird eyes and maybe nominate it at VIC with a scope like Columba livia (eye)?
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Impressive eye and useful image, but the small DoF is too small for to make the image outstanding. -- Christian Ferrer 17:42, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose beak is too out of focus for me. --Charles (talk) 11:47, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry,per others --LivioAndronico talk 12:47, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Charles, sorry. --Tremonist (talk) 16:09, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

File:2014 Baroña. Castro de Baroña. Porto do Son-2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 May 2015 at 10:39:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hill fort of Baroña, Pre-Roman Galicia (Spain).

File:NASA Unveils Celestial Fireworks as Official Hubble 25th Anniversary Image.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 May 2015 at 09:46:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

NASA Unveils Celestial Fireworks as Official Hubble 25th Anniversary Image

File:Dülmen, Viktorkirmes auf dem Overbergplatz -- 2014 -- 3738 (2).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 May 2015 at 09:10:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Light traces of a ferris wheel, Viktorkirmes in Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XRay - uploaded by XRay - nominated by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 09:10, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I really like the nice light pattern coming from the ferris wheel. Also the composition is imho quite pleasing. -- Tuxyso (talk) 09:10, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per nom. Nikhil (talk) 09:18, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose light ok, but too tight crop and weak sharpness, D kuba (talk) 10:11, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LuisArmandoRasteletti (talk) 10:56, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't mind the top crop but a little mind the bottom crop but agree with Tuxyso. --Laitche (talk) 20:04, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 06:56, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks to Tuxyso for nominating the picture. (BTW: I just improved the resolution.) --XRay talk 09:33, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Sharpness could be better, but given the circumstances it is ok. I like the tight crop which gives the picture intensity and a feeling of actually being there. Nice work. --Pugilist (talk) 15:55, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as others --Hubertl (talk) 09:09, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 16:06, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Juan Griego sunset from Fortín La Galera.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 May 2015 at 01:45:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Juan Griego sunset from Fortín La Galera
This is not another sunset over the sea, this is a zoombie sunset before apocalipse :) --The Photographer (talk) 16:44, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Bothriechis lateralis CR.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 May 2015 at 22:00:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bothriechis lateralis

File:StJohnsAshfield StainedGlass GoodShepherd-frame crop.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 May 2015 at 10:53:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jesus image on church window

File:Douglas DC-3 of BOAC at Gibraltar, silhouetted by searchlights on the Rock.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 May 2015 at 09:36:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Douglas DC-3 of BOAC at Gibraltar, silhouetted by searchlights on the Rock.jpg

File:Reflexions of a mangrove.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 May 2015 at 00:14:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, nominated by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 00:14, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 00:14, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but I don't see an overall idea in the composition. --King of ♠ 00:24, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per KoH. Daniel Case (talk) 00:56, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per King of Hearts. --Laitche (talk) 07:21, 24 April 2015 (UTC) Withdraw my vote, neutral for now. --Laitche (talk) 19:28, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I find the composition very good and very interesting. I really don't understand the critics above. However, on the left side of the picture there's a lot of magenta CA at the tree. I would support the nomination if this issue was fixed. --Code (talk) 09:57, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
    • If that very interesting means reflection and symmetry, I've realized before your comment and guess others are same... --Laitche (talk) 10:34, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I couldn't shut my mouth called a critic. --Laitche (talk) 10:45, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support now. --Code (talk) 06:51, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral This is indeed very interesting with "reality" and reflection seamlessly blending without leaving any discernible water line. Makes my brain go nuts, which is meant in a positive way. I'd compare it to listening to one of the more obscure Zappa songs: complex music and strange lyrics (for a non-native speaker), so I have to listen to them actively and carefully multiple times for them to make sense, but after some time I usually start to like them. Most of those songs are not really danceable or radio-friendly, though, and I fear that this image may lack the FPC equivalents of these words (whatever they are) as well. --El Grafo (talk) 11:51, 24 April 2015 (UTC) I sincerely hope this comment makes sense to anyone but me. If not, it's obviously a side effect of looking at the image for too long ;-)
  • Yes, that's what I meant. --Code (talk) 11:59, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • I like this review, the analogy. If you look up mangrove photographs, 99% will be photographs from the outside looking at the edges of mangroves. Pictures from inside a mangrove are rare, and difficult because of the visual confusion, branches, reflections, light seeping in... The idea of this photograph is precisely that, to show the confusion, the visual confusion. The ripples of the water, the reflections make it hard even there to distinguish objects, until one just sits long enough and let the mangrove in. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 20:50, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Good composition, but lacks sharpness and too much darkness. --Tremonist (talk) 12:25, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LuisArmandoRasteletti (talk) 10:59, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like it very much and it deserve a better exposition which is too bright here IMO. -- Christian Ferrer 17:34, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Chamaeleo chamaeleon - Common Chameleon - Bukalemun.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 May 2015 at 17:42:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:2014 Szczytna, fontanna.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 May 2015 at 12:43:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fountain in Szczytna

File:Red Fuji southern wind clear morning.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 May 2015 at 09:35:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

South Wind, Clear Sky, by Katsushika Hokusai
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Katsushika Hokusai, uploaded by Petrusbarbygere, nominated by -- Yann (talk) 09:35, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Famous painting by Katsushika Hokusai, mostly known as the author of The Great Wave off Kanagawa. Renomination. -- Yann (talk) 09:35, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 10:02, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Quality reproduction. --Tremonist (talk) 12:02, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • {{s}} Razorsharp, notable artist, great work. Kleuske (talk) 12:59, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
    • Having second thoughts. Kleuske (talk) 16:22, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I nominated the alternative. This version was published circa 1930 and also the woodblock was made circa 1930. At least Hokusai had never seen this version then I'd like to support the alternative. When the last time I nominated this, I didn't realize that. --Laitche (talk) 13:05, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LuisArmandoRasteletti (talk) 17:19, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

South Wind, Clear Sky, by Katsushika Hokusai

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This version was published circa 1830 - 1831. --Laitche (talk) 13:05, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Laitche (talk) 13:05, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Obviously. Yann (talk) 14:48, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:37, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Also good. --Tremonist (talk) 12:20, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Better colors. Comparing the two versions, i find the above a bit overdone. Kleuske (talk) 12:59, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dull. -- Fotoriety (talk) 01:08, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
    • I couldn't find a better one of the first publication or near first publication, I think 1930 version's detail is distinctly different from the first publication, Thanks. --Laitche (talk) 08:58, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LuisArmandoRasteletti (talk) 11:00, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LuisArmandoRasteletti (talk) 11:01, 25 April 2015 (UTC) Duplicate- — Julian H. 17:36, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
    • Please check what you vote on. I don't know if you have written a voting-bot or something like that, but it doesn't work very well. — Julian H. 15:18, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Stairway Monsanto Castle April 2015-1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 May 2015 at 08:51:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Granite stairway in the Castle of Monsanto, Portugal. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:51, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 08:51, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment At first view it appears as a zig-zag line rather than stairs, but it's really well-made. Is it possible to increase the stones' sharpness a bit? --Tremonist (talk) 12:07, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
    • This is a very high resolution photo, with more than 22Mp. In my opinion the stones of granite are as sharp as they can be. Any further sharpening would cause undesired artifacts. Alvesgaspar (talk) 15:50, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Love the optical illusion created by those dark and harsh shadows. Well spotted and executed – Chapeau! Sharpness is perfectly fine for me. If you can find the stairs on a map, geocoding would be nice. --El Grafo (talk) 08:01, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Thank you @El Grafo:, it's good to know that some of our peers (one, at least!) perceive things the same way we do! Aussi, c'est bon d'être félicité en français! Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:21, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent jeu d'ombres! At low resolution I have the impression that the stones are arranged in the wall and not that they are a stairs outside of this one. -- Christian Ferrer 08:04, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LuisArmandoRasteletti (talk) 11:02, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I suggested a very small crop. Could we have a better file name? --Kadellar (talk) 12:20, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! --Kadellar (talk) 12:36, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice subject! Very good! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:08, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
    • @Kadellar: & @Slaunger: -- I tried to crop a bit on the top and doesn't work out imo. The bright part in the bottom stair was darkened because it was a bit distracting. Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:47, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Did I say how much I love you when you submit this kind of pictures ? Smile--Jebulon (talk) 14:43, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
    • Indeed you did! Thank you Jebulon, I will try to nominate as many minimalist pictures as I can. Even knowing that most editors don't appreciate them much... Alvesgaspar (talk) 15:09, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very clear composition. --Hubertl (talk) 09:13, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Monaco Panorama 2015.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 May 2015 at 06:45:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Villy Fink Isaksen -- Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 06:45, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 06:45, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great panorama with many, many details. --Tremonist (talk) 12:09, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 13:02, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 13:19, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 00:25, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 06:31, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice panorama though the colors look faded. --Laitche (talk) 07:28, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
    • I agree, I think there might be some problems with the processing. There is some inconsistency in the sky. I'm guessing that tone mapping or exposure fusion was used, the dull muddy sky is a common problem with that technique. Diliff (talk) 10:01, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for now, although I could be persuaded to support if reprocessed to fix the issues with the sky. The whole scene looks slightly too dark too. I appreciate that it might have been to preserve highlight detail, but a bit of bumping up shadow and mids might be useful. Diliff (talk) 10:01, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I am working on it but it is a hard job, please wait a few days. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 21:47, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LuisArmandoRasteletti (talk) 11:02, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Uploaded a better version with more light in the dark areas. And the sky is also better now. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 19:24, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Improved. I still think the right side of the sky is a bit dull and not very blue and the transitions between the frames is not great (you can clearly see a difference in brightness), but the left side is improved. Overall, it's just good enough for a support, but if you still have some energy to improve the sky on the right, it would be another step in the right direction. Did you make sure that each frame had the same exposure and the same white balance? It seems like something isn't quite right. Diliff (talk) 21:37, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's a tiny thing but a stitching error, added an image note. If you'd like to remove that, please do so. --Laitche (talk) 10:38, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done I have uploaded a panorama with less stitching error, but this has moved to another place in the picture but harder to see. Thanks for all the reviews. The panorama is from 7 picture taken on vacation in southern France, and I was not prepared to take panoramas, so the seven picture are taken with f/11 but with different shutter time from 1/320 to 1/160 that leads to problems. And the boats have moved a bit between the shots and that leads to stitching errors. THX all. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 13:38, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sorry, but I have uploaded the wrong version twice - but now it looks like the right one. - SORRY. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 17:04, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Tate Modern, Londres, Inglaterra, 2014-08-11, DD 116-117 HDR.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 May 2015 at 21:06:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the interior of the building of the Tate Modern, a modern art gallery located in London, England. It is Britain's national gallery of international modern art and the building itself, a former power station, was built in 1947 and 1963. The power station closed in 1981 and instead of demolishing it, the building was reinvented, making out of it an example of adaptive reuse, the process of finding new life in old buildings. The building itself still resembles the 20th century factory in style from the outside and that is reflected on the inside by the taupe walls, steel girders and concrete floors.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info View of the interior of the building of the Tate Modern, a modern art gallery located in London, England. It is Britain's national gallery of international modern art and the building itself, a former power station, was built in 1947 and 1963. The power station closed in 1981 and instead of demolishing it, the building was reinvented, making out of it an example of adaptive reuse, the process of finding new life in old buildings. The building itself still resembles the 20th century factory in style from the outside and that is reflected on the inside by the taupe walls, steel girders and concrete floors. All by me, Poco2 21:06, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 21:06, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Great view, but rather dark overall, probably due to the lack of light inside (?) and the dark construction elements. --Tremonist (talk) 12:11, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
    Tremonist: I uploaded a brigther version Poco2 19:16, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thank you, it looks much nicer now! --Tremonist (talk) 12:08, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very well done. The man ascending the stairs seems a bit "ghostly" - but that doesn't matter that much imo --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:18, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LuisArmandoRasteletti (talk) 11:02, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:09, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A good picture, definitely QI, but not visually striking enough (due in no small part to the asymmetry of the subject) for FP IMO. Daniel Case (talk) 19:14, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Daniel Case.--Jebulon (talk) 14:48, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Rissne Metro station September 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 May 2015 at 19:59:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rissne metro station.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Rissne metro station, Stockholm. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 19:59, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 19:59, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 04:49, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The train is blurred "on purpose", it's greatly done! And on the left wall even the writing is readable. Good work! --Tremonist (talk) 12:14, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good, but note my suggested crop --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:17, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 13:04, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but note my suggested crop, too, it is a bit different --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 14:01, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:02, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak Support. Nicely taken, although it's not the most interesting view. Very minimalist, not a lot of visual interest. Diliff (talk) 09:52, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LuisArmandoRasteletti (talk) 11:03, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the composition and the overall "crispness" of how you captured this specific moment. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:37, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose We have now a lot of this kind of pictures in our gallery. The bar is getting higher and higher and is one is not the best of the best (Matter of taste), sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 14:51, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

File:A Sky View of Earth From Suomi NPP.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 May 2015 at 18:33:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Sky View of Earth From Suomi NPP

File:Dülmen, Buldern, Eingang zu einem Wohnhaus -- 2015 -- 5388.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2015 at 19:02:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gate of a house (an former grain mill) near Karthaus (Limbergen, Buldern, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany)
  • Already done.--XRay talk 19:27, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment What does that say in English? (What does the warning sign mean?) --Laitche (talk) 19:21, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • "Caution - Biting Dog" is the translation of the sign. --XRay talk 19:27, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I think the composition and technical quality is good and so is the idea of simply framing the subject like this. The background is too busy with too uneven contrast for my taste though. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:44, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A QI but not an FP—no wow. Daniel Case (talk) 22:43, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Daniel Case --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:24, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't find this sufficiently striking for FP, and as Slaunger says the background is too busy, as well. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 08:34, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral --Tremonist (talk) 14:07, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LuisArmandoRasteletti (talk) 11:06, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. -- Colin (talk) 11:34, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Macaca nigra self-portrait large.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2015 at 15:51:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Self-portrait of a female Celebes crested macaque
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by a female Celebes crested macaque, uploaded by Crisco 1492, nominated by Qian.neewan -- Qian.neewan (talk) 15:51, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Qian.neewan (talk) 15:51, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could you please add a category above? Yann (talk) 15:59, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support copyright issue of this picture makes it a featured picture to me, but it is great anyway. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 18:08, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice, but IMO not FP. It's special because it was made by a monkey, but it is only a snapshot. --XRay talk 19:11, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • It's a stolen image IMO. No matter what the stupid law says. --Donninigeorgia (talk) 19:15, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This image was discussed extensively by a large number of reviewers at the earlier nomination: Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Macaca nigra self-portrait (rotated and cropped).jpg. However, the actual JPG offered here is much larger (11.74MP vs 1.63MP) so I guess a revisit is justified. -- Colin (talk) 19:50, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Quality is not so bad seeing the condition how it was taken (good camera or artist monkey? ;oD) And now it is famous. Yann (talk) 22:31, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 01:39, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Great selfportrait... Kleuske (talk) 10:05, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 11:29, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There is enough doubt about the copyright status of this image to make featuring it unwise. Voting to promote it to FP status just as the (human) photographer has said in yesterday's edition of Amateur Photographer that he is ‘working to pursue infringers in the UK’ feels too much like an unethical exercise in photographer-baiting. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 13:49, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
    • Michael, this is the wrong place to discuss the copyright status of this picture, which already have been discussed ad nauseam and settled. David Slater is not the photographer (that's the point), and he sent a DMCA notice to the WMF and it was rejected. BTW his arguments are complete bullshit. Regards, Yann (talk) 21:34, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
      • See m:Wikimedia_Foundation_Transparency_Report/Requests_for_Content_Alteration_&_Takedown#Monkey_Selfie. -- KTC (talk) 22:41, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
      • Yann, while I agree the copyright issue has been discussed ad nauseam and settled in the US, the image still strongly divides opinion on the ethics (enshrined in law or otherwise) of treating this image as free. A featured picture is supposed to be one "of the finest on Commons" and if some feel it is not ethical to host/promote such works then their opinion is a valid aspect that judgement of "our finest", even if some disagree. While threats of legal action continue in the UK, it would probably be unwise for any UK-based person to re-use this image [other than "fair use" for commentary, which seems to be 99% of its usage anyway], which surely affects its status as being among our best free works. -- Colin (talk) 07:54, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
        • Colin, the copyright status has been reviewed by several legal experts, including from WMF and the US government. I don't think there is any doubt that it is in the public domain in the USA and most countries. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:01, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
          • I know and I agree it seems pretty settled wrt copyright law. Doesn't mean that the ethics are settled (they clearly aren't, especially outside of Commons) or that the continued threat of legal action in the UK can be completely ignored. These two issues exist, regardless of whether one agrees with them or not. -- Colin (talk) 09:54, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
          • Yann, I understand that you don't see any ethical problem here. I do. The copyright situation in the UK is by no means as clear as it is in the US, and if it were to be adjudicated by a UK court the decision could go either way. That, and the perception that Commons is featuring the image out of spite is very relevant, in my view. The comment by Daniel Case, below, exemplifies the type of hostile and unpleasant view that I find most regrettable. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:29, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
            • Sorry to say, but talking about ethics here is a big hypocrisy. I am pretty sure than the camera owner, now being known as "the man who helped creating the monkey selfie", is a much better commercial position than being a photographer of an ordinary picture of an ordinary monkey. Beside, we promoted pictures of much worse ethics than this without anyone raising an eyebrow about it. And we will certainly do it again in the future. That's not an issue in itself, Commons being not a project for promoting ethics. I would be happy to discuss this in a RFC about "ethics and Commons", this nomination is not the right place to do it. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:35, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:04, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Just another selfie. Saffron Blaze 22:45, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't want to be too formal but per XRay plus it was taken accidentally. --Laitche (talk) 22:49, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support because it's now a picture with historic value in and of itself, it was pretty good to begin with, and David Slater can go stick his long lens where the sun don't shine. Daniel Case (talk) 23:43, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • ... and another case in point as to why I don't contribute images to Wikimedia Commons anymore. Saffron Blaze (talk) 23:23, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bastial, animal, but not FP. A "snapsot" taken from an animal can't be featured. It is simply a random image, a snapshot. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:10, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Who or what created the image is not a criterion for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 16:01, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
@Daniel Case: sorry, but what will be featured on this absolute and real/true random snapshot??? Can you please explain it me? That was neither wanted nor intended. It is comparable to a game of roulette or lotterie ... a simply chance from an interesting animal! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:38, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Nationaal Park Drents-Friese Wold. Locatie Dieverzand. Dode boom, belangrijke voedselbron in evenwichtig biotoop 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2015 at 06:00:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Drents-Friese Wold National Park. Location Dieverzand. Dead tree, important food source in a balanced ecosystem. created by Famberhorst - uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by Famberhorst -- Famberhorst (talk) 06:00, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 06:00, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Could you please add a category above? Thanks, Yann (talk) 13:29, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Answer: sorry I do not know what you mean. Are the English language is not powerful. --Famberhorst (talk) 15:34, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Thank you.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:00, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 04:00, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 13:04, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 14:58, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The quality and the composition are good but not outstanding, the blue sky can be seen among the trees ruins the wet-ish atmosphere, Sorry. --Laitche (talk) 16:21, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition does not work for me; it is too busy for my taste. Lightning is too dark and dull as well. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:17, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 21:43, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the idea and the subject, but I'm not fully convinced by the composition - it's quite busy. Just some ideas that came to my head: 1) A lower angle could have enabled you to keep the branches at the top left corner out of the frame. Maybe concentrating on one of the two sections of the dead tree would have helped too. 2) The whole image is quite dark, but not dark enough to make this look like an intentional choice by the photographer (could potentially work very well with this subject). 3) The white balance seems to be a little bit too yellow (you won't have much living green things this time of the year of course, but still …). 4) I've got a suspicion that this subject might work quite well in black & white. --El Grafo (talk) 07:47, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I am also unconvinced by the composition. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 11:38, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Seems left side trees leaning to the left and right side trees leaning to the right. Is that actually leaning or cause by the distortion with the wide angle lens(18mm)? --Laitche (talk) 12:17, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Answer: I have automatically corrected lens with lightroom 5.7. Can also manually correct. For your information: it is hilly spot.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:49, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done. Small correction WB and verticals.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:16, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Better with the correction. For me, wow is limited, but the quality is very good. Regards, Yann (talk) 21:46, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 13:10, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 17:50, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think the composition is much better but about the quality(especially the colour range) seems rather difficult with EF-M for this photo, IMO. --Laitche (talk) 22:41, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Note: in my humble opinion is in early April not much color in a dark forest. It was important for me to bring the decay of dead tree good picture and that life in the vicinity of the tree has benefited. And I succeeded in my opinion. --Famberhorst (talk) 15:37, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LuisArmandoRasteletti (talk) 11:08, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done. Small light correction.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:35, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Useful but I don't see a FP here. The tree branches in the top left break the composition. Image quality is adequate but not outstanding. -- Colin (talk) 11:30, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

File:2014 Kłodzko, pl. Chrobrego 13 03.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2015 at 19:56:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

13 Bolesława Chrobrego Square in Kłodzko
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 19:56, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 19:56, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support No better example of oriel windows on Commons. Daniel Case (talk) 20:33, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Could you please add a category above? Yann (talk) 10:07, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
    @Yann ✓ Done --Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:48, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support My eyes are surprisingly drawn to that picture every time I scroll through the huge FPC page. Simple, but striking picture to me. I don't think the lighting can get better than that for the subject : it emphasizes the textures quite well. - Benh (talk) 21:01, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 04:01, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Only when I look this at 1280px, a head of statue and a cable at the right side appear, Here. Why? --Laitche (talk) 05:13, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
    This is the previous version of this photo, I do not know why this is happening, at a resolution of 1280x881 it should be visible the last version. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:23, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • hmm, That's a mysterious. Thanks. --Laitche (talk) 12:40, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 13:04, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 19:21, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For me a QI with good lightening. But something is wrong with the proportions. The window on the right extends noticably further in the vertical direction, than the one to the left. I get the impression that the vantage point was not right in the middle but has been atempted postcorrected by a perspective correction. It pretends to be symmetric, but is not quite so. It gives an unbalanced composition IMO.-- Slaunger (talk) 20:06, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I don't mind the tight crop for this but the lighting is not appropriate for the subject, the left window's shadow is cutting off and the right window's shadow is reaching the left window, that's the reason why this doesn't look excellent, in my opinion. --Laitche (talk) 21:32, 22 April 2015 (UTC) --Laitche (talk) 19:06, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
    • Plus, I guess this photo was taken by low-angle notwithstanding it's showing just as if taken by level-angle, so I feel it strange. --Laitche (talk) 10:00, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Slaunger, he explained very well my own feeling.--Jebulon (talk) 21:42, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
Slaunger, Laitche & Jebulon - Capture a photo directly ahead is impossible, because there is a tree. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 10:55, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • I know it's impossible but that way(getting strange feeling) doesn't work for me in this case. --Laitche (talk) 17:54, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
But I don't mind change my vote to neutral. --Laitche (talk) 19:06, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LuisArmandoRasteletti (talk) 11:09, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Abrimaal (talk) 12:59, 26 April 2015 (UTC) Possibly cropped too much, but good lighting on the details.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good light and arrangement. Looked for distortion mentioned above, but isn't disturbing to me. -- Colin (talk) 11:25, 27 April 2015 (UTC)


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]

Thu 23 Apr → Tue 28 Apr
Fri 24 Apr → Wed 29 Apr
Sat 25 Apr → Thu 30 Apr
Sun 26 Apr → Fri 01 May
Mon 27 Apr → Sat 02 May
Tue 28 Apr → Sun 03 May

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

Sun 19 Apr → Tue 28 Apr
Mon 20 Apr → Wed 29 Apr
Tue 21 Apr → Thu 30 Apr
Wed 22 Apr → Fri 01 May
Thu 23 Apr → Sat 02 May
Fri 24 Apr → Sun 03 May
Sat 25 Apr → Mon 04 May
Sun 26 Apr → Tue 05 May
Mon 27 Apr → Wed 06 May
Tue 28 Apr → Thu 07 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). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
  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 2015), 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 2015.
  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.