Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/April 2007

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search


This is an archive for Commons:Featured picture candidates page debates and voting.
The debates are closed and should not be edited.


Contents

Image:Graureiher.jpg, featured[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Chmehl --Chmehl 09:49, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Chmehl 09:49, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition, good quality - Alvesgaspar 10:25, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Especially the composition is very nice --Packa 12:51, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not good lighting. The majority of the head and neck is in shadow. --MichaelMaggs 14:13, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hugo.arg 20:45, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree to Michael Metoc 14:34, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose dtto Michael --Karelj 22:08, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice Ixnay 16:31, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition --LucaG 13:20, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T 01:42, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ack Michael -- Lycaon 07:30, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Basik07 15:27, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer 07:00, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Sicilia_2006.png, not featured[edit]

Sicilia 2006.png

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Kekko89 --norro 19:50, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, the colors are not real (oversaturated?), the composition is not good enough – and a poor description. But I like Italy! --Packa 20:07, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Why is it in PNG, not JPG. Chris huh 13:24, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Can't you see the image? It's made in PNG to preserve the quality. --Kekko89 18:55, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Who nominated? Kekko89 or norro. -- Lycaon 19:21, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The colours seem OK to me, but the horizon is not fully horizontal, and the wires and the junk on the rooftop at the right spoil the composition. - MPF 11:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think colours are real, because I live in Sicily and I know how beautiful my land is. - Max 18:10, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Max on the beauty of Sicily but I'm missing the "wow!" factor to support this picture to FP status. --Diligent 16:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:01, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Ring-Tailed Lemur eating.jpg, not featured[edit]

A ring-tailed lemur eating fruit in Bristol Zoo

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Chris_huh --Chris huh 12:26, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - thought i would try a self-nom: took this photo at Bristol Zoo back in November --Chris huh 12:26, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - too obviously in un-natural habitat in a cage, also that odd pink thing covering its right hand/forefoot - MPF 16:48, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment i removed that pink distraction thing, didnt notice it before. Chris huh 17:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not very interesting. I can eat too.Metoc 14:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nothing so special... --Karelj 22:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - this is a good shot, try to take a similar picture, and then you'll khow what's so special about it.--Vaya 08:36, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support agree with Vaya Tomer T 01:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kirkland23 23:00, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ack MPF -- Lycaon 17:56, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:02, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Parthenon from south.jpg, featured[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Thermos, this version edited by Majestic - uploaded by Thermos - nominated by Thermos --Thermos 14:20, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Thermos 14:20, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --KFP 15:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - too gloomy, particularly the dark sky at the top right looks un-natural - MPF 16:52, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Atoma 17:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- powerful sky adds to the composition Gnangarra 05:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the atmosphere Benh 07:36, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The dark sky makes it look more interesting, better than just a regular blue one. Sharp focus too. Chris huh 09:16, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good composition and excellent colouring, giving a surreal atmosphere. I would prefer the the building vertical though. Alvesgaspar 09:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment you have to know that the Parthenon is not vertical, it was made on purpose by the architects to enhance the impression of height. Here the non-verticality of the left column is about right. Diligent
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I know that, but the whole bulding is tilted to the left. - Alvesgaspar 22:40, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It isn't tilted, the camera is pointing up, creating perspective distortion. In these cases (where, incidentally, the effect of size is exaggerated, so it works for me) you should check verticality at the center of the image. The center of this image is vertical. mixpix 08:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice! --Simonizer 11:55, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love it. --Diligent 17:37, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AngMoKio 19:42, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support super --Karelj 22:12, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MichaelMaggs 07:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pupster21 17:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the atmosphere -- Lycaon 19:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support could be a little lighter, but it is nice --Packa 21:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice lighting --Digon3 15:24, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Leafnode 09:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Maire 12:44, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 18 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer 07:04, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Oxalis acetosella ziedas1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Oxalis acetosella

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Algirdas, uploaded by Hugo.arg - nominated by Hugo.arg
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hugo.arg 14:49, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tadas12 17:29, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- not sharp enough and I don't like the lighting. Lycaon 18:11, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not very sharp I'm afraid. --MichaelMaggs 22:35, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not sharp enough, not nice colours. Benh 07:42, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rtz 08:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unsharp - Alvesgaspar 09:49, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unsharp --Karelj 22:13, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lerdsuwa 15:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pupster21 17:34, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --donald- 14:27, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose flat, unsharp. --Leafnode 08:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nice colours. Ceridwen 14:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 6 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Tachina grossa3. 2006-08-18.jpg, not featured[edit]

Tachina grossa (Tachinidae) Tachina grossa (Tachinidae)

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Algirdas - uploaded by Algirdas - nominated by Username --Algirdas 18:49, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Algirdas 18:49, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support second picture (right) seems ok, except for flash light reflex on its back Ziga 19:04, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Please only nominate one version at the time. Lycaon 19:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hugo.arg 20:09, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Renata3 23:44, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose compression artefacts, oversharpening and poor lighting mixpix 23:56, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Obviously, author has a lot to shoot but is limited by his equipment. I bet the lack of sharpness and odd colours (common to all his pics) come from the camera and not the photographer. Benh 07:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm not so sure... the Nikon 8800 has manual focus, custom white balance, ISO50, RAW, image stabilisation and ED glass. If you set it up right, it can really perform. I suspect the problems with these images come mostly from them being shot JPEG and set to AWB under mixed lighting. Shooting macro this way is asking for trouble, as you're bound to look as close as possible. mixpix 09:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment You must be right. But from the size/resolution ratio of the author's picture, I would say his final jpegs are in the higher side of quality (but the source image may be bad already). So there must be some point in his "chain" where something isn't done right because given the 8 mpix of his camera and the relatively low resolution of the final pictures, details per pixel should be good. And this isn't only because he was shooting macro in some supposedly bad conditions (I don't think conditions were bad on his branch pic below). Algirdas if you hear me, are your pictures cropped or sampled down? Benh 22:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose None of them has enough photographic quality for FP. Please separate the nominations. Alvesgaspar 09:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Metoc 14:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rtz 12:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --donald- 17:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree to Alvegaspar. --Atoma 18:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Karelj 21:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 5 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:11, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Chikuwa.jpg, not featured[edit]

Chikuwa (竹輪), food of Japan

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by User:Lombroso - uploaded by User:Lombroso - nominated by Shizhao --Shizhao 03:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Shizhao 03:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ??? --norro 12:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I miss a composition with the wow-effect. I would also recommend an additional text in the description...otherwise there might be misunderstandings.... --AngMoKio 18:29, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question - What is this? Alvesgaspar 16:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Check here ->Chikuwa ...it seems to be sth to eat though it doesn't look that tastey imho :) --AngMoKio 19:21, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose noisy.. --Jeses 21:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, what could be this terrible thing? --Karelj 18:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose strange DOF - too long or too short, also lots of noise in the darker parts (to high ISO setting?); oh, I've noticed, that it was made using cell phone... --Leafnode 08:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Ouh ! What noise ! And the subject is badly illuminated --Alipho 11:53, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 6 oppose, x neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:15, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Countdown.gif, not featured[edit]

200px|A very nice animation I made. Want it to be FP.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Pupster21 - uploaded by Pupster21 - nominated by Pupster21 --Pupster21 18:47, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pupster21 18:47, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Fine work, but I'm missing the "0" --XN 19:23, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Was designed to be like a Power Point background, switches slides on 1. --Pupster21 19:53, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
I'm only always thinking like a computer scientist ;) --XN 20:29, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Opposelow resolution, noisy. Who took the original pictures of the number? --Jacopo86 10:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Boring, very easy to make. Noisy. And the copyright status of the used pictures is not clear. --Simonizer 14:34, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Viele-baeren 21:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:40, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Grey fantail444.jpg, not featured[edit]

Image:Grey fantail444.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by, uploaded by and nominated by --Benjamint444 12:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Benjamint444 12:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No, not really excellent. Metoc 14:31, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info You might be better off submitting the photo of the parent bird on its own. --MichaelMaggs 16:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 23:24, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Cold colours, bad lighting, noisy and not very sharp. But to me, it's a very amazing subject ! Benh 07:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose looks unnatural --Simonizer 09:14, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose valuable but bad lighting Basik07 19:47, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:05, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Costa Rican Sunset.JPG, not featured[edit]

Sunset at Arenal

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by waddler154 - uploaded by waddler154 - nominated by waddler154 --Waddler154 04:03, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Waddler154 04:03, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Beautiful atmosphere! But the composition acts a little boring and the picture is noisy --Simonizer 08:59, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -Hugo.arg 19:13, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Karelj 23:26, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the reality could be very nice, but the photo is a little kitschy --Packa 21:30, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Lycaon 06:53, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Chorzów - Skansen - Szopa na siano z Kobióra.JPG, not featured[edit]

Shed on hay from Kobiór in Upper Silesian Ethnographic Park.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Lestat --Lestat 16:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lestat 16:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unfortunate composition (shadows, too much grass) Lycaon 19:22, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --WarX 20:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC) I like it very much and don't understand Lycaon ;)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like it too, though it might perhaps be a little better with the bottom 5% or so cropped off to answer Lycaon's "too much grass" comment - MPF 21:43, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose boring, disturbing varicoloured objects --norro 22:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose boring composition cause subject is centered --Simonizer 09:11, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose could be a QI though --AngMoKio 20:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose poor quality and nothing interesting --Karelj 20:54, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The main subject is not sharp enough,and too far in the picture. --Vassil 29 March 2007
result: 3 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Lycaon 06:54, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Metalmania 2007 - Vital Remains - Anthony Geremia 02.jpg[edit]

Anthony Ceremia from Vital Remains band during Metalmania 2007 festival

This was not Anthony Ceremia on photo, so I deleted it :( --WarX 17:06, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Photographed and uploaded by Lilly M, nominated by --WarX 17:23, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --WarX 17:23, 2 April 2007 (UTC) evil inside
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Neat. Different. Awesome. Satan. Cary Bass demandez 18:07, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Oh, yeah!!! How did she manage to get that shot, anyway? Wpedzich 18:28, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Well, it's different, but I don't quite see what a photo like that can be useful for. --che 20:53, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Noisy, ugly (sorry) - Alvesgaspar 21:55, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
    He is so ugly that beautiful! --WarX 22:27, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - "Get a Haircut!!" :-) have to agree with Alvesgaspar! - MPF 12:00, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ouch!! Lycaon 13:35, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Fishing reel.svg, featured[edit]

fishing reel diagramsmaller numbers

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Chabacano - uploaded by Chabacano - nominated by Chabacano --Chabacano 18:51, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Chabacano 18:51, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great SVG.--HereToHelp (talk) 21:52, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very good schema, but the labels could be smaller - Alvesgaspar 22:38, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Leafnode 08:20, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice SVG, the numbers could be smaller though. --Atoma 09:20, 20 March 2007 (UTC) Supporting the new version --Atoma 08:43, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Having large numbers is good, it makes it easy to read in small thumbnail pics and for those with poor eyesight - MPF 11:20, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow, fantastic! I like the size of the labels, actually. Brighterorange 20:58, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great art! Don't like the labels though, to big and I prefer text labels anyway. Doesn't stop me from supporting this very well made SVG. Lycaon 15:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --WarX 19:11, 21 March 2007 (UTC) This is great image! But in my very-very subjective opinion drawings should not be photo realistic. Sorry ...
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great, i would like to be able to draw like you. Herr Kriss 19:19, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Thermos 21:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support My vote goes to both versions of this fantastic picture. Good job! /odder 20:28, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:08, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Smaller numbers[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg InfoHaving choices is good :)Chabacano 18:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Like the smaller labels. --MichaelMaggs 21:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Moved my vote from above. Alvesgaspar 09:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Moved my vote from above. Lycaon 09:54, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Simonizer 11:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice work --AngMoKio 20:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Way better with smaller numbers. --Atoma 08:43, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support // tsca [re] 15:17, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support like MichaelMaggs and Atoma --Packa 21:25, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Like previous comments --Javier ME 21:07, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support small numbers = good ~ trialsanderrors 08:27, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Leafnode 08:54, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Maire 12:43, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Masti 20:11, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support /odder 20:28, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Lycaon 07:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Everest North Face toward Base Camp Tibet Luca Galuzzi 2006.jpg, featured[edit]

Piles of Salt on the Salar de Uyuni, Bolivia.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This brilliant photo shows the Mount Everest seen from the path to the base camp. Created, uploaded by Lucag and nominated by Überraschungsbilder 20:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Überraschungsbilder 20:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - MPF 21:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - You got lucky with the weather ;-) Lycaon 21:38, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - although the pic is very nice, that little piece of cloud to the left of the summit spoils it a little for me. But I can't oppose this. Benh 21:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice shot. --Atoma 09:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Simonizer 10:13, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacopo86 11:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Hugo.arg 19:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AngMoKio 20:25, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Romary 12:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support excelent --Karelj 21:00, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral nice, but it is not so exciting for me --Packa 21:41, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lestat 21:42, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Maire 12:35, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Basik07 19:53, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral => featured. Lycaon 06:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:European honey bee extracts nectar.jpg, featured[edit]

honey bee extracts nectar

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by John Severns - uploaded by Eleassar - nominated by AngMoKio --AngMoKio 21:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AngMoKio 21:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support third very nice pic in a row tonight :) is the reflection from the body due to a flash ? Benh 21:58, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - MPF 11:37, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful colors and sharpness. --donald- 18:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support the bee has so many nice details… --Packa 21:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the details too. Especially the tiny hair. -- AM 15:26, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lestat 21:42, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 17:21, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Basik07 19:56, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Lycaon 06:58, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Cranberrys beim Ernten.jpeg, delisted[edit]

Cranberrys beim Ernten.jpeg

Cranberry harvest in New Jersey. Credit: Agricultural Research Service.

  • Nominated for delisting by Lycaon 15:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Original nomination by villy 21:01, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Should not have been nominated with only three votes cast. The image is of very poor quality, only colour and composition are ok. Obviously mistake in judgement of promotor. Lycaon 15:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Agree about the bad quality of this picture. But this picture wasnt the only one in this month, which got featured with less then 5 support votes. Maybe the rules were different at those times. --Simonizer 08:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment You are correct on the number of votes (diff): The five votes rule was only introduced in May 2005. Let's concentrate on the very low quality of the picture then. Lycaon 10:17, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Large, but blurry, scratchy, unsharp. Ick.--HereToHelp (talk) 01:40, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Have a look at the top of the sky. There's a load of stuff on the film/sensor. --MichaelMaggs 16:51, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Very poor image quality. --Atoma 08:12, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support i think the quality is because this is not an digital image. it was taken still on film. so its ok like that... --Jeses 21:22, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist - ditto to MichaelMaggs on the gunk in the sky: poor scan from a dusty slide - MPF 22:21, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Olegivvit 11:37, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 2 keep, 5 delist, 1 neutral => delisted. Lycaon 07:00, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Humanitarian aid OCPA-2005-10-28-090517.jpg[edit]

#1U.S. Army Sgt. Kornelia Rachwal gives a young Pakistani girl a drink of water as they are airlifted from Muzaffarabad to Islamabad, Pakistan, aboard a U.S. Army CH-47 Chinook helicopter #2Noise reduced.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Air Force Tech. Sgt. Mike Buytas - uploaded by Rama - nominated by Rama --Rama 10:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rama 10:45, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose small and noisy --Simonizer 11:13, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to Simonizer - MPF 14:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - The scene, the emotions and the composition makes it FP for me. --Malene Thyssen 06:15, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --WarX 17:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC) I know it's low quality, but it's great!
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ack Simonizer --Digon3 17:55, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support a very impressive photo --AngMoKio 20:12, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support a little noisy and small, you are right, but very affective --Packa 20:16, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ack Simonizer - Lycaon 12:05, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - not too small, not too noisy and probably the most powerful shot on the page mixpix 00:08, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - --Luc Viatour 12:58, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Med 13:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Leafnode 08:22, 20 March 2007 (UTC) Impressive image. Quality is not everything, and here it's not that bad.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - A meaningful composition and a beautiful light User:Vassil 20 March 2007
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I uploaded a higher resolution of it. --Pmsyyz 01:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 10 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => waiting for the result of the edit. Simonizer 06:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)


Edit #2: larger, noise reduced[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I don't have any problems with the noise level of the original, but I added a larger, noise reduced version. ~ trialsanderrors 20:56, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support either. Iconic image, excellent composition and lighting. ~ trialsanderrors 00:18, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - staying with oppose, as I don't find the composition very attractive - MPF 16:11, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I like almost everything in this picture: composition, light and human expression. But the quality is too poor for FP. Alvesgaspar 20:41, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
    • How about the higher resolution version I uploaded? --Pmsyyz 22:01, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info OK, since the staus quo would lead to the odd situation where the smaller image were promoted instead of the larger, I informed all prior commenters in addition to the prior opposers. ~ trialsanderrors 00:57, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Malene Thyssen 06:09, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- --Luc Viatour 06:49, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support give my support to both versions. For such a picture the technical quality is not the most important...though the quality here is in both versions acceptable. --AngMoKio 10:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support coherent with nominating and supporting the first one. Rama 12:42, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Please, go with the original. I dislike noise reduction intensely and neither this nor the larger size adds anything at all to the image for me. Having said that, far & away the biggest reason to support this image is the subject matter, so I would support either version, but I urge wavering voters to go with version 1. mixpix 16:31, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support like AngMoKio - the overall impression, which includes also the technical quality, is important --Packa 16:37, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For the same reasons as before. Vassil
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In my opinion both versions are great. --Leafnode 10:01, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MichaelMaggs 16:39, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great picture, no doubt. But i have to agree with Alvesgaspar --Simonizer 06:22, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose joining the naysayers. Lycaon 07:08, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --che 19:34, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T 20:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Med 08:45, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The large version of course. --Digon3 02:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Romary 12:58, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Susanlesch 00:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 15 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. --Simonizer 10:11, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:ClevelandTowerWatercolor20060829.jpg, not featured[edit]

Cleveland Tower Watercolor

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by David Liao - uploaded by David Liao - nominated by David Liao --Magneticcarpet 04:56, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Self nomination by painter. (The Wikimedia Common alias magneticcarpet and the Wikipedia alias dliao both belong to me, David Liao) Magneticcarpet 04:56, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose cannot compare (nice) painting with a (nice) snap, sorry --Packa 21:51, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice --Elcairo 21:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It is not common in art to reproduce the geometric distortions of photographic lenses. And I'm happy the author explanation refer to the photography which is the base of this watercolour. I was puzzled when this image was nominated in WP:FPC because our brain (normally) compensates for that kind of distortion. But my support vote really goes for the beauty of the picture. Alvesgaspar 21:11, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 10:14, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Tubal Pregnancy with embryo.jpg, not featured[edit]

Tubal Pregnancy with embryo

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Euthman - uploaded by Patho - nominated by Yonatan --Yonatan talk 15:24, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support the photo is already a featured picture on en --Yonatan talk 15:24, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Interesting, though as it's a dead specimen I wonder why it doesn't appear to be in focus. The image was taken at f8 which is surprising; I'd have expected much smaller f-stop to give as large a depth of field as possible. --MichaelMaggs 15:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
    • The image description says it was shot using an old 1970's macro set up with bellows at full extension, which would have dictated a wide aperture (in lieu of powerful strobes) and basically the lens itself is at its absolute limit in terms of resolving power. Realising this and remembering the embyo is less than a half-inch long, and you have to credit the photographer with a job well done, in the circumstances. It's a great exposure. Not sure this has any bearing on its FP candidacy, unfortunately, even if it is a fascinating image. I tried to enhance it but a combination of medium-fast stock, poor scan (very soft grain just visible) and jpeg compression means it just posterizes as soon a you try to sharpen it. Macro shots really do need to be sharp and detailed, something this one will never be, I fear. mixpix 19:48, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
      • You can try contacting the author on en. Yonatan talk 20:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think it is a great image of a rare subject, could we down sample it a bit? Strictly speaking, it is almost double the minimum requirements. This isn't the ideal solution, but it would make it "appear" sharper. --Cody.Pope 02:25, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support // tsca [re] 15:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. --KFP 15:15, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Sorry to oppose what's clearly a rare image, but the fact that the subject matter may be uncommon doesn't improve the actual image quality. The picture may have been taken with a 1970s lens, and the subject may be quite small, but the quality of the equipment used shouldn't in my view be used to excuse a very much less-than-sharp image. Unfortunately, it's not an impressively focussed image, and it's simply a shame that the photographer didn't have access to better equipment and lighting. --MichaelMaggs 18:49, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - agree with MichaelMaggs - MPF 01:01, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - so do I -- Lycaon 14:43, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose same as MichaelMaggs --Karelj 17:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm with Michael too. Alvesgaspar 21:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - go ahead and close it then. ;) Yonatan talk 01:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 10:15, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Sepiola atlantica.jpg, featured[edit]

Sepiola atlantica

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Lycaon - uploaded by Lycaon - nominated by MichaelMaggs --MichaelMaggs 16:22, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MichaelMaggs 16:22, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great shot, good editing, perfect illustration for encyclopaedic articles. Could you add the circa dimensions (lenght) of this Sepiola individual to the description? --Überraschungsbilder 17:13, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Wow, I didn't expect that it was so small. Thanks a lot. --Überraschungsbilder 08:09, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support just great! --Cody.Pope 02:22, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very, very good --Thermos 05:12, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Malene Thyssen 08:04, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support agree --Simonizer 08:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Romary 12:20, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support // tsca [re] 15:11, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Leafnode 15:17, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - MPF 19:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice details --Packa 21:54, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Javier ME 21:12, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very fine. Wsiegmund 19:20, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support !! gren 05:27, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support woa ! Pictogram voting question.svg Question wouldn't it be nice to rotate the picture 90° clockwise ? I always find myself turning my head left when looking at the pic ;) Benh 06:54, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Elcairo 21:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - phantastic! Orchi 23:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Amazing! --LucaG 22:29, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Basik07 20:08, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wow Oonagh 13:42, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Digon3 02:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Rakshat 12:14, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer 10:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Antwerpen Stadhuis persp1 2006-05-28.jpg, not featured[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Klaus with K - uploaded by Klaus with K - nominated by Digon3 --Digon3 22:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Digon3 22:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice, but this type of images needs perspective correction --Packa 06:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special and if the corretced version does exist, why it is not here ??? --Karelj 16:58, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment the 'corrected version' linked by Benh is actually over-corrected, it makes the building appear too wide at the top. Of the two, the one shown here is the better. - MPF 00:23, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 11:08, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:April 17 2005 Seaside Oregon United States.JPG, not featured[edit]

The Pacific Ocean seen from Seaside, Oregon.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Apollomelos - uploaded by Apollomelos - nominated by Tomer T --Tomer T 18:29, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomer T 18:29, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The blue tint doesn't help - something more natural would be better. Image is tilted about 0.8 degrees to the left. --MichaelMaggs 18:42, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose tilt. ---donald- 20:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose tilt, noisy. -- Lycaon 23:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to MichaelMaggs on the excessively blue tones - MPF 00:24, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose blue sand --che 13:00, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Viele-baeren 21:08, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose tilt, unnatural colors, overexposed sky --Leafnode 06:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 11:16, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Shivta01.JPG, not featured[edit]

Ruins of a church at Shivta (Sobota) in the Negev desert, Isreal.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by ST - uploaded by ST - nominated by Tomer T --Tomer T 22:01, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomer T 22:01, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - very low res, only 116KB, with resulting bad jpeg compression artefacts - MPF 00:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
The res is 1600 × 1200 pixels Tomer T 01:56, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Low res = low information content. 116KB for a file with 1600 × 1200 pixels, spells low quality, unless you have large monochromatic surfaces (e.g. white background). Lycaon 08:57, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I think there is not enough contrast in the ruins, seems too "yellow-brown" --Alipho 11:38, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like the lighting. A softer light would avoid the harsh shadows and overexposed parts. Alvesgaspar 17:14, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Viele-baeren 21:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 11:15, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Macrocheira kaempferi.jpg, not featured[edit]

Macrocheira kaempferi

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Lycaon (based on Image:Riesenkrabbe.jpg by User:Michael w) - uploaded by Lycaon - nominated by Tomer T --Tomer T 22:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomer T 22:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yep I have to oppose my own work based on size and quality of the original. Sadly not FP worthy. But thanks for the nomination ;-) Lycaon 23:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, I don't think the black background works with this leggy creature... that's my biggest problem. gren 08:43, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think it looks too much "weird" because of the lighting of the subject, which makes me expect to see it in a different surrounding Benh 20:25, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose like the others. Viele-baeren 21:05, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ack opposers --Digon3 02:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 11:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Wejście.jpg, not featured[edit]

#1Ruined house entrance  #2Downsampled, blur reduced

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info photo taken and uploaded by Shannon5, nominated by --WarX 19:08, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --WarX 19:08, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not sharp Lycaon 19:22, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It's blurred in the current version, but the picture is pretty large, so there's a lot to work with. I like the composition and the atmosphere, so I might do an edit or support someone else's. ~ trialsanderrors 22:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 11:18, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Edited version, not featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Downsampled, blur reduced and contrast enhanced
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ~ trialsanderrors 03:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MichaelMaggs 18:34, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Sorry, I can't see the relevance of the picture. Maybe some information in English would help. Alvesgaspar 20:35, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Romary 11:36, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --WarX 11:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Ceridwen 14:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Basik07 19:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Lycaon 07:47, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree with Alvesgaspar --Simonizer 14:01, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 09:13, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:BusimCafe.jpg, not featured[edit]

A cafe somewhere in Krasnoyarsk krai

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Kalan — uploaded by Kalan — nominated by KalanKalan 15:39, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Vaya 16:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - very tilted, rather dark - MPF 19:18, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose good idea, but not a good composition --Packa 21:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Lestat 21:41, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. May be it's not professional, but I like it. --Obersachse 14:01, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not very sharp, noisy and tilted. Also, I don't think it illustrates the subject so well Benh 06:59, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nothing special... --Karelj 17:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Leafnode 08:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 09:14, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Elephant close-up.jpg, not featured[edit]

Elephant closeup; Okovango Delta, Botswana, Africa.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by, uploaded by, and nominated by Birdman1 --Birdman1 22:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Birdman1 22:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral good impression, but indistinct composition, second main object (tusk) is not sharp --Packa 07:43, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support though only just, with some parts of photo not well focussed - MPF 23:14, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting, but not relevant enough for FP. Why such a big file? - Alvesgaspar 11:32, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
    • To what should it be relevant? Birdman1 13:32, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - To beauty (the aesthetical aspect) and to knowledge (the encyclopedic one). Neither of them is good enough to reach FP status IMO. Alvesgaspar 22:31, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, although this might look weird, this close-up seems too much close. Particularly the eye is almost on the border of the picture. --che 19:28, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, too arty. // Liftarn
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, the cutting should be choosen different way --Karelj 18:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 09:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Aerial perspective 1.JPG, not featured[edit]

Aerial perspective in a mountain area

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Atmospheric perspective, or aerial perspective, is the effect caused by the atmosphere on the appearance of objects observed by a viewer. As the distance between the object and the viewer increases, the contrast decreases and the colours become lighter and more bluish, until the image of the object eventually fades into the sky. In this picture, the effect is emphasized by a series of mountains in different planes photographed in a near contre-jour situation. Created and nominated by Joaquim Alves Gaspar.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Alvesgaspar 14:56, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It shows the effect very well, but otherwise it's quite boring. Furthermore sky is overexposed. --norro 16:46, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with norro. But showing the effect well is not enough for me. ----Simonizer 17:32, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the hint. I chose the wrong template, ment to oppose too. --norro 18:33, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Viele-baeren 21:00, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose like Simonizer, sorry --Packa 06:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - should be possible to get a better demonstration photo of this without the foreground (the trees) being so black. - MPF 22:35, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose why should be picture like this one in this page?? --Karelj 19:04, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 09:24, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Friedrich Overbeck 009.jpg, not featured[edit]

Maria und Elisabeth mit dem Jesus- und Johannesknaben, by Friedrich Overbeck

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Friedrich Overbeck - uploaded by File Upload Bot (Eloquence) - nominated by Tomer T --Tomer T 21:18, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomer T 21:18, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - very low resolution (200KB) with inevitable jpeg compression artefacts - MPF 23:09, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 09:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Small Red Rose.JPG, not featured[edit]

Close-up of a small red rose.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Libera - uploaded by Libera - nominated by Tomer T --Tomer T 21:54, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomer T 21:54, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - no cultivar name. Commons has hundreds of photos of named cultivars; an un-named pic is of little value. MPF 23:07, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Is it a problem for FP? Why do you think so? --Packa 07:05, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - because of its minimal information content, compared to numerous other rose photos on commons. - MPF 12:22, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the central part is not sharp --Packa 06:58, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Unsharp (poor DOF or motion blur?), crop too tight. Also, not very beatiful IMO. Alvesgaspar 17:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 09:23, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:43. TKB - Sierra Manta 18.JPG, not featured[edit]

Anna Danyluk from Sierra Manta band.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Lestat --Lestat 21:43, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lestat 21:43, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - don't find this attractive - MPF 23:10, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Composition, exposure, human expression are all quite good. Photographic quality could be better but the existing flaws (some grain in full resolution) can be ignored IMO. We need more high quality portraits in Commons, like this one. Alvesgaspar 23:26, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Freestyle nl 08:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Composition, FP 'value' is lacking. Lycaon 12:18, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question What is she holding in her hands? ~ trialsanderrors 19:40, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
    Some kind of musical instrument made of nut shells ;) --WarX 22:44, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jeses 20:24, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --WarX 22:44, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Romary 10:25, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with opposers and don't like the cropped microphone in the foreground --norro 12:08, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A cropped version without the uggly and distracting name-tag and the microphone would be better. --Diligent 16:11, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not enough good for featured pictures --Karelj 18:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Basik07 20:10, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sharpness and colors OK, i think it is a nice picture that might not have been easy to take. but for an excellent photo the expression there are a few things missing. the on her face is less than ideal - i think she herself would not consider this an excellent photo. what are you trying to show? the scenery or the person (mike, nametag, ...)? €0.02, ---volty 13:14, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As volty --Tarawneh 13:47, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 7 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 11:57, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:The Sun.jpg, not featured[edit]

#1The Sun as it appears through a camera lens from the surface of Earth. #2Color-corrected and removed some glare.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Kulshrax - uploaded by Kulshrax - nominated by Kulshrax --Kulshrax 15:08, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kulshrax 15:08, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Support ... only after blown highlights are removed, so there is no danger to damage the reviewer's eyes. - Alvesgaspar 17:54, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Support ... only after replacement of the background with a more ichtyological theme. Lycaon 19:01, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment would support if the main object wouldn't be in the centre --AngMoKio 21:32, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment April Fool?!? - if yes, a bit late!! MPF 22:32, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment haha, very nice. --Simonizer 11:31, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I posted a new edited version that has been color-corrected and has had some glare removed. Kulshrax 20:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - purple blotch below sun makes it look rather odd. It is more a photo of flaws in an individual camera lens, rather than a photo of the sun. - MPF 12:16, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think it would be much more interesting if the sun were left out. --MichaelMaggs 20:57, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Wouldn't it just be a picture of the sky (which would be plain blue), then? Kulshrax 22:44, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm ;) --MichaelMaggs 23:07, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I wanted to use this last year as April fool, but them someone nominated it on Wikipedia and he was serious. The nomination failed. Anyway this is a funny joke, nothing more. Even a 2 year old can take this pic from anywhere on earth. --Arad 00:27, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Ah, but this might be a very rare picture of the far side of the sun.--MichaelMaggs 15:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 1th April ... emh... 7th day) Simonizer 12:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:XN Anemone nemorosa 837.jpg, not featured[edit]

Anemone nemorosa

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XN - uploaded by XN - nominated by XN --XN 15:43, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XN 15:43, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not so nice quality and distracting background to me. Benh 19:25, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose would have been better if main flower in focus did not overlap with blurred background flower to the left; also background rather dark - MPF 12:13, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - overexposed, unfortunate composition. Lycaon 13:37, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as others --Karelj 19:16, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 12:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Piles of Salt Salar de Uyuni Bolivia Luca Galuzzi 2006.jpg, featured[edit]

#1Piles of Salt on the Salar de Uyuni, Bolivia.  #2Tilt, background noise, green fringe removed. #3"Fixed" colours, added a little bloom. Edit by Wj32.

Original[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This photo shows piles of salt on the world's largest salt flat, Salar de Uyuni in Bolivia. Created, uploaded by Lucag and nominated by Überraschungsbilder 20:38, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Überraschungsbilder 20:38, 21 March 2007 (UTC) (vote moved to "edited version")
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Thermos 20:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC) Changed support to new version --Thermos 05:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AngMoKio 21:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC) vote moved --AngMoKio 20:28, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Arghh. Difficult decision. Slight tilt ccw and slightly grainy (no pun intended). Otherwise very good picture. When the tilt is corrected, I will support. Lycaon 21:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC) vote moved -- Lycaon 12:16, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
    • The tilt wasn't so much the problem as the green fringe on the piles. Edit #2 added. ~ trialsanderrors 07:33, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - nice encyclopaedic pic. Very slightly tilted, could perhaps benefit from rotating a fraction of a degree clockwise. MPF 21:38, 21 March 2007 (UTC) vote moved to edited version - MPF 01:04, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support woa, amazing subject to me, and overall very high quality. Benh 21:48, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support cool --norro 23:41, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 6 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Lycaon 06:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Edit[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Tilt, background noise and green fringe removed.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ~ trialsanderrors 07:35, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice pic, though Pictogram voting info.svg Info it's still slighty tilted to the left! Just draw a horizontal line through the horizon, and you'll see it. --Atoma 08:56, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
good point, the same image was actually shown twice, fixed the link now --Überraschungsbilder 17:00, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lycaon 09:52, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Simonizer 10:12, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacopo86 11:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Chabacano 15:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC) Very nice. ¿Aren't the two pics the same?
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Überraschungsbilder 17:06, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MichaelMaggs 17:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AngMoKio 20:28, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Thermos 05:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Malene Thyssen 08:09, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support // tsca [re] 15:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 20:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Packa 21:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - MPF 01:04, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Digon3 15:26, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Alvesgaspar 11:33, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Wsiegmund 19:34, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lestat 21:47, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Romary 14:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pupster21 19:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Maire 12:39, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Ceridwen 14:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Basik07 19:51, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - What is so special? --Arad 00:34, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral (still waiting for edit 2) => featured. Lycaon 06:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

2nd Edit , not featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Fixed colours with GIMP, added a little light bloom. --wj32 talk | contribs 11:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - worse than the original, with over-saturated colours - MPF 13:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - spoiled the picture Lycaon 19:31, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

If I can say something, I guarantee you that Salar de Uyuni didn't look yellow but white, bright white and daylight sky tended to be cold blue. Colors of Edit3 are totally unreal. Please don't use this picture with my name. --LucaG 21:55, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose baaaaaah, delete this --Überraschungsbilder 00:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I can reassure you I wasn't trying to "spoil" the picture. How would I know that they are white? And to LucaG, what do I name my edit? Random_edit_by_stupid_wj32.jpg? --124.243.176.241 07:23, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose You better ask to delete this. ~ trialsanderrors 22:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 11:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bucket well.jpg, not featured[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Zserghei --Zserghei 10:50, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Zserghei 10:50, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice image, but not special enough --Simonizer 09:52, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great. That's the stuff we need. --Jeses 21:14, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality pic, with encyclopaedic value - MPF 21:59, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Good quality picture but not special enough to be put among the best. Background is distracting and the subject is not self explanatory. Alvesgaspar 21:00, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose very nice image, but background is distracting. --Leafnode 08:36, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Ceridwen 15:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A decent-enough snap, but no more. No thought seems to have gone into avoiding the distracting backround. --MichaelMaggs 16:43, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Good picture but not special enough for the best. --Karelj 16:50, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Physikas 11:42, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 06:42, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:XN_Vinca_minor_682.jpg, not featured[edit]

Vinca minor

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XN - uploaded by XN - nominated by XN 19:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)]]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XN 19:16, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pupster21 19:54, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --donald- 20:07, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - MPF 21:26, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice use of selective DOF --Thermos 21:37, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support even if it looks a tiny, tiny bit too bright to me --Überraschungsbilder 22:53, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice image, but it looks very compressed, background is disturbing, flowers are not sharp - their borders have a lot of jpeg artefacts. There is this strange grainy look -- look at the dark corners in the lower-left at full size -- and it doesnt' look as camera noise (jpeg artefacts again?) --Atoma 08:04, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Atoma and not so much details come out from this pic. Also I think the subject is too similar to the background : that same flower to the left of the main subject, which isn't blurred enough, spoils it a little to my mind. Benh 11:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice composition and colours, but I agree with Atoma: flowers are a little unsharp and some atifacts are visible. Alvesgaspar 16:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice picture with small details of the flower --Packa 21:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Artifacts, looks like it was artificially sharpened --Leafnode 08:39, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ziga 12:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the same as Leafnode --Karelj 16:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Viele-baeren 21:12, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Orlovic 21:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree with Atoma and Leafnode --Simonizer 11:56, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 10 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 06:43, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bryce Canyon Hoodoos Amphitheater Panorama.jpg, not featured[edit]

Bryce Canyon Hoodoos Amphitheater

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and nominated by Digon3 --Digon3 22:37, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Digon3 22:37, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Sorry, but it is a bit too out-of-focus. Sad, as it is otherwise a stunning photo. - MPF 12:16, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Would downsampling help? --Digon3 17:00, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - probably yes, if it works the way I think it does - MPF 21:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice, nice --Packa 21:08, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Basik07 20:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support beautiful image Viele-baeren 21:12, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very sorry too, but I agree with MPF (with the otherwise stunningness of the picture as well). Benh 19:29, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I will provide a downsampled image as soon as this nomination is done (hopefully this will get rid of some of the out-of-focus) --Digon3 21:28, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 06:44, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Northern Spotted Owl.USFWS-thumb.jpg, not featured[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by a FWS-Photographers Hollingsworth, John and Karen - uploaded by H-stt - nominated by Tomer T --Tomer T 20:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomer T 20:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose typical position for owls, unfortunately not sharp --Packa 21:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose low res, noisy --Dschwen 21:04, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ack Dschwen -- Lycaon 21:14, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - 1.5 megabytes isn't low res! But it is a rather bad scanning of a slide, with dust etc., and the edge of the frame, all too readily visible. As an absolute minimum, the slide frame should be cropped off. That white bar at the left could also be edited out. - MPF 21:50, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
    • res!=pixelcount :-) --Dschwen 23:34, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Poor photographic quality. Is this a scan? - 217.129.91.43 08:10, 28 March 2007 (UTC) Please log in to vote. Lycaon 11:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It clearly is a scan - from a negative, judging by the lack of density. Looks like a bad lens/film combination failed to deliver any decent resolution (of detail!) even though the shot was well-focussed and decently scanned. I see no chance of redeeming this in post processing. Great shot otherwise (or would be if cropped form the right) with the owl looking good in its natural habitat. Would make a nice (small) print. mixpix 08:29, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I've cropped off the edges of the slide frame and cleaned out the worst bits of dirt - MPF 11:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's surely usable as an illustration of the species in wikipedia, but the quality i definitely not FP-worthy. Lycaon 12:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment good effort MPF and certainly an improvement, but I still have to agree with Lycaon. --Dschwen 12:53, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very impressive, excellent piture --Karelj 16:26, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Viele-baeren 21:12, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment would be better if the white line was removed from the LHS --Benjamint444 00:42, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 06:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Brueghel-tower-of-babel.jpg, not featured[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Pieter Bruegel - uploaded by Adam - nominated by Tomer T --Tomer T 23:31, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomer T 23:31, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too small, JPEG artifacts. --startaq 07:56, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Yes, this is one of the most sriking paintings from Brueghel, but the image is too small according to the agreed guidelines. 217.129.91.43 08:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC) Please log in to vote. Lycaon 11:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Freestyle nl 09:42, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose 196 KB is much too low resolution - MPF 12:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Yes, this is one of the most sriking paintings from Brueghel, but the image is too small according to the agreed guidelines. Alvesgaspar 20:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 16:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I plead in favour of "mitigated reasons" in respect of the low resolution. The painting is outstanding. --Diligent 10:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I don't see why the mitigating reasons should apply, after all, the painting isn't going away anywhere, so getting a higher res pic should not be difficult for anyone near the gallery where it is kept (unless the gallery has rules restricting hi-res photography?). - MPF 11:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too small, and no mitigating reasons. --MichaelMaggs 16:41, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no no never! Viele-baeren 21:11, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 06:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Southeast Steam Plant-University of Minnesota.jpg, not featured[edit]

#1University steam plant  #2Distorted, cropped, foreground musted

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Karl Frankowski - uploaded by Susanlesch - nominated by Susanlesch --Susanlesch 00:16, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- I"ve read that this plant supplies most of the power for the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, Minnesota. --Susanlesch 01:03, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - blurred smokestack clouds (exposure time much too long) - MPF 12:03, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think that was the intention of the photographer, to give the picture some kind of mystical touch --Simonizer 13:49, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - composition (POV) and ack MPF -- Lycaon 13:35, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I personnaly appreciate the blurred smokestack, aggree with Simonizer that it was a desired effect. I'd support but the distorsion due to the point of view and focal-length is too important on the houses, and the lower part of the photo is kinda disturbing. --Atoma 14:40, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I like the effect, but cut parts of the trees in the bottom kind of spoil it --che 16:32, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 06:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Edit #2, not featured[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I cropped and muted the foreground and slightly distorted the image on the right. ~ trialsanderrors 09:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 06:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Trevi Fountain.JPG, not featured[edit]

Trevi Fountain Night

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Kachan - uploaded by Kachan - nominated by Kachan --Kachan 19:04, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too small to assess. Lycaon 19:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too small. It would be worth your reviewing the guidelines. --MichaelMaggs 20:49, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice pic, but agree that it is too small. Aim for 800-1000 KB or larger. - MPF 23:21, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too small, per above. Wooyi 20:20, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Low quality, low size and darked, What's that? A Wallpaper? --Wilfredor 02:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 0 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 06:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Miscanti Lagoon near San Pedro de Atacama Chile Luca Galuzzi 2006.jpg, featured[edit]

Salar de Talar near San Pedro de Atacama, Chile.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Salar de Talar near San Pedro de Atacama, Norte Grande, Chile. - created and uploaded by Luca Galuzzi - nominated by Überraschungsbilder 13:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support true colours, good composition, brilliant shot --Überraschungsbilder 13:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support agree (but can't tell if true colours) Benh 13:44, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support // tsca [re] 17:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XN 18:25, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Mountain colors look totally irreal (I'm not saying they are irreal!), I've searched "Salar de Talar" on google images, some other photos look pretty much the same. Is there any explanation to this? The contrast between the sky and the mountains is pretty shocking. --Atoma 19:41, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support – Double support! --Packa 21:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Wow!! Never been there, but happy to accept the colours are real - a combination of dark sky at very high altitude (it's at 4,100m alt.), lava on the mountains, salt flats, and halophilic microorganisms in the water. - MPF 21:21, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes, colors looked irreals also been there, explanation is no pollution at all at 4,100m alt. and no humidity in the dryest desert on Earth. Coming back to sea level was depressing! Thanks everybody. --LucaG 20:36, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lycaon 05:56, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Simonizer 06:43, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Leafnode 08:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Maire 12:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Stef Mec 15:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 16:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jespinos 23:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent. ~ trialsanderrors 04:48, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It looks unreal as it's been oversharpened, I think. --MichaelMaggs 16:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
    • What makes you think that? I don't see any evidence for it. ~ trialsanderrors 08:11, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support impressive... --AngMoKio 17:16, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ¡Perfecto! Hugo.arg 08:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Basik07 20:20, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support okay Viele-baeren 21:11, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support sanchezn 15:33, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Susanlesch 00:30, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support – Amazing --Kachan 04:09, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Urby2004 16:32, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral => featured. Simonizer 06:56, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Waterfrog head.jpg, featured[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Holger Gröschl - uploaded and nominated by Simonizer 07:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great detail, nice DOF --Simonizer 07:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That's special. Makes me feel really small. Very cool. --norro 08:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great shot. Grass on first plane distracts a bit, but I can't complain about it in this photo (macro+animal) :) --Leafnode 08:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support yep! Lycaon 10:11, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - MPF 14:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 16:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XN 17:56, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Vassil 29 March 2007
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LucaG 22:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --benjamint444 please log in to vote Lycaon 07:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the flash in the eye. --MichaelMaggs 16:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support to me it looks more like a sunset reflecting in the frogs eye rather than a flash, which could be why this scene is so nicely illuminated as well. you can see the fotographer, too :) very nice work. ---volty 13:03, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AngMoKio 17:15, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LucaG 16:07, 31 March 2007 (UTC)you allready have voted --Simonizer 13:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support it´s an nice frog. In german we would say "Schöner Frosch" Viele-baeren 21:10, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Susanlesch 00:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer 06:51, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Moving sidewalk scheme.svg, featured[edit]

Escalator Escalator, no circles

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by MesserWoland - uploaded by MesserWoland - nominated by Leafnode --Leafnode 12:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Leafnode 12:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Maire 12:31, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wpedzich 13:25, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support :D M@rcin Suwalczan [talk] 13:26, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Szczepan dyskusja Mail 13:26, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral (for now) Will support if following issues are addressed: arrows (full line, narrower head) and circles around numbers disturb. Lycaon 13:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Is there such a thing as a Polish grapevine ?? ;-)) Lycaon 13:54, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's our secret plot to... whoops ;) --Leafnode 23:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - ditto to Lycaon; also number sequence is somewhat illogical (my suggestion would be clockwise numbering from the left; 1. Electric motor, 2. Drive gear, 3. Handrail drive, 4. Handrail, 5. Step, 6. Return wheel, 7. Chain guide, 8. Inner rail) - MPF 14:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --WarX 17:53, 29 March 2007 (UTC) But renumerize and make thinner strokes around numbers ;)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Great illustration! But is it really called moving sidewalk? It's an escalator! --Dschwen 22:46, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Ah well, maybe you guys have moving sidewalks and flying cars over there in warsaw, who knows ;-) --Dschwen 22:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice one! Herr Kriss 23:15, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Packa 06:11, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Image has been changed according to comments. Also version without baloons has been prepared (if you like vote for it below) --Leafnode 10:26, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like baloons :) --norro 09:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Masti 19:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC) moving sidewalk up-the-hill :)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support gren 10:53, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose until the kink in the handrail is fixed. ~ trialsanderrors 00:06, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral => featured. Simonizer 06:57, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Fixed version, no baloons, not featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info fixed according to comments above (ordering, arrow lines, additionally no baloons) and uploaded by Leafnode based on image by MesserWoland--Leafnode 23:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lycaon 07:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Diligent 10:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Thanks! MPF 11:28, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Support. Always wondered how those things worked. In Paris, at La Défense, there are always at least two mechanical stairs broken, no idea why.
    Numbers seem still pretty big (I tend to compare their size to the real-size of the mechanical stair, so they are big). --Atoma 14:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
A real size escalator would also have about 4 or 5 times as many steps :-) MPF 19:43, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MichaelMaggs 16:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Thermos 03:33, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support really nice! Viele-baeren 21:09, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - The level of detail is much lower for the handrail system than it is for the step system. For example, at the inflexion points of the handrail, there should be some kind of wheel, which is not depicted. BTW, some of these inflexions seem too sharp to be real. Also, I agree with MPF about the number of steps. - Alvesgaspar 10:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I believe that this image is supposed to depict stair mechanism, only signing presence of handrail but not focusing on it. But maybe author of this image should make some comment. --Leafnode 17:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral, I actually prefer the circles for this image... they only cover background space and make for better image mapping. gren 10:53, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose until the kink in the handrail is fixed. ~ trialsanderrors 00:06, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral => not featured. (Original has more support votes) Simonizer 06:57, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Virginia class submarine.jpg, not featured[edit]

Virginia-class attack submarine

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ron Stern - uploaded by Owly K --Ayack 17:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ayack 17:40, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Maybe it should be stated somewhere, that it's only artistic vision? --WarX 19:13, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - very low res, only 219KB, with resulting hideous jpeg compression artefacts (see particularly the lower right part of the pic) - MPF 20:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
The res is 1260 x 2100 Tomer T 15:42, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - No. 1260 x 2100 is the dimensions. The resolution is how detailed the image is, not how large it is top to bottom or side to side. High resolution requires more kilobytage, and that's what this pic doesn't have. - MPF 00:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
Not so! I hate to be pedantic, but this sort of thing really gets my goat. Read en:Image resolution and you'll find no mention of image (byte) size, which varies with compression. This is a compressed high resolution file, which reduces file size and sometimes quality (though not, IMO, in this case). If you are to fairly review images here, you really should get your criteria straight. mixpix 00:11, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great Tomer T 15:42, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 16:53, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose i have difficulties seeing sth special in it. Might be a good candidate for QI --AngMoKio 17:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Trivial 3D rendering, not even particularly spectacular, beautiful or even well-framed. Rama 19:42, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Viele-baeren 21:09, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Agree with previous opposers, might pass (or not) the QIC challenge. Alvesgaspar 10:55, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 06:58, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Verdun cimetiere.JPG, not featured[edit]

Picture taken in the Douaumont cemetary (World war I), France

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ajor933 - uploaded by Ajor933 - nominated by Ajor933 --Ajor933 13:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ajor933 13:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The photo is out of focus and consequently does not appear to have any depth of field --70.56.91.246 14:56, 6 April 2007 (UTC) -please log in to vote --AngMoKio 15:34, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose severe technical flaws --AngMoKio 15:34, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to AngMoKio, also resolution very low - MPF 20:35, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As above. --Javier ME 18:42, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Lestat 20:05, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:00, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Mousse.jpg, not featured[edit]

Beer foam

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ajor933 - uploaded by Ajor933 - nominated by Ajor933 --Ajor933 13:17, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ajor933 13:17, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unacceptable. Please read guidelines. Lycaon 14:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This must be very poor joke... --Karelj 16:56, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not to be featured. Please read guidelines. --Javier ME 19:07, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Waaayyy too low res --wj32 talk | contribs 09:08, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Leafnode 18:15, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:01, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Paris arc.jpg, not featured[edit]

View of the city of Paris taken from the top of Arc de Triomphe

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jplavoie - uploaded by Jplavoie - nominated by Tomer T --Tomer T 18:53, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomer T 18:53, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - doesn't grab me as a very good pic - MPF 00:27, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Maybe because the day was grey and because no street is in you axe --Alipho 11:46, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment right side of the first avenue left is blurred. --Javier ME 15:38, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Basik07 20:19, 31 March 2007 (UTC) cut too high
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral there´s something missinf for a realy exelent picture. Viele-baeren 21:08, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Would have been more interesting with a 360° pano. --Atoma 07:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Karelj 19:20, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Maybe too gray, but I liked it since I saw it very long time ago in Wikipedia. Gray is actually a color I associate with Paris. --Arad 00:32, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good pic --Tarawneh 13:45, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 2 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 08:22, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:DK Fanoe Windmill01.JPG, featured[edit]

Windmill in Sønderho, Fanø, Denmark.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Cnyborg - uploaded by Cnyborg - nominated by Tomer T --Tomer T 19:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomer T 19:14, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ---donald- 20:33, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, but only just: aesthetically very nice, but the resolution is barely adequate. The same size but with 800kb or a megabyte of detail would be much better. - MPF 00:29, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Romary 08:40, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Agree with MPF, the walls of the building seems a little 'flat' --Alipho 11:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Basik07 20:25, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice image Viele-baeren 21:07, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Packa 06:50, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 19:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Leafnode 05:59, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lestat 20:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer 08:23, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Car side mirror sunset.jpg, not featured[edit]

Mirror Sunset

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by J RAWLS - uploaded by User:FlickrLickr / Tintazul - nominated by Bryan -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:40, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wonderfull composition -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:40, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it Tomer T 20:21, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Freestyle nl 21:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --donald- 22:16, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Small; many elements out of focus --Javier ME 08:22, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Nothing really interesting in this picture... --Alipho 11:39, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, doesn't see very special, although it's still a creative step above thousands of other sunsets we have here. --che 12:57, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - nice idea, but composition spoilt by wires in both directions - MPF 15:48, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose like MPF Viele-baeren 21:07, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support something unussual, nice The preceding unsigned comment was added by Karelj (talk • contribs) at 19:24, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question - Would removing the wires be a good idea? -- Bryan (talk to me) 19:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Orlovic 11:52, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, not outstanding. -- Physikas 11:40, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 08:24, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Seine wide.jpg, featured[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Jplavoie - nominated by ---donald- 21:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ---donald- 21:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I don't usually like night time urban pics, but this one is definitely a cut above most of the others. Mainly because there are relatively few light sources, and they illuminate the buildings well, rather than a whole lot of glare points. Also that (despite the low light levels) it has been done with a fast enough shutter speed not to blur the water. One comment though, I think that cropping off about 10% off the right hand end would improve the pic. - MPF 00:40, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Excellent in everyway (Would probably make the crop suggested by MPF, however, somewhere right to horseshoe stamp in vertical pillar (the detail is really good)). Clearly a FP. --Thermos 03:27, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Romary 08:38, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Agree with MPF --Alipho 11:37, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment For those who may not know, the "disco" colours were to support Paris' bid for the 2012 olympics. Don't expect to see the same if you visit Paris now :) Benh 20:14, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Benh 20:14, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support really good image. Viele-baeren 21:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That's a totally cool panorama from Paris. --Atoma 18:18, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Agree with MPF --Digon3 02:28, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Why keep voting for a version that is not whole-heartedly supported, when a cropped (en:Image:Seine_wide_crop.jpg) (and apparently more appreciated) version exists? BTW, I would also support the cropped version... Lycaon 06:37, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rakshat 12:06, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. I'd support the cropped version too --LucaG 23:41, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Karelj 18:58, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support– Nice colors Kachan 21:25, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Urby2004 16:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Leafnode 18:17, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer 08:25, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Above the Clouds.jpg, not featured[edit]

A color-enhanced version of an aerial photograph of clouds.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Kulshrax - uploaded by Kulshrax - nominated by Kulshrax --Kulshrax 01:20, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kulshrax 01:20, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not really attractive and too dark I think --Alipho 20:14, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice pic, but suffering from jpeg compression faults in the sky (most obvious toward top left of pic) - MPF 23:15, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too dark, horizon should be lower --Leafnode 18:14, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Lestat 12:47, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 08:28, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Kjosnesfjorden.JPG, not featured[edit]

A beautiful picture of one of the most breathtaking parts of the world; the great Fjords of Norway.

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment good quality, but a little angle rotation would work! --Orlovic 11:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Pictogram voting question.svg Question I see what appears to be a smudge in the upper right region of the photo. Is this because of image editing, or is it a part of the original photo? Kulshrax 15:31, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I looked at the same smudge. I think it's a cloud. Nevertheless, it's really distracting.Kgrr 16:51, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not because of the smudge which can be easily cleaned. The composition is a little boring and the image quality not good enough. Alvesgaspar 18:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment there's two smudges (the other, at the top left); they look like smudges produced by editing, not clouds. Otherwise, nice pic though. - MPF 20:46, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Camera lent noise --Wilfredor 02:07, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I like the composition but I would be a greater picture without smudges. --Alipho 20:11, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose smudges --Lestat 20:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 0 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 08:29, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Bagre Puerquero de la Bahia de Juan Griego.JPG, not featured[edit]

Fish Bagre

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by wilfredor - uploaded by wilfredor - nominated by wilfredor --Wilfredor 02:17, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wilfredor 02:17, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nothing in focus, not even the (unidentified!) fish -- Lycaon 05:59, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ditto to Lycaon. -- Physikas 11:39, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ditto to Lycaon and Physikas - MPF 15:48, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose terrible picture --Karelj 21:55, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ditto to Lycaon and Physikas and MPF --Leafnode 18:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Lestat 20:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:USMC Marathon.jpg, not featured[edit]

Modern marathon competition

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A work of the United States Federal Government - uploaded by Tungsten - nominated by Tomer T --Tomer T 12:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomer T 12:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but I really don't see what this picture is trying to convey...there just isn't a "wow" factor for me. Kulshrax 15:19, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to Kulshrax - MPF 15:46, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Kulshrax --Digon3 15:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ditto to Kulshrax. Nice resolution, but otherwise ordinary sports shot. Furthermore woman in the front is out of focus. --norro 09:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Leafnode 18:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:04, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Watching Sunset Salar de Uyuni Bolivia Luca Galuzzi 2006.jpg, featured[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Lucag - uploaded by Lucag - nominated by Simonizer 11:37, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wonderful. Great colours and composition. I guess, the best sunset picture at commons at the moment --Simonizer 11:37, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Rakshat 13:20, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support looks like a graphic, but WOW! --Packa 18:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry to have doubts about this photography since LucaG seems to provide Commons only with very nice pics, but the guy and his reflection on the water look too much the same to my taste. I've played a bit with my gimp and the shapes are VERY close (though not exactly the same) as if they were mirrored and pasted to the picture. The part of water reflecting the light of the sky, just under the left feet seems to confirm my suspicions. Could anyone confirm or give me an explanation ? Benh 19:23, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I've changed my mind, since Lucag told me it's real and I don't want my vote to be a penalty if other users like it. Benh 19:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to Benh's comments (particularly re the spot of light shining under his left foot), and think it would look nicer without the guy standing there - MPF 19:33, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Oppose to my picture but not for an edit I didn't do. The girl standing on the Salar is my 10 years old daughter. Please tell me how to provide the original Canon RAW file and I'll do it. Giulia, my daughter was really there watching the sun. I love particularly this image. --LucaG 19:47, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
I provided the original RAW file to Benh and to MPF. It can seem an incredible picture but Bolivia is really an incredible country. Sorry for the intrusion in this poll. --LucaG 20:51, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Yap I saw it. That reflection under the left foot seems much more natural at real size and may be explained by the direction of the light source eventually to be somewhere on the left side (sky is big ;)). That makes this picture even more outstanding to me. Very sorry for the trouble... Benh 21:02, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks! My apologies for my doubts - MPF 21:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Nevermind. Now that you know her, I added some more pictures of Giulia in that incredible place: my Bolivia gallery. --LucaG 22:23, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Thermos 04:50, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lycaon 13:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Totally looks like a drawing, which makes it even more interesting. --Atoma 14:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice --Karelj 19:14, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MichaelMaggs 20:53, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Basik07 21:13, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - it looks like a typical render, but it's a photo. And that's cool! :D I had to look at EXIF to believe it's not rendered. - Erina 08:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I think that image, which could be made in not too long time in vector image software, shouldn't be a FP. --Leafnode 05:57, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Are you serious? This is a photo of a real place and not a computer generated image. --Simonizer 11:11, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
      • I can read, I know it's a photo. It only doesn't look like one. And I don't like it. --Leafnode 19:11, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- I don't really like it. It looks like a kitschy 70's blacklight poster to me. However, I have a couple of observations: The caption in Italian:in questo silenzio sono i colori ad urlare - Salar de Uyuni - Bolivia - 3700 m di quota. Forgive me, I don't know Italian. The title of this work appears to be Salar de Uyuni or Leaving Uyuni? Uyuni is a salt flat in Bolivia. My last recollection of salt is that it's white. It had to have taken a lot of post-processing to bring out the subtle colors on the salt flat and to get the shadows that black. Kgrr 05:03, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral i do not really like the photo, but my personal taste does not make it a less excellent picture of a natural-surreal scenery. I think it could be improved by a bit of postprocessing (the blacks do not appear balanced properly - they appear a bit fuzzy). --- volty 12:54, 7 April 2007 (UTC) Please sign with ~~~~ thanks. Lycaon 06:04, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Urby2004 16:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree it has a bit of a 70's kitsch factor, but as a photographic accomplishment it's outstanding. ~ trialsanderrors 01:28, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I like the landscape, but would prefer it without the person - MPF 23:24, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Lestat 20:03, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with MPF, I would prefer it without the person. --Digon3 01:18, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 12 support, 5 oppose, 2 neutral => featured. Simonizer 07:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Lake palace udaipur.jpg, not featured[edit]

Lake Palace Udaipur

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Rakshat - uploaded by Rakshat - nominated by Rakshat --Rakshat 12:47, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T 13:16, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Rakshat 16:23, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice hotel, but… --Packa 18:49, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice pic, but resolution (only 250 KB) too low, with jpeg compression faults - MPF 19:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose low quality picture --Karelj 19:12, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, but, that's so cool... until if floods. gren 10:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too much useless space. Wooyi 20:18, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Nikko Petals 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Hydrangea petals affected by aluminum

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Shmoopy - uploaded by Shmoopy - nominated by Shmoopy --Shmoopy 02:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Shmoopy 02:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - not enough depth of field, so only a few petals are in focus - MPF 10:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ack MPF and no reference as to the accuracy of the colours/white balance. Lycaon 05:57, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I like the limited depth of field and the color even though it might not be scientifically perfect (there is no need for scientific color balance on Commons). The photo would get my vote if the blossom that's in focus (the bright one near the upper left corner) were at a better location, for example, just to the lower right of center ("looking" toward the center). In its present location, it leads my eye out of the photo, and for this picture, that's not what I want. Fg2 22:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I am sure those are the natural colors, but there are no other colors to prove to my mind that they are. --Digon3 01:24, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Karelj 14:04, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:CD-R.svg, not featured[edit]

#1A Vectorized CD-R Bottom #2Photgraphic Version.

#1[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Created, uploaded, & nominated by Kulshrax --Kulshrax 03:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kulshrax 03:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too small res. Bad quality. ---donald- 08:47, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Please note: This is a vector file, resolution is irrelevant here. --norro 09:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Oh, i haven't seen this. ---donald- 09:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose and Pictogram voting question.svg Question - If this is a vector file, why aren't the lines sharp and the file is so big? It looks like a vector rendering of a photo. Alvesgaspar 08:54, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I guess this vector graphic was made by tracing a bitmap file, but I don't see the advantage of this SVG in this case. You can scale it, but the outlines are clearly visible anyhow. --norro 09:17, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - very poor reproduction of colours - MPF 10:02, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Leafnode 18:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

#2[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Original Photographic image --Kulshrax 12:36, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wonderful. ---donald- 16:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Leafnode 18:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose QI for me --norro 18:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Clock-longtime.JPG, not featured[edit]

Short description

  • A photo on a clock, with a longtime photo (4 secs) created by Moralist - uploaded by Moralist - nominated by Moralist --moralist 12:31, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral --moralist 12:31, 10 April 2007 (UTC) - Don't want to vote on i myself...
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Is the white balance correct? Shouldn't the clock-face be white? --AngMoKio 16:21, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - cut, with bottom and side of clock missing - MPF 16:46, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Seems to be a white balance and/or exposure problem. -- Ram-Man 16:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - compositional problems, white balance issues. Lycaon 05:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Leafnode 18:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Lestat 19:58, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don´t see any reason for featered picture here --Karelj 14:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 0 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Pacific Madrone Arbutus menziesii Closeup 2816px.jpg, not featured[edit]

Pacific Madrone (Arbutus menziesii)

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jina Lee - uploaded and nominated by Ram-Man -- 14:34, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (as the nominator). -- Ram-Man 14:34, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looks like peeling paint. This one actually creates some context. ~ trialsanderrors 20:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
    Please see my comments below: This is not intended to be a contextual image but an image which highlights the texture and shows the peeling bark. It is a closeup afterall. It is perfectly reasonable to use the picture you link (which was taken at the same time of the same tree) in conjunction with this one for proper context. The purpose of this image is as a closeup showing detail. -- Ram-Man 12:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice close-up of the bark, but sadly low quality (noisy) image. Lycaon 05:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
    • This picture was taken in bright sunlight at its lowest ISO setting and is not underexposed. That is not noise but the fine grain detail of the tree and is the whole point of the image. I had to search a little bit to find another example, but you can see the fine grain texture in this image as well. Part the educational value of this image is the fact that it is a high resolution closeup showing this fine detail. -- Ram-Man 12:02, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
      • I respectfully disagree. A picture of 2816 x 2120 with only 1.4 Mb was subject to some kind of compression. And some of the grain texture in this image looks like compression artifacts. Alvesgaspar 14:44, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
        • There may be some compression artifacts that are visible at extreme magnifications, but that's not the same as noise, which was the point I was addressing. For clarification, the camera in question is actually a 3MP camera and for marketing reasons includes interpolation to 6MP. The real resolution of this image is 3MP, which is still a lot of useful resolution, but not as much as the dimensions would suggest. This should help explain the file size issue. Downsampling would just introduce generational error, so I didn't do so. If you did, it would smooth out those issues, which is what happens when the wikimedia software creates the images used in articles. At a reasonably large size of 11"x14" at 100dpi, the grain matches that of the subject. Even at that magnification it would take a trained eye to tell the difference between the rough grain of the tree and any compression artifacts. We have noisier (and which looks to me like more artifacts) in 2MP featured pictures, such as the recent Image:Humanitarian_aid_OCPA-2005-10-28-090517a.jpg. -- Ram-Man 15:12, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Please sign to vote --MichaelMaggs 14:52, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:NZ North Island Robin.jpg, not featured[edit]

NZ North Island Robin

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tony Wills - uploaded by Tony Wills - nominated by Tony Wills --Tony Wills 12:04, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tony Wills 12:04, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very noisy. ---donald- 19:24, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Unsharp and full of artifacts. Alvesgaspar 21:30, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentYou are sadly right :-(. Pictogram voting info.svg Info I withdraw my nomination --Tony Wills 00:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
result: Nomination withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer 07:14, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Using sextant.gif, featured[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The animation illustrates the use of a marine sextant at sea, for measuring the altitude of the Sun above the horizon. This information, coupled with the knowledge of the exact time and the position of the Sun in the celestial sphere at the moment of the observation, allows the determination of a line of position, with an accuracy of about 1-2 nautical miles. Created and nominated by Joaquim Alves Gaspar.

Left (with swing)[edit]

Here, . . .
or here . . .
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alvesgaspar 22:56, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Susanlesch 03:24, 4 April 2007 (UTC) (Sorry I can't tell them apart.)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I understand that this is more informative version? In any case, both are good. --Thermos 05:23, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support BTW what's the difference? -- Erina 08:37, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very informative --Diligent 10:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - nice explanation of the theory of using a sextant, or on land, with the sextant fixed on a stable tripod. How does one obtain 1-2 nautical mile accuracy in practice? (see typical actual situations, right) - MPF 14:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info - The marine sextant cannot be fixed to a tripod, it is designed to be held with the right hand (the handle can be see behind the index bar, in this picture). This way, the ship's pitch and roll don't affect its use very much (unless you feel really sick or just can´t stand...). The accuracy of a celestial line of position at sea depends mainly on the accuracy of the altitude measurement, which is affected by the instrument itself (the precision of the sextant is about 0,5' of arc), the observer personal error, the accuracy of the available time (the celestial sphere moves, with the sun, 15' of arc in each minute of time) and the effect of atmospheric refraction. The accuracy value of 1-2 nautical miles for each line of position (about 1,85 to 3,7 km) is a little bit optimistic. On land, celestial observations are (were, as a matter of fact) normally made with an astronomical theodolite and the accuracy of the measurements is much higher (of the order of 100 times better). By the way, the sea states shown in the images are not, fortunately, very typical. Alvesgaspar 14:29, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Thanks; though I still don't see how it can be used in a practical situation. I've never used a sextant, but have frequently used binoculars on board boats (both large ships and small fishing boats, for birding), and know how impossibly difficult it is to keep the horizon (or a bird) steady in them with engine vibration and even just slight rolling. Even with a calm sea, engine vibration transmitted through the body and arm makes the horizon vibrate up and down by a degree or two. The two pics may be a bit more than normal, but it is extremely rare for there to be no swell in the open oceans (look at e.g. the difficulties of landing on oceanic islets like Rockall, where 1-2 metres swell is normal even in 'calm' weather), and on an average day (in the North Sea at least, where I have the most experience) wave heights very typically make the horizon 'lumpy' by several degrees as seen from the deck of a small ship. One degree of error from a lumpy horizon, or vibration, is equivalent to about 60 nautical miles. - MPF 14:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The beauty of the sextant is that it is not relevant if you are pointing exactly to the horizon or not to make an accurate measurement (as long as you see it through the glass). The important thing is that the heavenly body is put tangent to the horizon, which is reflected in a correct position of the index bar. The waves can indeed affect the process but only when the observer is quite close to the surface and the sea is rough. With an elevation of 3 m (1,5 for the observer's eye plus 1,5 for the boat's deck), the visible horizon is about 3,5 nautical miles away. Alvesgaspar 15:40, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great work --AngMoKio 18:53, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. Now the difference has been pointed out, I prefer the left version. BTW, in caption 4, for 'clump' read 'clamp'. --MichaelMaggs 19:34, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
    • The "clump" is now fixed (should I say silent?...), thank you. Alvesgaspar 20:39, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support FP for sure. Lycaon 19:35, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment moved to User talk:Alvesgaspar#Sextant animation ~ trialsanderrors 19:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Amazingly clear ! I now understand Sextans ^0^y --Yug (talk) 09:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good, very informative --Digon3 15:10, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support whichever version you'll settle on. ~ trialsanderrors 19:34, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Amazing, now I wish to try one. --LucaG 20:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good work --Simonizer 11:20, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It explains the use of a sextant very well. --Kgrr 04:17, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Support the image and the information associated to it. I feel like I understand the principle of a sextant now :) Benh 08:18, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Urby2004 16:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wilfredor 02:10, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Malene Thyssen 13:39, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Leafnode 18:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support :-) --Tony Wills 12:30, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Pedroserafin 12:59, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral => featured. Simonizer 06:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Right (without swing), not featured[edit]

  • Image:Using sextant.gif
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info -- In this version the rotation of the sextant around the optical axis of the telescope (which may be considered less than perfect) is not visible. Alvesgaspar 09:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Withdraw nomination - Alvesgaspar 20:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lestat 12:45, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
result: Nomination withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer 06:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Image: chompchomp GMC.jpg, not featured[edit]

Rusted truck

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Elcucococo - uploaded by Elcucococo - nominated by Elcucococo --Elcucococo 02:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Got to support my own pic! :) Elcucococo 22:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too small - please read the guidelines. Lycaon 05:51, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Leafnode 18:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose what is the picture trying to show? Too small. --Digon3 19:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too small --Lestat 20:08, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as above --Karelj 14:11, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Plaza Mayor Salamanca.jpg, not featured[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Keta - uploaded by Keta - nominated by Keta --Keta 06:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but I just feel the script for resizing doesn't work very well here --Keta 06:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think the details in the dark aren't for FP --Orlovic (talk) 10:40, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose to dark in the dark, overexposed spots --Leafnode 18:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Karelj 14:12, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:2062 series locomotive (1).JPG, not featured[edit]

No. 1 Version 1 No. 2 Version 2

Version #1[edit]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose picture taken too close to the locomotive, so it's deformed and not really well visible, lack of contrast --che 14:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Contrast fixed in the meantime, --Orlovic (talk) 17:45, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to che on pic angle. The other pic Image:2062 series locomotive (2).JPG is better - MPF 10:07, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 0 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Version #2[edit]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the contrast is much better, but sky is blown out and wideangle perspective is still there --che 14:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The sky is blown out. --Digon3 23:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 0 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:F-16 On Tarmac.jpg, not featured[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by US AIR FORCE - uploaded by Orlovic - nominated by --Orlovic (talk) 01:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really stunning heat effect and good focus on plane --Orlovic (talk) 01:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - poor composition with messy background distracting from subject - MPF 10:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unfortunately I agree with MPF. Shot, to look better, would have to be full-front (not slightly to the right), showing whole right wing etc. I've made some great shots of F16, but unfortunately I can't publish them :( --Leafnode 12:52, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Lestat 20:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ack Leafnode -- Lycaon 20:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose composition and framing --Digon3 23:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as above --Karelj 14:15, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Lwt02830.jpg, not featured[edit]

Rotunda Room, Mammoth Cave, Kentucky USGS Photo

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by US Geological Survey - uploaded by Alan Glennon - nominated by Kulshrax --Kulshrax 18:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kulshrax 18:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - numerous blemishes on photo (white spots, black spots, that bear no relationship to the photo subject and must be camera faults) - MPF 22:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ack MPF --Leafnode 06:40, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Laguna Negra de Urbión.JPG, not featured[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Txo - uploaded by Txo - nominated by Txo --Txo (discusión) Mi discusión en castellano 19:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Txo (discusión) Mi discusión en castellano 19:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Sorry, but there are very bad colour fringes in parts of the pic (see e.g. the boulders, lower left corner) and other poor reproduction faults. Otherwise, a nice habitat photo though. - MPF 22:01, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Very poor photographic quality: image blurry, overexposed and full of artifacts. Was certainly upsampled from a lower resolution picture. Alvesgaspar 22:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't think this was upsampled. I would credit this to a poor quality lens at f/2.8 because center is much sharper than (very blurry) borders. Benh 14:48, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment La resolución es alq ue da la cámara, una canón IXUS II D de 3.2Megapixels, No hay una sobre exposición ni artefactos en la imagen, el cielo estaba blanco, tal y como s eve en la fotografía, y lo que paecen artefactos son copos de nieve (estaba nevando enese momento). La dierencia entre el centro y los bordes, seguramente es debida a la calidad de la óptica.--Txo (discusión) Mi discusión en castellano 11:21, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose overexposed, seems tilted and blurry --Digon3 22:05, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as above --Leafnode 06:39, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:03, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Grito 11-M.jpg, not featured[edit]

"Reminds" inside 11-M memorial

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info, Grito 11-M.jpg by Desiree Onievas.

This image is the view of the 11-M monument which represent the sorrow and recolects some messages of condolence in their original language which covered all walls of the Atocha Station the days after the bombings. Interactive info Ive decided to nominate it because:

  1. Really amazing perspective with light and colours effects caused by the internal form of the monument (compare with the external view)
  2. Good quality: 1280 × 960, not noised, the sentences are surprisingly legibles.
  3. It shows messages in all laguages so people from all the world can understand the general meaning.--Serg!o 22:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is too small (244 KB). Please upload a higher resolution. --Digon3 23:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

It should be about 2000 x 1000 and around 800 KB or higher. --Digon3 23:16, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I've cleaned the image and upgraded the colours, please reconsider your votes--Serg!o 23:28, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I think 1.5M is too much for such a resolution, probably this can be compressed down to around 500 Ko without noticeable effects. Benh 11:33, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - It is a good picture but resolution is not enough for FP, please check the guidelines. I should try again with a proper camera... Alvesgaspar 07:51, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (weak) Looks like an... apple OS X paper peint wallpaper yes I'm french ! :) I wish I support it but quality (of image, not composition etc.) is not good enough to me Benh 11:33, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too small --Lestat 12:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 0 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:04, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Mount Washington Cascades.jpg, not featured[edit]

Mount Washington (Cascades), located east of Seattle, WA  USA by about 30mi (48km)

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Kgrr - uploaded by Kgrr - nominated by Kgrr --Kgrr 20:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kgrr 20:28, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Romary 19:37, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - MPF 20:37, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Quite poor quality, probably due to compression. The image has very little detail, the trees look like a shapeless green mass. and the sky is noisy. Alvesgaspar 22:24, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
The "noise" you see is snow in the air, the moon, and two airplanes.--Kgrr 00:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • That's not what I mean :). Well, maybe the noise is not vey disturbing. Alvesgaspar 07:35, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Agree with Alvesgaspar on the poor quality image. At 1600x1200 pixels, it's probably scaled down and therefore should have much more detail per pixel. I also think the foreground is a little inappropriate here. Benh 08:11, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • It was not scaled-down. The lens on the mid-grade camera is not the greatest, however it was easy to pack for the hike. Would you cut the foreground, making it look more like an aerial shot of the mountain? Help me compose the picture better.Kgrr 17:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I said it all, IMO, you should get rid of the foreground. Maybe you can leave it but use it in a better way to make the pic less (as been said) "boring". But that's not the main reason of my oppose. I Agree with Alvesgaspar that you should get a new camera if it can't produce sharper details than this at 1600x1200 pixels. Benh 08:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC).
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Boring composition (horizon in middle of picture divides the picture in two parts) and low quality --Simonizer 09:20, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your feedback. But please give me some more precise feedback. I plan to hike up to the same spot again this week and take a higher resolution camera and a tripod to shoot the picture again. Composition: Would you have had less sky and closed in on the mountain? Would you skip the foreground and take a more 'clinical' photo of the mountain? Was the time of the day right - this photo was taken near noon, casting shadows on the mountain. If it's taken later in the evening, the mountain glows with more light, but the three-dimensionality of the mass is lost.Kgrr 17:11, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - You definitely need a better camera, the image lacks detail and sharpness. Also,the exposure solution might not be the best: with a tripode it should be possible to shoot with a smaller aperture and get a better DOF. Finally, the composition is a lttle boring, like Simonizer said. Try not to center the subjects, both in the foreground and background. About the time of the day, it is difficult to give an opinion not being there. Personnaly, I prefer the evening light because the colours are nicer and the shadows smoother. Alvesgaspar 18:11, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Alvesgaspar for your feedback. I will shoot it again with my Pentax *ist-DS (a much better camera) and shoot the shot more to the right so that the mountain will have Chester Morse Lake to the right of it. Perhaps, I will shoot it later in the evening so that the light will be more golden. Unfortunately, the mountains will not be snow-frosted because it's spring already.Kgrr 23:53, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like it. Hugo.arg 19:20, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Karelj 21:37, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured.  Simonizer 07:34, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Perisphinctes sp.2 - Jurasico.JPG, not featured[edit]

Wasp dragging spider

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Drow male - uploaded & nominated by Drow male 12:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Drow male 12:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Would be better with the descriptive note fully visible, not partly hidden underneath the fossil. - MPF 14:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Poor quality due to compression and too much light. Composition is not good either. Alvesgaspar 16:58, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm not worried about the note as the image description should contain those details in multiple languages. But focus looks off, and shadows are purple - colour balance? --Tony Wills 09:26, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Poor quality --Karelj 14:31, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose definitely not FP --Leafnode 06:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:26, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Wolf 610.JPG, not featured[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by amphibol - uploaded by amphibol - nominated by amphibol --Amphibol 15:52, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Amphibol 15:52, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - File highly compressed. The result is an image blurred, with no detail and full of artifacts. Alvesgaspar 16:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not sharp enough --Karelj 16:33, 14 April 2007 (CEST)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question - location of photo? - MPF 19:48, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose focus on the background, left wolf is looking to the corner --che 12:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Pleiades Spitzer big.jpg, not featured[edit]

Pleiades in infrared by Spitzer Telescope, big version

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Infrared photo of Pleiades (M45) open star cluster created by Spitzer Telescope (Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/J. Stauffer (SSC/Caltech)) - uploaded by Winiar - nominated by Winiar --Winiar 16:42, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Winiar 16:42, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Not sure why there are two versions here. Why don't you just nominate the large one? --MichaelMaggs 17:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Smaller version looks more sharp in 300px, but ok, I'll change nomination to larger only. Winiar 18:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm sure NASA can be the source of more clearer images, this one is too noisy. --Orlovic (talk) 13:36, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice colors, but only this --Leafnode 06:30, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:29, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:P6250057.JPG[edit]

Short description Alternative, by Leinad-Z

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by The bellman - uploaded by The bellman - nominated by Tomer T --Tomer T 19:10, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomer T 19:10, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Very poor quality, due to compression. Please check the guidelines before nominating. Alvesgaspar 20:24, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as above; also tilted - MPF 19:52, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as above Karelj 20:43, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:30, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T 08:56, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Jorgovan-pcela4.JPG, not featured[edit]

Bee

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Pokrajac - uploaded by Pokrajac - nominated by Pokrajac --Pokrajac 22:58, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pokrajac 22:58, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Poor quality (noise), overexposed, subject unfocused. Please check here the kind of quality we are seeking in Commons:FP - Alvesgaspar 07:39, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noise, strange DoF --Leafnode 12:17, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as above --Karelj 14:35, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose far from current similar FP images, as alvesgaspar --Orlovic (talk) 13:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:31, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:C17virginia.jpg[edit]

#1original  #2alternative #3re-edit by fir0002

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by the US government - uploaded by Orlovic - nominated by --Orlovic 13:45, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Orlovic 13:45, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A good example of Atmospheric perspective (or aerial perspective) too. --Atoma 15:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good image. --MichaelMaggs 19:58, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LucaG 20:24, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - "Seventeen C-17 Globemaster III aircraft fly over ..." Someone at the USAF can't count? Or have four crashed? There's also a fault in the pic on the tail of the lead plane, a blurry blob half way up the tail stem. And the source link doesn't lead to the right pic at the source website. - MPF 20:55, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
    • There's also a raindrop on the lens on the lower right, just above the horizon. ~ trialsanderrors 21:27, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I believe, that they made this photo from another C-17, so rest of the planes are behind the camera --Leafnode 06:06, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- noisy (and airforce publicity) Lycaon 20:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Leafnode 06:06, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent. --Karelj 16:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --WarX 19:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC) thiz image lookz gr8 :)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Good composition, image quality quite far from it. - Alvesgaspar 22:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose noisy Romary 19:12, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose due to blurry blob fault half way up the tail stem - MPF 22:21, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree with Alvesgaspar --Simonizer 08:11, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 7 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured.  Simonizer 07:35, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Alternative #2, featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - The air looks really muddy on this image. I like the other image DF-SD-06-03299 051220-F-5964B-161 that is the exact same shot. However, it looks post-processed to be brighter. Find it with the search at the Defense Visiual Information Center. Is there a way to vote on the alternate? Kgrr 04:45, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support you could have simply changed the first image. I must vote for the second. --Orlovic 09:58, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The second image looks better, less smoggy. Kgrr 16:48, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose noisy like the first version Romary 19:13, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good picture ! --Alipho 20:19, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 21:34, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Under the circumstance of moving objects, both pics are quite good. It is much easyer to make better quality still photohtaphs with some insect or building waiting for you infinitely. Ziga 06:48, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Malene Thyssen 13:41, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as above Lycaon 06:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose due to blurry blob fault half way up the tail stem - MPF 22:21, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ~ trialsanderrors 00:38, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose good composition but noisy! --Simonizer 08:13, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Arad 01:54, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer 08:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Alternative #3, not featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - This image version was cleaned up by Fir0002 and is about as clear as the image can possibly be. It retains the original lighting. Unfortunately the smudge is still on the tail of the main plane, bit it's pretty damn good! Witty lama
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Witty lama 00:32, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as above + introduced vignetting and halo on tail. Lycaon 10:04, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as above--Pedroserafin 15:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree with Lycaon --Simonizer 08:14, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day)Simonizer 08:57, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:MergellusAlbellusTakeOff.jpg[edit]

Smew taking off Smew taking off

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Thermos - uploaded by Thermos - nominated by Thermos --Thermos 17:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Thermos 17:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC) Changed support for new version
  • {Support}} - amazing sharp detail in the water droplets! I'd be inclined to brighten the image a bit, though. Location of the bird in the image description would also be nice. - MPF 20:32, 6 April 2007 (UTC) Changed support for new version
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Location information is now added in image description. --Thermos 21:39, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Beautiful, but image so darked --Wilfredor 02:08, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 0 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:02, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- rather dull (not sure if I'm expressing this right but...) dull colors, no contrast. Nice motion shot though. --Spundun 22:37, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

New version (on the right), featured[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Uploaded a new version, adjusted for brightness --Thermos 05:56, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (weak one) because it's amazing how all the relevant details of the picture are in focus in a shallow depth of field. But I think lighting of the bird is a little poor. Benh 08:38, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Digon3 15:43, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 21:30, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - MPF 23:17, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cool. Would be interesting to see a more narrow vertical crop. --Atoma 15:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Basik07 22:39, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Leafnode 18:14, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice pic, but i think the harsh shadows and the flat colours, caused by difficult light conditions, are not FP-worthy - forgot to sign --Simonizer 13:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Pedroserafin 15:33, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- as per first version --Spundun 22:37, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tony Wills 11:24, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 10 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer 08:59, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Plunging bronco, Bar Diamond Bar range.jpg, not featured[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Erwin E. Smith - uploaded by Brian0918 - nominated by me. --Yonatan talk 12:44, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yonatan talk 12:44, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - as historical photos go, it is fairly good quality, but nothing to compare with modern photographic quality. As the subject is not of any particular unrepeatable historical significance (it would be easy enough to repeat, given a well-trained horse and rider), I don't see any good reason for supporting it - MPF 23:54, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose like MPF, nice but no historical significance --Packa 06:14, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support of course. High quality picture by well-known photographer. ~ trialsanderrors 08:52, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T 09:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as long as there is no better image of this rather iconic pose in commons, I'll support this. :) --Spundun 22:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tony Wills 11:30, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ack MPF -- Lycaon 11:55, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 09:00, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:St Louis Gateway Arch.jpg, not featured[edit]

St Louis Gateway Arch

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Bev Sykes - uploaded by FlickrLickr - nominated by Tomer T --Tomer T 16:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomer T 16:33, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The horizon is tilted a bit, and the sky is a tad noisy. Try straightening the image in a graphics editor and you might want to try some noise reduction if possible. The picture looks a bit plain since it is a head-on shot. --Kulshrax 16:51, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The hotel at the left looks like the leaning tower of pisa, so I have to agree with Kulshrax. The photo needs to be corrected for parallax also. The square buildings on the right are clearly narrower on top.Kgrr 16:56, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to Kulshrax and Kgrr - MPF 23:44, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Tilted --Tarawneh 13:30, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 21:43, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Leafnode 18:13, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 09:02, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Skyline Frankfurt am Main.jpg, featured[edit]

Skyline of Frankfurt am Main

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Nicolas17 - uploaded by Nicolas17 - nominated by Nicolas17 -- Nicolas17 20:01, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Nicolas17 07:25, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good picture, no reason to oppose. Wooyi 20:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great picture; has a little bit of noise in the sky though. Kulshrax 22:00, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like it, too excessive light and boring composition. --norro 22:27, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think the exposure was chosen too long. The photo was taken after 10pm in April. Shouldn't the sky be black? --AngMoKio 23:09, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
The photo was taken at 7:47pm (summertime), during late twilight. There is also a lot of light pollution. -- Nicolas17 23:35, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
The metadata states 19:47; I presume that is local time (Germany, UTC +1), but possibly not corrected for daylight-saving changes - MPF
sorry i mixed the lines in the EXIF.--AngMoKio 08:03, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to norro - MPF 23:45, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support a little kitschy, but nice --Packa 06:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose but a weak oppose. At f9, and with any lens (even the kit), it should be sharper than that. I wonder if it's out of focus or if it's due to a slight camera shaking. Maybe you can try again ? Benh 08:32, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice picture. I like it because the long exposure creates brilliant lights and reflections. -- Physikas 09:52, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love it. It has that "wow" factor. Maybe could use a tiny bit of sharpening. Fg2 11:09, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it a lot. I wish I had taken that photo myself. --Eirissa 12:51, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very nice --Tarawneh 13:30, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 21:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Geisterbanker 00:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Atoma 15:33, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rakshat 06:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too kitschy Lycaon 17:53, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice. Appears a little bit skewed clockwise though, but maybe it's just my imagination :) --Leafnode 18:12, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support beautiful sky and river mirror. --Orlovic (talk) 00:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Is it just me, or is there a tilt to the right? Otherwise a great photograph --Digon3 01:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • It is, but very slightly. Benh 11:42, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Highlights overexposed, not sharp enough, tilted on left side. ---donald- 15:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose overexposed! --Torben 18:39, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Der Wolf im Wald 10:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 15 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral => featured. Simonizer 09:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Torre de Belem 20050728.jpg, not featured[edit]

Torre de Belem

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Zero - nominated by Tomer T --Tomer T 20:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomer T 20:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - The Tower of Belém deserves a better picture. This one is affected by a poor lighting (harsh shadows), geometric distortion and vigneting. Alvesgaspar 08:47, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Alvesgaspar --Digon3 15:40, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 21:47, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I actually like the vignetting (who needs edges on this photo?), opposing just because the distortion. I could live with harsh shadows. --che 15:00, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Generally image is nice, but this geometry... --Leafnode 18:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Winiar 16:48, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Why bot?--Pedroserafin 13:04, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 09:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Dresden.jpg, not featured[edit]

Dresdens skyline at night

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Username - uploaded by Username - nominated by Username --Tackbert 12:58, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tackbert 12:58, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - spoilt by garish blue patch toward lower left - MPF 14:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
    • There is nothing I could do about that. This ship is a theater and won´t leave.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as MPF --Karelj 21:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment just in case you haven't noticed, there's what I believe to be a stitching error in the middle, at the riverside level. It's not that easily seen because it's in a dark area. Benh 19:21, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day)Simonizer 09:07, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Nova zoomed.png, not featured[edit]

The Nova Fractal

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Wj32 - uploaded by Wj32 - nominated by Wj32 --wj32 talk | contribs 05:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC) withdrawn by nom. Ben Aveling 10:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The above image is ONLY A THUMBNAIL. The actual image is 6144x4608 and is 17.2MB. --wj32 talk | contribs 05:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --wj32 talk | contribs 05:55, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As I'm thinking about it, fractals are just a specialized category of sunsets. --che 14:03, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - We are talking about beauty here (like in sunsets) and I don't like this suggestion of volume given by the colouring choice. Alvesgaspar 21:33, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support There are so many other images of fractals that are already featured pictures, but none even come close to the resolution of this one. I think it should definitely be featured. Also, Pictogram voting question.svg Question Why didn't you post the full sized image to be featured (you say that this image is "only a thumbnail") Kulshrax 23:29, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unattractive compared to Image:Mandel zoom 00 mandelbrot set.jpg. ~ trialsanderrors 00:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Isn't that picture already featured? Or maybe it's only featured on Wikipedia... Kulshrax 01:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info My picture is 27mpx, the limit for generating previews is 12mpx. No, this was uploaded yesterday or the day before. --wj32 talk | contribs 05:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Oh, and BTW, I've also got a 6144x4608 mandelbrot one. It's more attractive than this one. I think I'll try and feature that one. --wj32 talk | contribs 05:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info And second BTW: I tried making a more beautiful version of this but it was already 30MB when it had rendered around half-way. I gave up. --wj32 talk | contribs 05:52, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
result: Nomination withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer 09:08, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Calle Carabobo en el Saladillo de Maracaibo 18.JPG, not featured[edit]

Saladillo downtown Not a candidate, only to illustrate geometric correction

- uploaded by Wilfredo R. Rodriguez H. - nominated by Wilfredo R. Rodriguez H.--libertad0 15:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --libertad0 15:19, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
    • I have included the correct author's identification - Alvesgaspar 15:41, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - The car should be cropped out and the geometric distorton corrected (vertical lines parallel). Alvesgaspar 15:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Sorry, I can't undestand "vertical lines parallel", Where is exactly it?

--libertad0 17:54, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

  • He/She means that lines going down are slightly skew at the moment: like this: / instead of this |.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Alvesgaspar. I also would have taken the picture from directly in front of the houses, that would emphasize the really nice colours. --Simonizer 10:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as Alvesgaspar and Simonizer --Leafnode 06:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There is nothing interesting here. --Karelj 19:53, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Please make a different entry for each nomination, if that is indeed the intention of the author. A little more care and preparation might result better than a flood of substandard alternatives. Alvesgaspar 22:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thaks --libertad0 23:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info - Note the geometrically corrected picture at right (not a candidadte) - Alvesgaspar 11:49, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thak's Alvergaspar, Now I can undestand the enderezar process / ==> | --libertad0 15:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day)Simonizer 09:10, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Stella Artois Dielectric.jpg, not featured[edit]

Labeled glass using costume written mental ray shader, demonstrating the use of Dielectric Shaders.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Mehran Moghtadai uploaded by Arad - nominated by Arad --Arad 17:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Arad 17:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A nice one :) from your user page I guess it's from your friend. This is just me, but couldn't he make the logos smaller and opaque ?? I think this would be much closer to the real model stella glasses ;). Benh 19:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I'm not sure this image is compatible with Commons policy, as it contains a trademarked/copyrighted logo in a context where it is not an incidental part of the image. That makes it non-free, AFAIK. --Yummifruitbat 21:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
    • I would say the logo is incidental, since it is not even completely visible.--Eloquence 02:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • When I say "incidental", I mean that the logo doesn't add any useful information to the image that couldn't have been provided by some other means - it's not a photo of actual Stella glasses; it's not a photo that happens to contain a Stella logo because it's part of a scene; it's a piece of art which, fairly gratuitously, incorporates a trademarked logo where some other form of marking or graphics would have served exactly the same purpose. That seems to me to make it a derivative work and therefore non-free. --Yummifruitbat 03:35, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I don't know much about copyright/free stuffs, but I think that the logos can be arranged to be seen in part so there's not violation of copyright (and so the image can be freed) and anyone familiar with the brand can guess it's "Stella Artois". That's already the case for the lying glass, but maybe we can see too much on the standing one. Benh 06:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Sorry, but the picture just doesn't have any esthetic value as far as I'm concerned. The glasses aren't centered and the colour of the liquid clashes with the background. Anrie 19:56, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bad lighting, lo-res --Leafnode 06:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose If nothing else, there are problem with picture licence. --Karelj 19:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A definite violation of Stella Artois's copyright in their logo. It's not just incidental, either: the creater has spent some considerable effort making an exact copy of their copyright work. A substantial part of the copyright work (ie the logo) has been taken; it doesn't matter that it's quite small in the resulting image. --MichaelMaggs 21:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm copying here my comment from wikipedia for the same nomination “I checked Fair use and it might be possible that in this case, the picture doesn't violate copyrights. Although the material copied is clearly a copyrighted one, we can safely assume there is no commercial intention behind the picture. The goal of author was probably to make a realistic rendering of a glass of beer, and he had to use a realistic logo to do so. He arranged the scene so only parts of logos are in sight (but maybe more than one third the logo is too much). Also, I think this may only benefit to the brand.”. I'm not very sure, but so far, there's nothing so sure about the opposite neither. The question is how much part of the logo being in sight would be acceptable ? Benh 16:36, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day)Simonizer 09:11, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Potsdam Park bw amk.jpg, featured[edit]

#1Winter view of a park in Potsdam  #2Edit by Kulshrax 
#3Edit by Trialsanderrors  #4Edit by Trialsanderrors 
#5Edit by Thermos

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by AngMoKio --AngMoKio 10:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A melancholic winter view of a park in Potsdam (near Berlin) --AngMoKio 10:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A calm place for a winter walk.. --Eirissa 12:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Everyone loves non-trampled snow, but the picture is noisy, ruining the effect. Kulshrax 15:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I like this picture a lot, pitty about the noise. What about croping most part of the snow in the foreground? - Alvesgaspar 17:38, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - don't care for b/w - MPF 23:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment the fact you don't care about b/w doesn't make any b/w picture less good. And (at least to me and apparently to others) this picture is good. I don't mean to be "harsh" or something but why not keeping from voting a FP candidate when you know from start you won't like the subject because of your tastes and not the qualities of the picture itself, which is what is being judged here ? Benh 11:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Like it a lot, nice composition, and noise isn't such a big issue here I believe. Benh 11:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- BW, no wow factor, not FP quality. Lycaon 16:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent composition, very evocative, noise problems not overhwelming. ~ trialsanderrors 00:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This still needs to be switched to greyscale, there is no reason to keep this in RGB mode. ~ trialsanderrors 00:47, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A colour version wouldn't have the same impact. --Tony Wills 11:40, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 5 support, 2 oppose, 2 neutral => featured. Simonizer 06:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Edit #2, not featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Added new retouched version. Kulshrax 01:35, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose You killed the whole foregound. ~ trialsanderrors 02:16, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - don't care for b/w - MPF 23:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- BW, no wow factor, not FP quality. Lycaon 16:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 0 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Edit #3[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Noise reduced, contrast enhanced with curves; I also switched the color mode to greyscale, which reduces the file size. ~ trialsanderrors 04:36, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - don't care for b/w - MPF 23:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- BW, no wow factor, not FP quality. Lycaon 16:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think it's the closest to version 1 which I already support. As has been said, very nice mood. Benh 11:35, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Edit #4, not featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info taking up Alvesgaspars idea i created a cropped version of the original. It is not noise reduced as i dont have a good method for it. --AngMoKio 09:23, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Beautiful. I'll wait for someone of good will to apply the noise reduction. Alvesgaspar 09:27, 9 April 2007 (UTC) Moved my vote to next version Alvesgaspar 19:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - don't care for b/w - MPF 23:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Foreground is part of the composition. ~ trialsanderrors 00:00, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- BW, no wow factor, not FP quality. Lycaon 16:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree with Trialsanderrors. Benh 11:35, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 0 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:10, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Edit #5[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice mood and composition. This is as #4 but with conservative noise reduction applied (I also tried some additional sharpening, but in my opinion it spoiled the mood of the image and created some additional halos) --Thermos 10:19, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Per above Alvesgaspar 11:49, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - don't care for b/w. Is there a colour original? - MPF 23:26, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Foreground is part of the compostion. ~ trialsanderrors 00:01, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- BW, no wow factor, not FP quality. Lycaon 16:05, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree with Trialsanderrors. Benh 11:35, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Black and white photos are excellent in conveying light contrasts, which works well with the naked trees and the snow here. The empty bench and the "constructedness" of the dome works very well together to add to that "cold" feeling. Anrie 11:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC) (Liked the previous edits too, btw.)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A colour version wouldn't have the same impact. --Tony Wills 11:40, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 06:42, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Agawa River, Ontario.jpg, not featured[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dustin M. Ramsey - uploaded by Hugo.arg - nominated by Hugo.arg
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hugo.arg 19:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's a river, a nice river even, but it's oversharpened (see conifer left top) and yet still unfocussed. Lycaon 20:10, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice picture, maybe a Quality Image. Lacks the touch of magic (and it is tilted) - Alvesgaspar 20:57, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 21:49, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice pic, but colours a bit over-saturated - MPF 23:30, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, nice landscape. =) - 84.250.52.148 16:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC) please log on to vote. Lycaon 17:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose tilt and oversaturated. --Digon3 19:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't think it is tilted at all, refer to the man made object half way up on the right side, and the average direction of the conifers, I hope people aren't using the bank of the river in the far distance as their reference - that is not a horizon! :-) --Tony Wills 09:58, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 06:45, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Mandelbrot zoomed.png, not featured[edit]

Mandelbrot fractal, zoomed.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Wj32 - uploaded by Wj32 - nominated by Wj32 --wj32 talk | contribs 06:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info again, THE ABOVE DISPLAYED IMAGE IS ONLY A THUMBNAIL. The actual image is Image:Mandelbrot zoomed.png. I've made a thumbnail version because the limit for MediaWiki generating a preview is 12mpx. My image is 27mpx. --wj32 talk | contribs 06:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --wj32 talk | contribs 06:30, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Another fractal...? --Karelj 20:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment If you're talking about my previous nomination, I "withdrew" that one. If your oppose is purely based on mine being a fractal, please don't oppose. Why not say "Another photograph...?" to all of the other nominations? --wj32 talk | contribs 23:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info discussion about "another fractal/photo/somethings" can be seen at Commons talk:Featured picture candidates#People keep on saying "Another XYZ...". --che 10:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Not because it is another fractal, their variety is infinite! But I don't like the colour pallet, seems a little kitschy to me. Alvesgaspar 16:58, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Could you suggest other colours so maybe I could do another render? --wj32 talk | contribs 00:33, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - That is the main issue here isn't it? If we look at this examples, we will note that the colours in use are much more discrete, specially when the full Mandelbort set (or one of its smaller replicas, like in your picture) is depicted. For me, the best solution is to use several grades of a reduced set of colours and avoid sharp contrasts, except at the border of the set itself. That is the solution adopted in most of the more beatiful pictures Alvesgaspar 09:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 06:47, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Machadograve.jpg, not featured[edit]

Antonio Machado's grave at Collioure cemetery in France

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Pedroserafin - nominated by --80.39.180.97 10:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC) )
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose messy composition, noisy and blurred --Jacopo 11:03, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose boring composition, not FP quality --Simonizer 11:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It isn't my best picture. I wouldn't have proposed. --Pedroserafin 12:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as above --Leafnode 06:05, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose why??? --Karelj 20:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 0 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 06:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Highcliffe Castle.jpg, not featured[edit]

A sunset in a beach near Highcliffe Castle A sunset in a beach near Highcliffe Castle

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Pedroserafin - Uploaded by --Pedroserafin 12:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)- nominated by --Pedroserafin 12:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ...quoting from the guidelines: "At least 2 million pixels (e.g. 2000 x 1000) seems reasonable right now.". Lycaon 13:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Now, It's more than 2 million pixels, isn't it?--Pedroserafin 16:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)]]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sky and water overexposed. Lots of noise in the darker parts. Not FP. Lycaon 18:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nothing interesting in this picture, dark parts too dark, pinkish colors, overexposed sky, water --Leafnode 06:01, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Could be better. --Arad 01:46, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 06:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Arco di Costantino (particolare).jpg, not featured[edit]

Particolare dell'attico con due episodi delle imprese dell'imperatore Marco Aurelio - (Roma) Italy

result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 06:49, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Venezuela Division Politica Territorial.svg, not featured[edit]

SVG transformation from Image:Venezuela politica copy.png

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by libertad0 - uploaded by libertad0 - nominated by libertad0 --libertad0 21:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --libertad0 21:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - As far as I remember Venezuela is not an island or a baloon floating in the air! All maps should be inserted in their proper geographic context, in this case, the northern part of South America and the Caribbean Sea. Alvesgaspar 23:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Please, show me a sample, thax --libertad0 23:08, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info - Here is a simple example: Ve-map.png Alvesgaspar 23:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Not sure what Alvesgaspar's complaint is about (that it isn't like the dragefestival pic above??), but I'm rather uneasy about the "Zona en Reclamación" cut out of Guyana - is the map trying to make a political (or even military?) statement? It is not explained on the image description. Some of the lettering (islands, Dto. Capital, etc.) is also too small to read easily in typical wikipedia page thumbnail size (it should be readable together with the article text without having to open the image separately). - MPF 22:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info - The object of my complaint is now fixed. The map of Venezuela was "floating" in a transparente background, i.e., not inserted in its geographical context. - Alvesgaspar 11:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Pictogram voting info.svg InfoIt is a map about the states of Venezuela or territorial political division. The zone in claim not yet knows if it belongs to Guyana or Venezuela, for that reason usually it is placed of that way --libertad0 23:10, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I have consulted several world atlas, including the Times Atlas of the World, and in none of them there is any mention to the claimed territory, or any variation from the internationally accepted borders between Venezuela and Guyana. The statement that "the zone not yet knows if it belongs to Guyana or Venezuela" is extraordinary (note that the territory of Guyana would be reduced to less than one third if the disput were resolved in Venezuela favour). Commons is not the right place for this kind of polytical campaign. Alvesgaspar 08:09, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This kind of map you will only find in Venezuela. The "Zona en Reclamación" is also know as Essequibo region. An arbitration in they year 1899 awarded the territory to the former colony of British Guayana. Since this time there is a dispute between Guyana and Venezuela, because Venezuela feels itself treated unfairly. You have to know that this region is high in mineral and natural resources. In the beginning of the eighties, both sides agreed that the matter should be solved by the United Nations. The issue is now in the hands of the Secretary General, who has the task to find a solution. Until the UN hasnt find one, the territory belongs to Guyana. --Simonizer 10:06, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Why normal map should be in this category? --Karelj 16:54, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes, not much 'wow', it would probably go well in Quality images candidates --Tony Wills 12:09, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 06:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:William-Adolphe Bouguereau (1825-1905) - Nymphs and Satyr (1873).jpg, not featured[edit]

William-Adolphe Bouguereau (1825-1905) - Nymphs and Satyr (1873).jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by William-Adolphe Bouguereau, uploaded by Thebrid and nominated by Fernando S. Aldado 01:59, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - low resolution - MPF 09:58, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto low resolution. -- Ram-Man 14:56, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Am I seeing the same image? 1488 × 2125 pixel is not low resolution! --Arad 17:38, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - It's pretty nice --Arad 17:38, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - resolution is not too low, but the quality is. heavy compression artifacts. Huskyoog.jpg Husky (talk to me) 00:24, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:06, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Tawny Frogmouth 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by, uploaded by, nominated by --Benjamint444 03:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This was a completely wild bird, it's probably never seen a person before and yet it let me walk right up to it. alot of animals seem to have this lack of survival instict. Frogmouths haven't had any any natural predators for quite a few thousand years so I guess it has an excuse --Benjamint444 03:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - maybe it realised you weren't a predator, and therefore not a threat to its survival ;-) MPF 10:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - This picture looks very neat. Just the way it was taken...I say yes! Happyme22 21:23, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Leafnode 18:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice image, but the black background just doesn't seem right, it ressembles in no way with a bird's natural habitat. The use of flash is unnatural for this kind of shots, moreover it reflects in the bird's eye. Taking account the shooting distance it looks very much like a ZOO pic or a photo of a tamed animal.

Why is the background that black by the way? Night time shot? --Atoma 13:40, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - yes, night shot. The species is nocturnal, and the metadata records the photo as taken at 01:17 hours - MPF 22:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose looks unnatural --Simonizer 09:14, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Black background at night looks natural to me :-) --Tony Wills 10:41, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Given the (I guess) conditions it probably couldn't have been done another way, but the flash makes the subject looks flat. Also, colours are either undersaturated or too cold to me. Benh 11:39, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose very difficult subject, but the picture doesn't look really nice and it's not worth being between the best ones Alessio Damato 15:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 14:06, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Packa 12:22, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very flat lighting because of flash near optical axis. It would be worth purchasing an angle arm so that the flash can be held well way from the lens in shots like this. --MichaelMaggs 13:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Flat lighting, boring composition, I'd wish to see more of the bird's body. Still, I admit that it is a difficult subject! --Siebengang 15:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Belmonte77 22:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tony Wills 07:24, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Anrie 07:27, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 9 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:08, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Phutthamonthon Buddha.JPG, not featured[edit]

Buddhist priest parade in Thailand

Buddhist priest parade in Thailand at Phutthamonthon.Nakonphatom,Thailand 2006.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Teva - uploaded by Teva - nominated by Tevaprapas (talk) --Teva 20:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support beg for participate in the activity too ^_^--Tevaprapas 20:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - very nice pic, but rather small. Is there a larger version available? - MPF 23:59, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Suffering from excessive noise and JPEG compression artifacts. -Kulshrax 18:19, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lestat 20:02, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -Hugo.arg 08:46, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 14:13, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much post-processing has created horrible effects on the backs of the monks and around the edges of the robes.--MichaelMaggs 21:39, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose oversharpened, tons of JPEG artifacts --Leafnode 06:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- agree with the above. Anrie 08:46, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Image format should be in JPEG but with higher quality settings. Converting to GIF doesn't help improving image quality problem. -- Lerdsuwa 15:04, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree with the above. --Digon3 21:58, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 2 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 07:11, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Cologne cathedral at dusk.jpg, not featured[edit]

Cologne cathedral at dusk

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Yoceto - uploaded by MathKnight - nominated by Tomer T --Tomer T 09:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomer T 09:08, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose exactly the right time of the day, but the building doesn't fit in the picture. I'm afraid you need a wide angle lens for this kind of monuments. --che 10:09, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Blurry, noisy, full of artifacts. I don't like the angle either. Alvesgaspar 11:38, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Nice!!! but blurry and noisy. --Pedroserafin 15:01, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - composition. Need to find an angle which cuts out that nasty portakabin-like building at the right, and also to wait until the scaffolding is removed ;-) - MPF 22:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - as MPF --Karelj 16:43, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ack MPF --Leafnode 07:23, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:13, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Crane machine.svg, not featured[edit]

Crane mecanic machine

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I uploaded the spanish and english description Image SVG --libertad0 23:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Maybe with a lot of careful work can reach FP status. Like it is seems only a sketch. Note, for example, the lines used to draw the crane's arm. Or the crudeness of the human figure. As for the labels, this is not for sure the correct type of font.Alvesgaspar 07:45, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Why should be this picture in the group of candidates? --Karelj 17:00, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- ack Karelj Lycaon 11:43, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting question.svg Question I don't know about this particular picture, but is there something wrong about SVG drawings or what? --che 16:13, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Another case of not enough 'wow' to 'woo' us ;-), it might go better in Quality images candidates --Tony Wills 12:13, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - mere sketch, but good base to work something out --Leafnode 07:25, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:14, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:New Jersey Sunset.jpg, not featured[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Created, uploaded, and nominated by Uria Ashkenazy --Uria a 05:08, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uria a 05:08, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Not acceptable, it is just not possible to compress a 7400 x 2500 photo into 1.4 Mb without serious quality degrading. Please try again with the original photo, if there is one. Alvesgaspar 10:19, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For a 7400 x 2500 photo it should be at least 5MB. --Digon3 17:37, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info You are right. JPG settings were wrong. I uploaded a new version and it is now 8.5 MB.
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment could someone crop the frame? Lycaon 11:42, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Frame Removed --Uria a 15:40, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Did it actually look exactly like that, or is it just the over-exposure of the red channel that has produced that flame like effect? --Tony Wills 11:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sunset like many --Leafnode 07:26, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Heavy artifacts in the sky. Looks like the original image was artificially enlarged. Alvesgaspar 09:52, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 7th day) Simonizer 07:18, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:NGC_1672_HST.jpg, featured[edit]

Hubble’s View of Barred Spiral Galaxy NGC 1672

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by HST - uploaded by Winiar - nominated by Winiar --Winiar 19:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Winiar 19:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too small - please read the guidelines. Lycaon 20:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - hi-res version from NASA website uploaded on top, now 1.41 MB - MPF 22:07, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - still too small. There are much better and higher res images available from Hubble... Lycaon 12:55, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
        • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - bigger version can be found here but it is about 25 MB (res. 5302 X 3805 px) - Winiar 16:48, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - MPF 22:07, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MichaelMaggs 06:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Benh 11:39, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 14:20, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Belmonte77 22:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Leafnode 06:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T 09:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer 07:16, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Brandenburgertor SN.jpg, not featured[edit]

Brandenburgertor

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ger1axg - uploaded by Ger1axg - nominated by Ger1axg
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose excellent light, but the cron is too tight; also resolution is quite low --che 22:23, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - too small (only 108 KB!) - MPF 22:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too small and too tight of a crop, otherwise I like it --Digon3 22:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don´t think that small size iz reason for non voting the picture --Karelj 14:23, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
There are guidelines which have to be fulfilled. ---donald- 15:54, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment :-) No! they are just guidelines, not absolutes. --Tony Wills 12:09, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ---donald- 15:54, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is a pity that the image is so small. Perhaps a larger image could be provided? --Thermos 11:12, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose tight crop, low res. But I like this shot - upload larger one :-) --Leafnode 06:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 15:58, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:MSM sunset 02.JPG, featured[edit]

Mont Saint-Michel in Normandy, France at night

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Benh - uploaded by Benh - nominated by Digon3 --Digon3 22:58, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Digon3 22:58, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sunset? Its night on this picture. Composition is not FP-worthy, imo --Simonizer 09:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes, maybe "MSM_twilight_02.jpg" would have been more appropriate, but I didn't know about that word until a few weeks ago :) Benh 11:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's pretty good --Arad 13:36, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ---donald- 16:02, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful photo; love the composition. Fg2 01:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice, the composition is net excellent, but it is “FP-worthy” :) --Packa 13:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to Simonizer on composition - MPF 14:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Apart from the naming it is great. --AM 21:43, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful! --Spundun 22:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Pedroserafin 07:18, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Been there, that's totally cool. --Atoma 19:04, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer 15:59, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Yellow Admiral (Vanessa itea).jpg, not featured[edit]

Butterfly on my little fingeralternative

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tony Wills - uploaded by Tony Wills - nominated by Tony Wills --Tony Wills 10:58, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tony Wills 10:58, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Pictogram voting info.svg Info Beauty and the beast - This rather small butterfly is perched on the base of my little finger, so that hairy bit is the back of my left hand :-) --Tony Wills 11:16, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support; Pictogram voting question.svg Question which is the beauty, and which is the beast?? ;-) - MPF 14:13, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 14:29, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Benjamint444 03:42, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but I feel the hand detracts from what otherwise would be a good nature shot --MichaelMaggs 14:51, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I am part of nature too ;-) --Tony Wills 22:54, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distracting background, the hand/arm more hurts than helps. --Siebengang 15:27, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but the hand distracts too much for me. Anrie 20:11, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral, I actually prefer the first to the second, but I still just can't bring myself to support it as a feautured picture. Sorry. Anrie 18:08, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose distracting hands --Leafnode 06:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer 16:00, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Ok, new rotated and closer cropped version --Tony Wills 08:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tony Wills 12:42, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This would easily be considered a quality image, but I don't think it is quite a FP. It doesn't look great blown up to large print size magnifications, but that's probably not a reasonable thing to do considering the subject. At normal sizes it looks pretty good, but I think the composition with the finger is a little distracting. Its a close call though. -- Ram-Man 19:21, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes it already made QI :). It's a macro shot, taken as close as possible to the butterfly, the camera lens is balanced on the other end of my little finger to minimise movement during the 1/15sec exposure. Without the hand I'd never have gotten a shot this close and this detailed (about 10x actual size when viewed on 17" screen at 100% mag.). --Tony Wills 23:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Wasp and spider 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Wasp dragging spider

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tony Wills - uploaded by Tony Wills - nominated by Tony Wills --Tony Wills 11:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tony Wills 11:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Pictogram voting info.svg Info The wasp has just paralysed the spider and is dragging it rapidly to its nest where the wasp will lay eggs on it so they will have fresh meat when they hatch :-( --Tony Wills 11:08, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Great action pic! I just find the focus on the Pompilid a bit lacking. I'ld also appreciate some sort of id on the spider. Lycaon 13:04, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Pictogram voting info.svg Info My best guess for the spider is some type of Amphinectidae, probably Paramamoea. --Tony Wills 04:44, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to Lycaon; some rather bad colour fringing at the left of the pic on the wasp and on the frame where it is standing - MPF 14:10, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - It is just fair to invoke the "mitigating reasons" for the small size and technical flaws, because this is a superb catch. The result is a "neutral vote", which takes nothing away from the quality and usefulness of the picture. Alvesgaspar 23:01, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Winiar 10:36, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj 14:30, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love this scenery and think, that this is a really special shot. --norro 21:38, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sharp,especially according to circumstances,beautiful perspective,impressive picture. User:Vassil 17 April 2007
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral impressive shot, but as Alvesgaspar - many technical flaws, but this is macro, so neutral --Leafnode 06:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As Vassil say, beautiful according to circumstances Nino Barbieri 15:55, 21 April 2007 (UTC)