Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/December 2008

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:Jovan Kaneo.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Nov 2008 at 13:30:53
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Vanjagenije - uploaded by Ori~ - nominated by Tseno Maximov
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportTseno Maximov (talk) 13:30, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Georgez (talk) 14:26, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Rather flat, and the pink umbrella distracts. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 23:05, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral is it me, or it is even so slightly out of focus ? --JY Rehby (talk) 02:38, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose: not geocoded, {{information}} is not used, {{self}} does not mention the author (who is different form the uploader). --Kjetil_r 00:40, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Yeah, some parts of the picture are blurry, it's not only you ;-) But I must admire the composition. --Aktron (talk) 15:15, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Now, it is geocoded, I've added {{information}} and name in {{self}} Vanjagenije (talk) 01:53, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The geocoding can't be correct: Compare the position in Google Maps with the background in the photo, where is the lake/sea in the map? --Kjetil_r 13:59, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 2 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 12:14, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Parthenocissus quinquefolia on wall, November 1, 2008.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Nov 2008 at 00:56:04
Virginia Creeper berries

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Created and uploaded by Ragesoss - nominated by Ram-Man 00:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think this is simple, beautiful, and a little different. As a bonus, it nicely illustrates its Wikipedia article. -- Ram-Man 00:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per previous voter. Lighting and color palette are very expressive. --JY Rehby (talk) 02:32, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportTseno Maximov (talk) 09:39, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I don't like the composition. Was the image rotated? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:28, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
    • No, it was not rotated.--ragesoss (talk) 20:56, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't think this is FP material. --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 01:24, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Somehow i like it --Richard Bartz (talk) 12:24, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the composition, colors are nice. --Aktron (talk) 15:14, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Then why the hell are you opposing? :D diego_pmc (talk) 18:52, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Because I have copied bad teplate. You should have noticed on my talk page, I barely found this error. This is first time when I've found I've done such a blunder. --Aktron (talk) 12:14, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - pretty okay I guess. diego_pmc (talk) 18:52, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition. --Karelj (talk) 22:04, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lošmi (talk) 20:46, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quality is rather ok but it misses the magic to become FP. Lycaon (talk) 17:03, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition and backround. --Herrick (talk) 18:49, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
result: 6 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 12:15, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Bödele Bregenzerwald Panorama.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Nov 2008 at 12:58:09
Fog border at Bödele

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- Böhringer (talk) 12:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Böhringer (talk) 12:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, lens flare (even *two*) equals obvious non-FP, in my eyes. --Aqwis (talk) 13:15, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great panorama. --Kosiarz-PL 14:02, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That is one great panorama. --Mr. Mario (talk) 15:26, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. I like it. – Tseno Maximov (talk) 16:04, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Georgez (talk) 16:25, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The lens flares ruin it for me. Es tut mir leid. --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 17:05, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Pictogram voting info.svg Info 've Removed the sensor spots, there were even 4! --Böhringer (talk) 19:36, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice panorama. --Jagro (talk) 20:59, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support no question. nice work --Simonizer (talk) 21:04, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I don't like the symmetry of the composition -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:31, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Richard Bartz (talk) 12:58, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support weakly, great panorama, sharpness, colors, rendition of atmosphere are great. Lens flare a little too present, unfortunately. --JY Rehby (talk) 17:51, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support My first reaction to this image was "wow". Calandrella (talk) 21:26, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lestat (talk) 22:02, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 22:03, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kjetil_r 00:36, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportJukoFF (talk) 05:12, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Wisnia6522 (talk) 10:46, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Martin Kozák (talk) 16:21, 24 November 2008 (UTC) — Good composition, good moment, good colors, good work.
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It's super ! but I think there's too much sky. Benh (talk) 20:56, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pom² (talk) 11:52, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support   ■ MMXXtalk  05:16, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support /Daniel78 (talk) 21:15, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Awesome! - Man On Mission (talk) 08:16, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great panorama, really interesting. --MonaLuna (talk) 23:51, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
result: 21 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral => featured. Pom² (talk) 12:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Struthio camelus (Kunene).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Nov 2008 at 13:33:08
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Lycaon (talk) 13:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mind the dip! Picture taken while driving (don't tell). -- Lycaon (talk) 13:33, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Funny but nothing for higher encyclopedic use. --Herrick (talk) 15:56, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A featured picture doesn't need to be encyclopedic. It just needs to fall within the scope. Diti (talk to the penguin) 17:58, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Beats any zoo picture though ;-) Lycaon (talk) 23:17, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Back side of the ostrich and road in bad composition. --Jagro (talk) 17:23, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think this picture's good! --Mr. Mario (talk) 23:59, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support One of my favorite images -- the first time I saw this not only did I laugh but I also said "Wow". (I so support this that I have to sit on my hands to not log in from some of the other ips I have access to and vote....) -- carol (talk) 06:33, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Upsampled. Flying Freddy (talk) 06:53, 22 November 2008 (UTC) removed inappropriate joke :-(. Lycaon (talk) 16:48, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • If you look at the upload log, you will find that Lycaon just uploaded the original version, not an upsampled version. --Digon3 talk 15:09, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
    • I think he was making a joke :) Noodle snacks (talk) 22:21, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 4 given cirumstances and under strictly abidance 4 traffic regulations it's a great shot. --Richard Bartz (talk) 12:31, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Might be reframed later if necessary ; composition is interesting, the neck falls exactly between 2 road signs. Maybe a little bit too much road on the right hand side, but then the ostrich would be too centered... oh well, i think it's very good for a picture taken while drivin of a running ostrich. --JY Rehby (talk) 17:48, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Too bad composition for my taste. Manuel R. (talk) 20:53, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Maybe not the best quality, but the feeling is good. Calandrella (talk) 21:24, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Simonizer (talk) 22:36, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is unusual and perhaps comical, but I don't think it meets the compositional or quality requirements. Noodle snacks (talk) 22:41, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad composition, and sorta dull, IMO. diego_pmc (talk) 12:14, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As other opponents. --Karelj (talk) 22:06, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too grey, no sky... >>> composition should be better. --Aktron (talk) 15:13, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
    • I challenge you to do better in a split second while driving a car with one hand and shooting pictures with the other ;-). Lycaon (talk) 16:48, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose overcropped.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 15:50, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
    • Nonsense. Only about 250px cropped from the bottom to remove part of he car's bonnet. Lycaon (talk) 16:48, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
      • Well and thats a problem. It si done from unforable place, so it cant be better.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 12:11, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose wrong side --Mbdortmund (talk) 22:17, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
    • Luckily ;-). Lycaon (talk) 22:39, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
result: 7 support, 9 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 12:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Blue Angels NAS Jacksonville Air Show 2452.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Nov 2008 at 16:02:23
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, and nominated by Digon3 --Digon3 talk 16:02, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Digon3 talk 16:02, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportTseno Maximov (talk) 16:18, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A perfect shot. Diti (talk to the penguin) 14:33, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support detailed in every respect, down to the bubble crewman, and the damage on the port wingtip. Ultra7 (talk) 17:34, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Albertus teolog (talk) 18:00, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 22:07, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support not bad.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 15:46, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great shot --Pom² (talk) 11:51, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A bit vignetting visible though. /Daniel78 (talk) 21:18, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice one - Man On Mission (talk) 07:49, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Pom² (talk) 12:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Tu-95MS and F-15C.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Nov 2008 at 18:54:23
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by USAF - uploaded by Nova13 - nominated by Tseno Maximov
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportTseno Maximov (talk) 18:54, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Compression artifacts and posterized sky. /Daniel78 (talk) 23:34, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Avala (talk) 00:01, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The quality is very bad, heavily compressed. --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 01:23, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special. Diti (talk to the penguin) 09:37, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 21:05, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The original NORAD photo is here, in case somebody wants to upload a version without artifacts. --Kjetil_r 00:13, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ouch, bad quality. Should've been FPX'ed Lycaon (talk) 17:14, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportI like it! --Jhz94 (talk) 00:01, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much grain, too much compression. I am sorry. --Aktron (talk) 14:16, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bad quality --Mbdortmund (talk) 22:16, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Kjetil_r, original is much better quality. --Specious (talk) 23:06, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 12:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Air conditioning unit-en.svg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2008 at 02:08:01
Air conditioning unit.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Pbroks13 - uploaded by Pbroks13 - nominated by Pbroks13 -- Pbroks13 (talk) 02:08, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pbroks13 (talk) 02:08, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very well done. Diti (talk to the penguin) 09:13, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as is ; first, the "expansion valve" tag is not pointing to the proper item. Furthermore, it might be useful to indicate the direction of travel for the cooling fluid. --JY Rehby (talk) 17:43, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting question.svg QuestionI'm sorry, but where should it be pointing then? Is that not the expansion valve? Pbroks13 (talk) 02:08, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting info.svg Info JY Rehby (talk) adjusts his spectacles on his nose and checks. As of now, it's pointing to a purple, horizontal rod linking the blower's motor to the fan on the "hot" side. This would be called the "fan axle". The "expansion valve", per se, is currently not shown. It ought to be in the bottom right corner of the unit, approx. where the inner wall of the appliance is set, and it should be installed on the tubing between the "hot" and "cold" sides. After a quick search, I found this diagram [1] that should help you locate the device. The "red" and "blue" sides have the same meaning in both your and their diagram. Hoping this helps!--JY Rehby (talk) 16:51, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
        • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Okay, what do you think about that? Pbroks13 (talk) 02:24, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good compromise between smplicity and level of detail. --JY Rehby (talk) 03:03, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well done! --norro 17:12, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

November 2008 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 19:46, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Pom² (talk) 12:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Acer platanoides in autumn colors.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2008 at 08:09:44
Acer platanoides in autumn colors

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Kosiarz-PL - uploaded by Kosiarz-PL - nominated by Kosiarz-PL -- Kosiarz-PL 08:09, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kosiarz-PL 08:09, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is overexposed I am afraid. Both the red and blue channels are badly clipped. Also, it is not that sharp, given the rather small image size. I would suggest using a tripod for a 1/60 second exposure. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 08:22, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Overall impression is neat but it's 2 blurry --Richard Bartz (talk) 12:02, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per previous voter. A nice picture of an automn tree, not sharp enough though for FP, i think. --JY Rehby (talk) 17:39, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It is not overexposed and trees are very oftern blurry like this one. I have no reason to oppose. --Aktron (talk) 15:12, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not sharp, bad compostition.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 15:44, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 12:23, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:StAugustinesächsischeWand.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2008 at 11:27:01
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Agnete - uploaded by Agnete - nominated by Tseno Maximov
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportTseno Maximov (talk) 11:27, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient quality such as grain/noise & contrast. --Richard Bartz (talk) 12:06, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per previous voter --JY Rehby (talk) 17:34, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Grain, and the wall is lacking detail - problem should be the lighting. --Aktron (talk) 15:24, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose yeah, grain.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 15:42, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose grain and lacking detail --SuperJew (talk) 14:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 5 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured (rule of the 5th day). Benh (talk) 18:42, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Bonde Sta Tereza01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Dec 2008 at 11:40:05
Carioca Aqueduct in Rio de Janeiro

Symbol support vote.svg Support – Nice panorama --Jagro (talk) 22:16, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Can you geocode it? --Kjetil_r 00:03, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
I put the coordinate on the page, but I don`t know if that`s exactly what you meant. Feel free to change the syntax of the coordinate. I am very unexperienced with that. -- 84.187.58.99 13:28, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Quite ok for a start. I changed it to the camera position (and I use a different geocoding template) -- Klaus with K (talk) 14:00, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unfortunate quality. Lycaon (talk) 08:12, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I am not sure about the colors and the clouds are not looking good also (however, these are quite hard to shoot). --Aktron (talk) 15:27, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose--Georgez (talk) 15:14, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured (rule of the 5th day). Benh (talk) 18:43, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Berlín, Mitte, socha na mostě Schloßbrücke.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Dec 2008 at 17:00:15
Athena protects the young hero (Der unter dem Schutze Pallas Athenes zum Kampf ausfallende Krieger) by Gustav Blaeser 1854

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Aktron - uploaded by Aktron - nominated by Aktron -- Aktron (talk) 17:00, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Aktron (talk) 17:00, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition. Very unfortunate POV. Lycaon (talk) 17:10, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition and viewpoint --Richard Bartz (talk) 17:26, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too usual point of view (ya rly). Diti the penguin 00:01, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose--Georgez (talk) 15:14, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose very bad point of view. --JY Rehby (talk) 23:48, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
  • I like the composition, it's strong.

Sorry, you should try Commons:Quality images candidates first! --Beyond silence 01:26, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support point of view is interesting (even though different) and good quality --SuperJew (talk) 14:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC) too late Benh (talk) 18:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 5 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured (rule of the 5th day). Benh (talk) 18:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Rembrandt self portrait.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2008 at 01:00 (UTC)
Rembrandt self portrait.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Rembrandt - uploaded and nominated by Paris 16 (talk) 00:29, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Paris 16 (talk) 00:29, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looks like a scan from a book, dithering pattern is visible. /Daniel78 (talk) 21:09, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As Daniel78 --Lošmi (talk) 00:29, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not a good quality Vanjagenije (talk) 11:12, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured (rule of the 5th day). Benh (talk) 18:44, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Peggys Cove - NS - Leuchturm.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Dec 2008 at 06:08:44
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Taxiarchos228 - uploaded by Tohma - nominated by Mmxx --   ■ MMXXtalk  06:08, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --   ■ MMXXtalk  06:08, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition --Herrick (talk) 08:28, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Get closer, man. The lighthouse is a bit far for me. If the picture is used as a thumb like here, people would see some white place, not a lighthouse. --Aktron (talk) 14:14, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad composition (skyline at the middle —think about the rule of thirds!) and unwanted vignetting. Diti the penguin 20:54, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info might benefit from a tighter crop, then...--JY Rehby (talk) 05:26, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral This image is really not bad at all! I like it a lot. The lighthouse is rather distant indeed, but the landscape is very nice. And the centered skyline doesn't bother me: the rule of the thirds is not always the best solution. The balance between the sky and the rocks is very good here. The reason why I'm not supporting for FP, is that the lighthouse itself is partially overexposed... -- MJJR (talk) 21:54, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 opposes, 1 neutral => not featured (rule of the 5th day). Benh (talk) 18:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:MS Sonnenkönigin 01.JPG, withdrawn[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2008 at 21:00:02
MS Sonnenkönigin in Bregenz

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- Böhringer (talk) 21:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Böhringer (talk) 21:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too noisy. ISO 800 is way to high for an image that doesn't "run away" please use a tripod and longer exposure time next time. -- Gorgo (talk) 00:52, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ISO 800? The composition is awesome and it is looking really good... but this thing ruins it. I am sorry. --Aktron (talk) 11:02, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Iso 800 --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 15:59, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination ye have fairly but 800 is too high --Böhringer (talk) 21:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
result: withdrawn => not featured Lycaon (talk) 07:12, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Fisherman's mascot.jpg, withdrawn[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2008 at 07:31:30
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Lycaon (talk) 07:31, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lycaon (talk) 07:31, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think closer view with maybe a bit different angle would be much better. If this picture is displayed as a thumb the teddy bear would be very tiny. --Aktron (talk) 11:00, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing WOW, Bad composition --libertad0 ॐ (talk) 14:24, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great illustration for wild brown bear --Pom² (talk) 14:59, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dislike the centric composition --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 16:00, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow, closer view would be preferable. Anonymous101 talk 17:11, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Yep you're right: cute ≠ FP. :-). Lycaon (talk) 18:08, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
result: withdrawn => not featured Lycaon (talk) 07:13, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Calocera viscosa LC0123.jpg, Not Featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2008 at 12:13:20
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Yellow slagshorn fungus; created, uploaded & nominated by -- LC-de (talk) 12:13, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LC-de (talk) 12:13, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice. The mushrooms look a little bit flat and could have more grip (texture) and plasticity (lighting) 4 my taste --Richard Bartz (talk) 12:43, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
    • Thanks for your opinion. Actually the mushrooms have a smooth surface without any visible texture. Maybe I could show more plasticity by more direct lighting, but I like this dimmed light on the forest soil. Btw. Unlike the pic in the Makro-Forum it was a dry day. Normally they aren't as slimy as seen on the pic there. --LC-de (talk) 13:10, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the depth of field is not optimal, the top of the mushrooms is a bit blurred. I like the leaf at the left, so we can compare the mushrooms' size, but you should have chosen an aperture a little bit bigger. Diti (talk to the penguin) 14:32, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks ok to me --JY Rehby (talk) 17:37, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Focus is good, detail is good, composition is fine. --Aktron (talk) 15:25, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
    Ok, maybe I'm too demanding. ;) I changed my vote from neutral to support. Diti the penguin 23:59, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lošmi (talk) 20:45, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks really cool to me. --Albertgenii12 (User talk: Albertgenii12) Probable puppet]. Lycaon (talk) 09:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Unfocused foreground ruins it, in my opinion -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:05, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 22:02, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Alvesgaspar. Lycaon (talk) 11:22, 28 November 2008 (UTC)Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Lycaon (talk) 19:58, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Change after deadline --Pom² (talk) 08:55, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Alvesgaspar. --Mbdortmund (talk) 22:15, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Alvesgaspar. --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 23:36, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice --MonaLuna (talk) 23:33, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 08:55, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Calocera viscosa LC0123 edit.jpg, Not Featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2008 at 023:24:46
SHORT DESCRIPTION

result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 20:10, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Kraków - Wawel Cathedral 01.jpg, Not Featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2008 at 22:04:47
Wawel Cathedral

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Lestat -- Lestat (talk) 22:04, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lestat (talk) 22:04, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Albertus teolog (talk) 17:59, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Umnik (talk) 11:18, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I am not sure about the colors, but that's quite marginal and may not be a problem if we consider there people have different computer screens. --Aktron (talk) 15:11, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bad compostition--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 15:39, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Herrick (talk) 09:53, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose composition --MichaelMaggs (talk) 17:40, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This cathedral being, by itself, the result of additions over the years, it's not visually easy to read. It challenges the notions of symmetry, unity, homogeneity, that we might come to expect in architectural works. Thus, this picture (namely, its composition and point of view) is not optimal to get a good idea of the church. The building on the left appears stuck on the cathedral, although it actually isn't. The towers appear to be leaning slightly on the left, too. --JY Rehby (talk) 19:16, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ... and the crop is not optimal on the left side building, part of the edge outside the image. /Daniel78 (talk) 21:20, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose don't like the composition to much --SuperJew (talk) 14:18, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 20:10, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Fragonard, The Swing.jpg, Not Featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Dec 2008 at 23:20:43
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jean-Honoré Fragonard - uploaded, nominated by -- Paris 16 (talk) 23:20, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 23:20, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pom² (talk) 21:44, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:12, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice painting. How do you turn this on (talk) 01:01, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unfaithful reproduction. Lycaon (talk) 07:09, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting question.svg Question Again, could you be more specific? --Eusebius (talk) 16:28, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
    To many colour versions on the web. Needs a photograph together with a colour chart to identify correct colour temperature/balance. Lycaon (talk) 20:10, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
    OK. But you're assuming unfaithful reproduction, then? For any representation of a painting? --Eusebius (talk) 22:16, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
    Not any but many. I've seen colour calibration charts with photographs on commons (can't recall exactly where at the moment though). Chances may also be better for wikipedian self photographed works of art, but not the ones grabbed from the net (look e.g. at the upload history of this particular one). Mostly the grab-jobs don't even include an EXIF. Lycaon (talk) 22:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • I don't know for certain if the color renovation was accurate. I do know that a lot of information came with this LOC download and that the renovator of this image did the very best she could given the information that is there and had aged with the photograph. I also can tell you for certain that after my experience with the scans of old color prints that are being hosted here that I will in the future and given a chance always scan with a color card as similar to the color bars that exist on this old photograph.
  • Take a journey into a bookstore which sells books containing art prints and compare the same print in from two different publishers and see what you will see. Even the pros aren't. -- carol (talk) 04:03, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose until a known accurate representation can be uploaded. -- carol (talk) 04:08, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

result: 4 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 20:16, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

  • This vote unfortunately does not count. -- carol (talk) 21:18, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose until a known accurate representation can be uploaded. -- carol (talk) 04:08, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured -- carol 21:18, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Pelargonium Peltatum.JPG, Not Featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2008 at 16:07:59
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Silfiriel -- Silfiriel (talk) 16:07, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Silfiriel (talk) 16:07, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Strong CA on the edges, DOF suboptimal, not categorized and, oh yes, unnecessarily downsampled. Lycaon (talk) 16:13, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose 4 a fragile object like this the lighting & quality is 2 rough --Richard Bartz (talk) 18:01, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 20:18, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Another version[edit]

Pelargonium Peltatum.JPG

Image:Bone cross-section.svg, Not Featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2008 at 02:26:13
Bone cross-section

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Pbroks13 - uploaded by Pbroks13 - nominated by Pbroks13 -- Pbroks13 (talk) 02:26, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pbroks13 (talk) 02:26, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:59, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but i prefer a version number.--Econt (talk) 17:42, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - i'm not going to !vote, but isn't FP on commons about the beauty of the picture, and the FPs on wikipedia is the place for educational images like this? —Ceran (speak) 20:37, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too simple for FP. --Karelj (talk) 19:52, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Beyond silence 01:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very simple, nothing special, nothing WOW --libertad0 ॐ (talk) 17:31, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 20:18, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Admiral Vanessa atalanta rb.jpg, Not Featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2008 at 10:42:41
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded & nominated by --Richard Bartz (talk) 10:42, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Red Admiral (Vanessa atalanta)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Richard Bartz (talk) 10:42, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • endlich wieder einen R.B.Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 12:17, 28 November 2008 (UTC) (bitte 4 Sensorflecken entfernen - alle im der oberen Bildhälfte - blauer Bereich)
  • Check mark.svg Erledigt --Richard Bartz (talk) 13:30, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Not your best work. I don't like the composition, the lighting and the blurred eye. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 13:48, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lošmi (talk) 01:37, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This picture could and should be better to become a FP. --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 10:39, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- it could do with a crop, and the composition isn't the best either. diego_pmc (talk) 07:35, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 18:13, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

image:Mountet18.jpg, not featured[edit]

Grand Mountet Zinal

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Debugman - uploaded by Debugman - nominated by Debugman --Debugman (talk) 19:28, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Debugman (talk) 19:28, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dimensions of image, it is too cut from the top side. --Karelj (talk) 20:05, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Unfortunatelly I've not the photoshop skill to recreate the sky. I'll have to wait next summer to take such an impressive picture with more sky. --Debugman (talk) 19:28, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much compression artifact and CA --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 10:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Quality is good and the detail also. Yet Karelj is true. There should be more sky in the picture. --Aktron (talk) 11:08, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Georgez (talk) 19:53, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'm happy here. How do you turn this on (talk) 00:54, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Top crop and CA. Lycaon (talk) 09:02, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 2 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 10:42, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Weiße Seerose IMG 5489.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2008 at 17:54:29
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Hedwig Storch - nominated by D-Kuru -- D-Kuru (talk) 17:54, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- D-Kuru (talk) 17:54, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Image may should be renamed --D-Kuru (talk) 17:54, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --   ■ MMXXtalk  20:56, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aktron (talk) 11:08, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose white borders around petals --Pom² (talk) 21:50, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lighting is odd. How do you turn this on (talk) 00:55, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as per previous oppose and for oversaturated colors (Varcos (talk) 09:22, 9 December 2008 (UTC))
result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 10:41, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

File:McDonnell-Douglas F15 (modificata).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2008 at 11:07:37


  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Suetonius - uploaded by Suetonius - nominated by Suetonius --Suetonius (talk) 11:07, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Suetonius (talk) 11:07, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Image page says "Screenshot di Microsoft Flight Simulator 2004". Doesn't that mean "delete as a copyvio"? Lupo 11:38, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because image is too small Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Lycaon (talk) 11:43, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Uzungol panoramic2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2008 at 12:19:19
SHORT DESCRIPTION

Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because image is much too small Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Lycaon (talk) 15:50, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Affresco Villa Livia.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Dec 2008 at 16:51:20
SHORT DESCRIPTION

Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because it is too small Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

-- Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:08, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Eastern Gray Squirrel in Farmington, Connecticut 1, November 29, 2008.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2008 at 17:00:45
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Ragesoss - nominated by D-Kuru -- D-Kuru (talk) 17:00, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- D-Kuru (talk) 17:00, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 19:58, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lošmi (talk) 23:47, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very low DOF, only part of the head is in focus. Lycaon (talk) 08:35, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Lycaon --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 10:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--83.59.14.94 20:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC) --Tintero (talk) 20:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I have to agree with Lycaon. --Aktron (talk) 11:09, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Georgez (talk) 19:51, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's a very funny image! User: 84.222.229.170 19:58, 30 November 2008 (UTC) no anonymous voting, sorry. Lycaon (talk) 20:01, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 10:41, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:SantaAnaCave.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2008 at 12:27:42
Archaeological prospections at the cave of Santa Ana (Cáceres, Extremadura, Spain

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by mario modesto - uploaded by mario modesto - nominated by mario modesto -- mario modesto (talk) 12:27, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- mario modesto (talk) 12:27, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lošmi (talk) 23:48, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support diego_pmc (talk) 07:33, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wisnia6522 (talk) 08:23, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - While obviously quite a hard shot to have taken, I feel that it doesn't really show anything, it is just a shot of three people standing in a hole - not enough of interest to make it an FP. R-T-C Tim (talk) 14:57, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment there are 6 people in the photo, 3 well seen, obviously, and three relatively hidden. It shows the process of prospecting a cave, and the difficulties that it entails. Each person is in a different level, and that shows progressively the depth and the danger of falling down any stone. As well, each one has a different function in the chain extracting sediments. That who is next to the ladder controls the up&down big buckets with the crane (not seen in the photo), the other who is in the saft is extracting the sediments; the rest only help extracting them with small buckets. The cave is circle and the main 3 people form a triangle inside it. Well, that's my explanation. mario modesto
result: 4 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 10:40, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:De fem søstre i Århus.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2008 at 10:36:22
Århus havn, Final version - Current nomination

Dust spots? It is birds or tell me were the spots are. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 11:59, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Perspective corrected. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 13:22, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
I count six dust spots in the old version and three in the new one. They are all located in the upper right corner. The new version is also in need of some level tweaking. --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 14:27, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks - finally I saw the dust. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 19:31, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question why didn't you correct this one in final version? It's in bigger resolution.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Something does not look correct to me with the sky. Why is it brighter just around the chimneys ? And there is something weird with the clouds on the left side. /Daniel78 (talk) 00:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose With every edit this file is getting more downsampled. Two more comments and nothing is left ;-). I might have supported a level/perspective/dust corrected version of the original 16Mpx+ file. Lycaon (talk) 09:30, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment unless you started from the original RAW-file ;-)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow. Goog image, but not enough for FP. --Karelj (talk) 19:30, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 10:40, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Hovawart.blackandtan-play.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2008 at 10:21:31
SHORT DESCRIPTION

Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because image is poorly cropped. Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Lycaon (talk) 13:50, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose – poorly cropped. – Jerryteps 09:36, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 10:39, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Queen-Paul Rodgers-Madrid-6.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2008 at 19:24:43
Queen + Paul Rodgers at a concert in Madrid.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Kadellar -- Kadellar (talk) 19:24, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kadellar (talk) 19:24, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Nothing really special, not that great quality. —Ceran (speak) 20:35, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad quality, dislike it. --MonaLuna (talk) 00:06, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Georgez (talk) 00:08, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much noise. ISO 400 is way too much on these occasions. Try with ISO 100 next time. Diti the penguin 10:23, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not sharp Vanjagenije (talk) 12:17, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose – No wow, I find it hard to look at. – Jerryteps 10:12, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special and too noise, I don't like it.--84.223.165.15 19:17, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There is too noise. I don't like this picture.--Suetonius (talk) 22:22, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 10:38, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Licheń bazylika 2.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2008 at 00:10:51
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Albertus teolog -- Albertus teolog (talk) 00:10, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Albertus teolog (talk) 00:10, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Sorry Albertus but the quality of the image is just not enough for FP status. The exposure choice is all wrong, with a high shutter speed and a large apperture, which is the cause of the too small DOF -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 01:32, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
Joaquim, history has known worse candidate :-) Yours.Albertus teolog (talk) 02:57, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose If never seen pictures of Joaquim which are out of focus and contain perspective distortion. --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 10:40, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's not horizontal Vanjagenije (talk) 11:21, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Indeed the picture need a bit of rotation and some perspective corrections. The detail is not so big deal, however, better weather would make it much nicer. And of course good perspective. --Aktron (talk) 15:15, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. Georgez (talk) 00:10, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 19:55, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as other opposers. Lycaon (talk) 20:12, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose tilted, lack of sharpness, overall "dull and greyish" effect. --JY Rehby (talk) 18:38, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 10:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Mantis Hymenopus coronatus 6 Luc Viatour.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2008 at 06:46:03
Mantis Hymenopus coronatus

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Luc Viatour (talk) - uploaded by Luc Viatour (talk) - nominated by -- Luc Viatour (talk) 06:46, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Luc Viatour (talk) 06:46, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 14:38, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Too much of the insect out of focus Manuel R. (talk) 19:56, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Well the colors and sharpness are nice, Manuel R. is right. Too much of the insect is out of focus. --Aktron (talk) 11:04, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, can't tell what's the flower and what's the insect. How do you turn this on (talk) 00:51, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Out of focus areas are inherent in macro photography. By reading the metadata, a 150 mm macro lens, and a f8 aperture tells me that from the technique point of view the picture is adequate, no more reasonable DOF could be expected. Camouflage, or blending of the insect with the environment is OK, that is what it is all about. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 13:30, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with the previous "oppose". Poorly croped also.(Varcos (talk) 21:10, 8 December 2008 (UTC))
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think this is a beautiful picture. (Neighbours564eva (|talk) 00:10 9 December 2008 (UTC))
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sure, this could have been shot with a stop smaller aperture (f/11), but the focus is quite accurate, thus good enough. -- Ram-Man 12:13, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quality - focus + too light. --Karelj (talk) 22:40, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support JalalV (talk) 04:46, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 6 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 10:46, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Chachani summit edited.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2008 at 02:07:40
Summit of the Chachani volcano (left, a bit lower), 6075m high, and Mt Fatima (highest), the highest of the three volcanoes above Arequipa, Peru, in october 2007.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Nattfodd - uploaded by Nattfodd - nominated by Ceranthor -- Also an FP on English Wikipedia. —Ceranthor 02:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- —Ceranthor 02:07, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor composition, nothing special for FP nomination. --Karelj (talk) 15:39, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition is special but I am not sure about the colors :-( --Aktron (talk) 11:05, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per lack of quality --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 16:01, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not particularly awesome. How do you turn this on (talk) 00:53, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow, just a plain bland mountain. – Jerryteps 09:33, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 10:45, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:LMFBR schematics2.svg, Featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Dec 2008 at 11:28:25
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Graevemoore - uploaded by diego_pmc - nominated by diego_pmc -- diego_pmc (talk) 11:28, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- diego_pmc (talk) 11:28, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't have faintest idea of what this describes, but it looks good. I trust people on enwiki who promoted it to FP there for accuracy :) Benh (talk) 22:51, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Me parece que los elementos son muy simples, sencillamente copiar y pegar. Además que falta una versión en otros idiomas o numeradas. --libertad0 ॐ (talk) 21:41, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Online translator: "It seems me that the elements are very simple, simply to copy and to hit (paste). Besides that lacks a version in other languages or numbered."
The elements should be simple—it's a schematic (as the description states). The purpose it to educate, not to please. Besides that I definitely can't say it's an ugly drawing; in fact it looks quite good. Indeed perhaps a version with numbers would be good, but I doubt that is any reason to oppose this image. The text can easily be translated with Inkscape. diego_pmc (talk) 05:45, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Beyond silence 01:27, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Benh --SuperJew (talk) 14:19, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Simple yet confusing. Why not split 'em into two and present them side by side? Then they can both be recycled for single use too. Lycaon (talk) 15:10, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 15:31, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --83.59.14.94 20:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC) --Tintero (talk) 20:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 6 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => featured --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 20:11, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:EmossonLac082007.jpg, Not Featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2008 at 06:21:32
Dam of Emosson

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Debugman - uploaded by Debugman - nominated by Debugman -- 85.5.180.53 06:21, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 85.5.180.53 06:21, 25 November 2008 (UTC) Login to vote. --Mr. Mario (talk) 15:11, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Tilted. ---donald- (talk) 11:06, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Georgez (talk) 15:15, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lošmi (talk) 20:43, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good panorama --JY Rehby (talk) 23:47, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- I can reupload a new version with the correct tilt if you want, but I've to say that I don't know how (sorry I'm new)Debugman (talk) 10:20, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
For example Irfanview. There is an option "fine rotate". ---donald- (talk) 11:03, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, excessively tilted. --Aqwis (talk) 10:30, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As above, plus you should try to recover shadows / highlights on the right. Else really nice picture --Pom² (talk) 11:56, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yes, tilt. @ the upper right corner there is a white crop fragment --Richard Bartz (talk) 18:16, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Weakly Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above. How do you turn this on (talk) 01:03, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 20:13, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:EmossonLac082007_edit.jpg, Featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2008 at 18:22
Dam of Emosson

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Version with tilt correction --Richard Bartz (talk) 18:22, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 21:20, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Now, it is good --Böhringer (talk) 21:57, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Wisnia6522 (talk) 09:23, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Pom² (talk) 17:45, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lošmi (talk) 01:39, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special Vanjagenije (talk) 11:13, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This one is not rotated, resolution is fine --Aktron (talk) 15:55, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This version is better. It's a really nice pic (for me it's something special). --MonaLuna (talk) 23:43, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Xxxx00 (talk) 15:15, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:02, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Looks like there's a line running through it, but not enough for me to oppose. How do you turn this on (talk) 01:06, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral => featured --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 20:13, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Papilio Machaon caterpillar.JPG, Featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Dec 2008 at 21:22:14
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Entomolo - uploaded by Entomolo - nominated by Mmxx --   ■ MMXXtalk  21:22, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --   ■ MMXXtalk  21:22, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good indeed ! Some technically minded ones might argue that the DOF is too shallow and the tail is blurred - which doesn't matter to me, given the overall quality, sharpness, and contrast, of the picture. --JY Rehby (talk) 02:27, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - a depiction that crosses the anatomical and the scientific with the splendid. Well done. - Anonymous DissidentTalk 13:19, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Georgez (talk) 16:13, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Barely Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose 60/40 decision. Good. It's absolutely worth watching. The painted turquoise rod unfortunately clashes with the remaining green tones & background is 2 distracting --Richard Bartz (talk) 17:27, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 21:20, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:58, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the main subject, but I also find the background quite distracting, sorry --AlexanderKlink (talk) 22:29, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with AlexanderKlink.- Man On Mission (talk) 7:09, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose crop is too tight for me. Lycaon (talk) 08:17, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice! --Karelj (talk) 15:57, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Beyond silence 01:33, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kadellar (talk) 16:17, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --83.59.14.94 20:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC) --Tintero (talk) 20:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MJJR (talk) 20:05, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As AlexanderKlink --Pom² (talk) 21:42, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 22:58, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great shot. How do you turn this on (talk) 01:03, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support JukoFF (talk) 16:05, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 13 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => featured --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 20:14, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Édouard Manet - Le Déjeuner sur l'herbe.jpg, Featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Dec 2008 at 23:44:41
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Édouard Manet - uploaded and nominated by Paris 16 (talk) 23:44, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 23:44, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Compared with large images that can be find on Google images ([2], [3], [4]), quality of this one is far better. --Lošmi (talk) 00:27, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support sharp --Beyond silence 01:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pom² (talk) 21:44, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice painting. How do you turn this on (talk) 01:01, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unfaithful reproduction. Lycaon (talk) 07:08, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting question.svg Question Why? --Eusebius (talk) 16:27, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
    See next Lycaon (talk) 20:09, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Lycaon. -- carol (talk) 04:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

result: 5 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 20:17, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

  • This vote unfortunately does not count. -- carol (talk) 21:20, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Lycaon. -- carol (talk) 04:06, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 5 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured -- carol 21:20, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Water mill Rosenmühle in Lower Saxony, Germany.jpg, Featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2008 at 23:19:32
Water mill Rosenmühle

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Michael Gäbler - uploaded by Michael Gäbler - nominated by --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:19, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:19, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lycaon (talk) 00:10, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose excessive noise - Man On Mission (talk) 6:57, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info it's mist and fog in the evening on the river "Haller". --Michael Gäbler (talk) 13:07, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment, is it not tilted? --Aqwis (talk) 12:46, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info the mill is vertical. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 13:19, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Well the noise is no probem for me, but the colors seems a bit unusual (yet it may be nautral scene of course). And compression, mostly in the sky... --Aktron (talk) 14:12, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful --B.navez (talk) 14:54, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mbdortmund (talk) 22:13, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Base64 (talk) 09:51, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- I think it's slightly tilted, but that's something that happens to me all te time, and is more than compensated by the wow-factor. MartinD (talk) 15:04, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MonaLuna (talk) 23:57, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The noise and small tilt keep me from supporting this otherwise beautiful picture. --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 01:58, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice mood, good composition, allthough I think it would profit from a little croping at the bottom --Simonizer (talk) 09:35, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice colour nice composition but a bit blurry. -- Laitche (talk) 10:02, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too noisy. --Karelj (talk) 19:53, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 14:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Poor quality, noise, blured, unrecognizable objects.Silfiriel (talk) 16:10, 3 December 2008
result: 9 support, 3 oppose, 3 neutral => featured --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 20:19, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Alaskan Malamute R Bartz.jpg, Featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2008 at 13:51:01
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded & nominated Richard Bartz (talk) 13:51, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This is the real TRUCK under the sled dogs. Alaskan Malamute with a weight of 100 pounds.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WOOF ! -- Richard Bartz (talk) 13:51, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Man, my nominations are lame compared to this one. --Aktron (talk) 14:07, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive. --AlexanderKlink (talk) 18:20, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lošmi (talk) 01:36, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful photo Vanjagenije (talk) 02:01, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Euphoriceyes (talk) 12:21, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lycaon (talk) 13:27, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I can almost hear it howling... —Ceran (speak) 14:30, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Amazing technical quality. What focal length did you use? Freedom to share (talk) 16:56, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. /Daniel78 (talk) 19:50, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support sehr schön --Böhringer (talk) 21:31, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MonaLuna (talk) 00:12, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 01:57, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
Somebody called for me? --wau > 22:35, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wonderful --Faigl.ladislav (talk) 10:34, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --D-Kuru (talk) 12:16, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support   ■ MMXXtalk  21:02, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - LOVE IT so cute and amazing quality --SuperJew (talk) 14:22, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --83.59.14.94 20:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC) --Tintero (talk) 20:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great picture, looks like it's going to pass unanimously. Jerry teps (talk) 06:11, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful picture! --Caspian blue 08:22, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MJJR (talk) 20:01, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 22:51, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pile-on Symbol support vote.svg Support ;-) How do you turn this on (talk) 01:00, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nicely done. Digitaldreamer (talk) 17:00, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This edit, since I opposed the one below. :) --J.smith (talk) 02:44, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mr. Mario (talk) 15:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support grat picture, i like it! --Abbax (talk) 17:34, 8 Dicember 2008 (UTC) No anonymous votes. Log in to vote --Simonizer (talk) 17:17, 8 December 2008 (UTC)


  • Symbol support vote.svg Support grat picture, i like it! --Abbax (talk) 17:34, 8 Dicember 2008 (UTC)
result: 26 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 18:16, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Edit 1 by Fir0002

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - this edit has been added by Fir0002 at the en.wp discussion, and I thought it should also be mentioned here. diego_pmc (talk) 08:01, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Cropped like this the chill-factor is a bit lost. --Richard Bartz (talk) 17:31, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This edit crops away the frame the subject corresponds with, and even worse, moves the subject into the dead center. It does make for a way worse composition. Digitaldreamer (talk) 17:00, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose this edit. --J.smith (talk) 02:44, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 0 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 18:16, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Hedychium gardnerianum.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2008 at 22:54:23
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by B.navez - nominated by -- LC-de (talk) 22:54, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LC-de (talk) 22:54, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wow! --Lošmi (talk) 23:46, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 14:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Disturbing background. --Karelj (talk) 15:35, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Karelj --AlexanderKlink (talk) 22:11, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Background is not disturbing at all for me, it gives an impression of the natural biotope were the flower is growing. --Donarreiskoffer (talk) 07:32, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wisnia6522 (talk) 08:19, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well I think that Donarreiskoffer told what I exactly wanted to say. This picture has more to say than just ordinary flower macro. And such a feature is very important for an encyclopedia. --Aktron (talk) 11:06, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Natural environment is a plus, quality is good too. Lycaon (talk) 12:35, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose it's good example that natural enviroment can be negative effort on the composition. --Herrick (talk) 14:32, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A very good picture and I think the background is superb, really adding to the picture. Could it be geocoded though. R-T-C Tim (talk) 14:53, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's a great picture! --Mr. Mario (talk) 15:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Karelj --Pom² (talk) 21:40, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree with Donarreiskoffer. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 22:47, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Amazing. How do you turn this on (talk) 00:54, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Geocoded. --B.navez (talk) 03:17, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I really like the background here. /Daniel78 (talk) 22:13, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I also like the background. It looks like almost like a fantasy setting. A302b (talk) 10:12, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 13 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Pom² (talk) 10:44, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Lightning over Oradea Romania 3.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2008 at 17:43:01
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Nelumadau - uploaded by Diego pmc - nominated by Diego pmc -- diego_pmc (talk) 17:43, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- diego_pmc (talk) 17:43, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Manuel R. (talk) 19:51, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good illustrative value, WOW effect present, quite nice. --Aktron (talk) 11:03, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Amazing picture! R-T-C Tim (talk) 14:52, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK, guality could be better, but wow is here. --Karelj (talk) 19:35, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Georgez (talk) 19:54, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MJJR (talk) 19:55, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor image quality. Lycaon (talk) 20:10, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support – Great picture, plenty of wow, is encyclopedic too. Jerry teps (talk) 21:20, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Lycaon + bad foreground --Pom² (talk) 21:41, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fine for me. How do you turn this on (talk) 00:49, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Per previous opposers -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 13:09, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose building in front -- Gorgo (talk) 20:19, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info See Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Lightning over Oradea Romania 2.jpg for nomination of an earlier version of the same image]]. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 23:02, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose poor foreground. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 23:02, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment -- in my opinion the foreground helps the image by adding contrast to it. This crop shows what I'm referring to — IMO the image is just too dull like that. The full also looks somewhat more striking (probably from seeing the houses so close to the lightning). diego_pmc (talk) 06:11, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per other opposers --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 22:25, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support capturing 4 lighting bolts makes this a fascinating image. This is the kind of image that has some personality... a story if you will. --J.smith (talk) 16:49, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the multiple strikes. --Dori - Talk 18:29, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support with reserves. This picture almost has a "Magritte-esque" feeling to it, in the contrast between the sky, almost as lit as during the day, and the houses and streets, dark and sparely lit by street lamps. The foreground thus has to remain, imho. The small piece of a pointy roof, in the foreground, could be left out, on the other hand. As for the overall image quality, it seems fine, yet not optimal. The wow factor of the picture makes up for it, though. --JY Rehby (talk) 00:12, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Joku Janne (talk) 10:04, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unfortunate setting --Simonizer (talk) 11:58, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Quote from the guidelines: "A bad picture of a very difficult subject is a better picture than a good picture of an ordinary subject" (Varcos (talk) 09:40, 9 December 2008 (UTC))
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Stunning subject matter, but the composition could use a little adjustment to be really evocative. Otherwise sound. JalalV (talk) 04:47, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The foreground ruins it for me. --Estrilda (talk) 16:40, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality image. I opposse the opposers. Composition is good, exposure is very good, especially considering the dynamic range, the pictures captures good detail in the shadow areas, and good detail is retained in the lighter areas. The foreground is inmaterial insofar as it does not affect the nature of the phenomenom. From the technical photographic point of view, which in this particular case is synthesized on exposure and composition no one can argue bad technique, and from the documentary and encyclopaedic point of view, it is a very good representation of a natural event that just happened to be captured in an urban setting. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:51, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 14 support, 8 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. --Pom² (talk) 19:01, 10 December 2008 (UTC)(UTC)

Image:Marcellus4.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2008 at 19:41:09
Statua del Louvre

Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because image is tiny. Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Lycaon (talk) 19:59, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose – Way too small. – Jerryteps 09:32, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Giant Bison Vertebra with Atlatl Point.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Dec 2008 at 19:28:55
A native American arrowhead can be seen entering into the nerve channel in a Great Bison vertebra.  This would have been a killing blow. This artifact dates back approximately 6,000 years.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by J.smith - uploaded by J.smith - nominated by J.smith (how redundant) -- J.smith (talk) 19:28, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, of course. -- J.smith (talk) 19:28, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, sorry ;-). Poor lighting, noisy and insufficient DOF. Lycaon (talk) 20:51, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
    • I was forbidden a flash so my ISO was higher then I wanted. :D J.smith (talk) 01:30, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose And the white balance seem incorrect. /Daniel78 (talk) 22:10, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
    • It really is as yellow as it looks. --J.smith (talk) 01:30, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because noise, missing DOF, white balance Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

--AlexanderKlink (talk) 08:20, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to close the nomination early (consider it withdrawn, if you like), but that template is obnoxious. J.smith (talk) 08:45, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Sorry if you feel offended by it, but I believe I'm not the only one who thinks this is not FP-worthy. Don't take it personally, please --AlexanderKlink (talk) 09:17, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
No, I'm not offended that you dislike the image (I see that this nomination wont pass) I just think the template is insulting. --J.smith (talk) 19:53, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
The template is not intended to insult of course. If people would read the guidelines properly, it would even never have to be used ;-). Lycaon (talk) 20:14, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Alexander, if you don't think this is FP-worthy, it's exactly the point where you oppose to the nomination,not FPXing it. --norro 10:45, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Agreed, I should have phrased that differently. I thought it was not FP-worthy because it did not meet the guidelines, thus my FPX.

Image:NGC2207+IC2163.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2008 at 06:24:31
SHORT DESCRIPTION

result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. – Jerryteps 10:27, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Antidorcas marsupialis 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2008 at 07:28:30
Sprinkbok

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Springbok (Antidorcas marsupialis) in its natural environment in Etosha, Namibia, created, uploaded and nominated by Lycaon (talk) 07:28, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distracting background. --Aktron (talk) 11:00, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As Aktron - backgroung. --Karelj (talk) 19:53, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, background too distracting. How do you turn this on (talk) 00:24, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Background distracting. Marlith (talk) 01:29, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Background shows nice camouflage. Muhammad 05:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Obviously not a zoo pic. Natural background adds value to an unresampled (slightly cropped for composition) hires image. Lycaon (talk) 00:58, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
Of course not a ZOO pic, and I strongly agree with your kind of late support vote for your own image. I believe the image should get promoted, and I also believe that you should at least try to apply the same standarts that you apply to your own images to other people images too. At first maybe you could try at least not to oppose the images that are unique, rare, underwater, taken in the wild, and highly educational, no matter what quality they are, and then later maybe you could try to support one.Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:37, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose JalalV (talk) 04:39, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Impossible to tell whether this is a zoo shot or not, but that makes no difference, it looks like one. The background interferes with the head of the subject, so there is no clear contour of the animal, a basic graphic element. The lighting from behind does not favor subject. Good photographic technique would have called for use of a longer lens, wider aperture, lower camera position in order to exalt the subject. And BTW, nice to see you again. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 22:35, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
Tomas, look at the geolocation: This is wild Africa where animals don't do as they are told;-), no zoo 450 km in the neighbourhood! Welcome back! Lycaon (talk) 22:45, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
You can give moon locations for that matter, but that does not mean the picture was taken there, I guess it is just like my live scorpion, that you hint is dead. As I said, zoo shot or not, looks like one. Now, this IS a good shot #REDIRECT [[5]]And nice to see you too!--Tomascastelazo (talk) 22:54, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
It doesn't matter if it is a zoo shot or not, but the biggest clue is the focal length of 135mm. It'd be very, very difficult to get so close to a wild animal. Most of the zoo pictures on the English Wikipedia are at similar focal lengths. I'd say that Tomascastelazo was probably picking up the perspective of the 135mm lens, which is quite different to a 500mm one. Noodle snacks (talk) 00:21, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. – Jerryteps 10:44, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Larus argentatus juv.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2008 at 07:37:53
Larus argentatus (tweede winter subadult)

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Lycaon (talk) 07:37, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lycaon (talk) 07:37, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Unlike another similar nomination some time before this one looks better. The colors do have something to say - it's not only grey. --Aktron (talk) 10:59, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose artefacts in the background. --Herrick (talk) 14:31, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great quality --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 15:59, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Great picture, great quality. Anonymous101 talk 17:10, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow, just another bird. --Karelj (talk) 19:43, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:58, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Great picture -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:44, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good choice of aperture and excellent shot. Diti the penguin 13:15, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:16, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fine for me, good job! How do you turn this on (talk) 00:23, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Richard Bartz (talk) 01:40, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Simonizer (talk) 11:57, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support No wow for an easy shot ("the most abundant and best known of all gulls along the shores of Asia, western Europe, and North America"). But meets the rest of the criteria otherwise. Noodle snacks (talk) 19:26, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not spectacular. JalalV (talk) 04:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very good photo, but nothing special to qualify it for FP. In my opinion, fits perfectly in <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Quality_images> (Varcos (talk) 09:55, 10 December 2008 (UTC))
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It says nothing to me. A302b (talk) 10:10, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's a very good shot, but also very easy, so nothing very extraordinary... sorry. Benh (talk) 22:29, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • I agree it is not the most difficult shot (though they do tend to fly away you know), but so aren't the countless FP's of buildings (that even don't tend to fly away) ;-). Lycaon (talk) 22:54, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Of all the birds, seagulls are probably the easiest to photograph, and one can get to 2-3 feet away from them. A little bait and they walk right into the camera. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:11, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Definitely FP worthy in my view. Why the sudden concern about how "easy" a shot this is, without reference to the image quality itself? --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:41, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

result: 13 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. – Jerryteps 10:48, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

  • 3. Ratio of supporting/opposing votes at least 2/1 (a two-thirds majority)
result: 12 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. – --Pom² (talk) 12:49, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Fishermen - Tamandaré - Brasil pan.jpg, not delisted[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2008 at 19:45:38
Fishermen at work

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Much below 2 Megapixels and unsharp (Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist -- Manuel R. (talk) 19:45, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist diego_pmc (talk) 07:38, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Had 10 votes and 100% support, and I do not like removing old fp's. /Daniel78 (talk) 22:42, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep - still good.--Avala (talk) 13:55, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep It's a great picture. --Mr. Mario (talk) 15:14, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Resolution and so on. --Aktron (talk) 13:23, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Not egregious. --Dori - Talk 03:32, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Karelj (talk) 19:37, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist JalalV (talk) 04:31, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep --AngMoKio (talk) 08:51, 12 December 2008 (UTC) A bit too late. --Mr. Mario (talk) 02:21, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 5 Delist, 4 Keep -->not delisted. --Mr. Mario (talk) 02:21, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Farmer plowing.jpg, kept[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2008 at 09:24:28
A farmer plowing with horses.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The image look really nice, but its quality is not as good as the image has quite a lot of noise. It was probably caused by sharpening (it's most visible around the edges). Besides, it is just below the 2MP limit. (Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist -- diego_pmc (talk) 09:24, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep The picture is from 2004. --Lošmi (talk) 01:35, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist it is under 2 megapixels Vanjagenije (talk) 02:03, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Small size alone isn't a reason to delist an old FP, since 2 MPX was a huge format then. --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 10:37, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Nice horses, illustrative picture, good quality. Maybe not for now, but still good for me. --Aktron (talk) 15:56, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep --Böhringer (talk) 21:36, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep --Mbdortmund (talk) 18:10, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep --Karelj (talk) 19:41, 30 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep --Richard Bartz (talk) 12:04, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep --Wisnia6522 (talk) 13:20, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Withdraw diego_pmc (talk) 21:29, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
result: Withdrawn --> kept --Mr. Mario (talk) 15:10, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Coccinella septempunctata couple (aka).jpg~, kept[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2008 at 00:24:20
Ladybug


Votes rather late ;-), don't count. Sorry. ~~

result: 1 Delist, 3 Keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. --Lycaon (talk) 08:50, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Image:RustChain.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Dec 2008 at 01:28:30
Macro of Chain

result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. AlexanderKlink (talk) 09:57, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Jean Auguste Dominique Ingres, La Grande Odalisque, 1814.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2008 at 13:59:46
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jean Auguste Dominique Ingres - uploaded and nominated by Paris 16.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 13:59, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not too keen on this - why is the end of her big toe cut off? How do you turn this on (talk) 00:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting info.svg Info I've browsed the web for a while and couldn't find her right toe. I wonder whether it's the border of the painting that one can see on the right side of this one. Apart from that, she has three spare vertebras but she's been ok with them so far. --Eusebius (talk) 16:24, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. AlexanderKlink (talk) 20:59, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Louis Armstrong restored.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2008 at 13:44:21
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by World-Telegram staff photographer - uploaded by Mangostar - nominated by Paris 16.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 13:44, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special, just an old photo, like many of these. --Aktron (talk) 18:44, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree. /Daniel78 (talk) 22:48, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with above, good quality photo, but not awesome. How do you turn this on (talk) 00:22, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Georgez (talk) 12:22, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is a great picture! --Mr. Mario (talk) 00:13, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, it is. --Lošmi (talk) 02:09, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great photo, and i like a lot Louis! --Abbax 19:39, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 22:13, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As Aktron. --Karelj (talk) 15:24, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Famous picture with a great quality --Pom² (talk) 10:15, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mbdortmund (talk) 01:20, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 7 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. AlexanderKlink (talk) 20:57, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Sea otter nursing02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Dec 2008 at 03:21:22
Sea otter nursing a pup

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Mike Baird - uploaded by Fir0002 - nominated by X! -- X! (talk) 03:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- X! (talk) 03:21, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support special! --Herrick (talk) 08:48, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support – I supported this when it was nominated at the english wikipedia, and i'll support it again, great, encyclopedic picture. – Jerryteps 09:29, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 14:01, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good information w/ composition. Marlith (talk) 01:23, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Vmenkov (talk) 22:45, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour (talk) 18:55, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cute! --Estrilda (talk) 16:41, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mbdortmund (talk) 01:20, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. AlexanderKlink (talk) 09:58, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Hobart Docks.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2008 at 07:59:48
Hobart Docks Panorama

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Flying Freddy - uploaded by Flying Freddy - nominated by Flying Freddy -- Flying Freddy (talk) 07:59, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Flying Freddy (talk) 07:59, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, The image is badly lit and has a wrong projection. Lycaon (talk) 08:16, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
    There is no clear guideline violation. Both can be intended by the author. --norro 15:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it for its mood. --norro 15:52, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distortion, exposure. –Dilaudid 22:04, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distortion and noise --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 22:27, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lighting. Well better than FPX problems like "what picture is nomination-capable" we should vote so these will not be nominated. --Aktron (talk) 13:21, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --JalalV (talk) 14:35, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 supports, 5 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 21:02, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Centaurea jacea Ruissalo.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2008 at 22:18:52
Centaurea jacea

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dilaudid • uploaded by Dilaudid • nominated by Dilaudid on 22:18, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportDilaudid 22:18, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, most of the subject is out of focus, probably due to a poor exposure solution Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:29, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The blur is intentional and imho doesn't deduce from getting an impression of the plant; personally I wouldn't do much to change the DOF. –Dilaudid 08:33, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'll be the hond in het kegelspel this time. I think it might have a chance and FPX is a tad too harsh (I may wrong be of course). Lycaon (talk) 00:54, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I do not like the composition. The left side of the picture is distracting from the subject. I do not like the proportion either (as defined in the guidelines)(Varcos (talk) 20:49, 8 December 2008 (UTC))
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Didn't like composition. JalalV (talk) 04:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 supports, 3 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 21:03, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:LR91-AJ-11 rocket engine - Thrust chamber.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2008 at 22:49:27
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by J.smith - uploaded by J.smith - nominated by J.smith
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This photo is looking up the "tailpipe" of the LR91-AJ-11 rocket engine. This is one of the rockets that powered the Titan IV. -- J.smith (talk) 22:49, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support myself, of course. -- J.smith (talk) 22:49, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the symmetry of it --AlexanderKlink (talk) 23:38, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Well, symmetry is one of the basic ingredients of beauty, maybe the most important of all. In this case, and since we have a radial symmetry, the framing should be a perfect square. Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:26, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I can crop it if you think that's the best way to go. --J.smith (talk) 01:26, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think I'm confusing myself a tad with your comment. By "perfect square" do you mean perfectly square with the center of the image or the image should be cropped to even X/Y dimensions? --J.smith (talk) 01:38, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Please don't crop this. The irregularities that are out of where the square would be are interesting and beautiful. -- carol (talk) 03:48, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 09:57, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support /Daniel78 (talk) 11:46, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice picture --Aktron (talk) 13:20, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kanonkas(talk) 00:49, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 19:48, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Love this, like an abstract metal eye --Pom² (talk) 16:21, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 20:43, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --TheWB (talk) 02:10, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour (talk) 18:51, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Please don't crop. --Estrilda (talk) 16:42, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mbdortmund (talk) 01:19, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice abstract shot. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 22:58, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 14 supports, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Benh (talk) 21:04, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:RainAmsterdamTheNetherlands.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 Dec 2008 at 16:26:55
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Massimo Catarinella -- Massimo Catarinella (talk) 16:26, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Massimo Catarinella (talk) 16:26, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support /me likes! Diti the penguin 16:45, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Too simple, nothing outstanding Manuel R. (talk) 12:48, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It is simple... Calandrella (talk) 14:10, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As Manuel R. --Karelj (talk) 19:50, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quote from the guidelines: "Pictures should be in some way special..." I found nothing special. Besides, I do not see the encyclopedical value.(Varcos (talk) 21:03, 8 December 2008 (UTC))
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --FilWriter 10:01, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no wow here, sorry --AlexanderKlink (talk) 10:09, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 supports, 4 opposes, 1 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 21:04, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Parides anchises.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 Dec 2008 at 16:37:11
Parides anchises. The picture was taken at Butterfly World. Im curious to know if it is possible to take a featured image without very good camera equipment.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Korall - uploaded by Korall - nominated by Korall -- Korall (talk) 16:37, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Korall (talk) 16:37, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It is a little blurred, but I like it although. Calandrella (talk) 14:09, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose JalalV (talk) 12:19, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support – Fantastic picture, I can't see why the above user opposed it, mind explaining? – Jerryteps 10:15, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg Im not sure it has the proper name and categorisation--Korall (talk) 12:42, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

result: withdrawn, not featured. Benh (talk) 21:05, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Rinya waterfall.jpg, not featured[edit]

The Hungarian Branch Rinya's little waterfall

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Mdonci - uploaded by Mdonci -- Mdonci (talk) 14:29, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mdonci (talk) 14:29, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question why did you upload an exact duplicate of Image:Rinya patak vízesése.jpg? --J.smith (talk) 16:45, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Never mind. :) --J.smith (talk) 22:59, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The subject is not put in the right context, therefore leading to confusion. This is a 10 cm tiny waterfall? If so, what is the encyclopedical value? (Varcos (talk) 21:29, 8 December 2008 (UTC))
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose What are those little black dots all around the photo? I think it was dust on the lens. Diti the penguin 21:40, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much clutter; my eye couldn't concentrate on anything in particular. JalalV (talk) 04:21, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured (rule of the 5th day). Benh (talk) 21:06, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Levi 293.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2008 at 17:17:05
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • QI is nearly the same as FP except for the "wow" stuff. (They have same quality standards). --Mr. Mario (talk) 15:12, 11 December 2008 (UTC).
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, main subject is blurry and/or out of focus. --Aqwis (talk) 22:32, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Power lines detracted too much for me. JalalV (talk) 04:20, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The skier is not very sharp and missing part of his stick. --Estrilda (talk) 16:43, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Georgez (talk) 20:40, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 5 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 21:07, 15 December 2008 (UTC) 

Image:Voltaire nu 2.jpg, not featured[edit]

Statue of Voltaire naked by Pigalle, Louvre Museum

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jean-Baptiste Pigalle (sculptor) + Coyau (photograph) - uploaded by Coyau - nominated by Coyau --Coyau (talk) 21:00, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Coyau (talk) 21:00, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - looks plain to me - ChrisDHDR 17:10, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as per previous opposer. Also for the distracting background. (Varcos (talk) 17:43, 9 December 2008 (UTC))
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose JalalV (talk) 04:50, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured (rule of the 5th day). Benh (talk) 21:14, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Shinjuku by Night.jpg[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Fboas - uploaded by Fboas - nominated by Fboas --82.244.128.126 12:41, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --82.244.128.126 12:41, 10 December 2008 (UTC) Please login to vote. --Mr. Mario (talk) 04:39, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Latzel (talk) 14:43, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
    • You're supposed to give a reason for your vote. Muhammad 19:51, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
      • Oh no, look at this dark photo and think again, Metto --Latzel (talk) 07:08, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark. kallerna 14:43, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too, too, too dark. --Karelj (talk) 15:34, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Georgez (talk) 20:49, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Could've at least turned the flash on. X! (talk) 00:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because it is too dark. --Mr. Mario (talk) 02:12, 13 December 2008 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Image:Centruroides suffusus 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 Dec 2008 at 21:33:07
Centruroides suffusus

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Tomascastelazo (talk) 21:33, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 21:33, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question This guy is dead, isn't it ? --Richard Bartz (talk) 01:38, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
    • It´s still alive, waiting for tomorrow´s photo shoot. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 01:56, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral -- I like the white background and the position of the scorpion, but in full resolution, the quality is not as good as it could be. Parts of the scorpion are out of focus and theres some noise Manuel R. (talk) 12:57, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour (talk) 18:53, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the white backgrounds. --Digon3 talk 20:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good picture of a common (dead) scorpion with average DOF. As it is still around, you might take another picture, but please remove the dust and lint first. On a different note, the id might be wrong as C. suffusus (the Durango scorpion) has pale sides and only occurs in Durango province. The colour hints at C. vitattus but even then, although it is a wider spread animal, the place where you found it stays a bit problematic. All in all, a clean shoot of a properly identified (even dead) animal has surely FP potential. BTW, lighting is very good. Lycaon (talk) 22:04, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Dear Lycaon, I am not too keen on photographing dead fish in a perilous air-conditioned lab nor taking zoo pictures with bogus geolocations. If I say here that the bug is alive, it is. Here is another picture of the model and a little brother (who did die) #REDIRECT [[6]]. As far as the ID, a Bug-o-logist friend tentatively identifies it between a suffussus or a infamatus infamatus or infamatus ornatus. The problem is that they are very small. The dust? Well, I sure ain´t going to try to brush it off. :o) --Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:05, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
      • Maybe a gentle shot of compressed air? --J.smith (talk) 23:44, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I'm with Lycaon. For a studio shot it could and should have a much better quality and DOF (focus bracketing?). I don't like white backgrounds, but that is a minor remark. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:24, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Of course you are with Lycaon! Birds of a feather flock together! I am much more amused than surprised. What makes you assume that it is a studio shot? Just so you know, the critter was photographed with daylight in the shade, in a plastic ice cream container... pretty much in its natural habitat, my back patio. Perhaps for a photo critic you could and should have much better quality in your critiques, substantiated by insightful arguments, not blanket statements that say nothing. Nice to see you again too! --Tomascastelazo (talk) 00:46, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
      • Welcome back, Tomas! I see that you are well and sound. And with the usual difficulty in accepting criticism... Nothing new, really. I wish we have fun together and find new talents here! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 01:17, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
        • Thank you for the warm welcome Alvesgaspar!!! Funny thing about criticism. I love criticism! I truly do! Problem around here is that there is no criticism. I am a dictionary freak, and criticism is rave; appraisal, assessment, evaluation; analysis, examination, study. There is very, very little of that. What there is a lot of, however, is a lot of self delusion about knowing about photography. But it is ok though, this effort is still worth it, there is redeeming value in here. It is a fact of life that everything has good and bad, so we just have to accommodate for that. Zen says that in order for there to be short, there must be long, for there to be heavy there must be light, so I guess here in order to have wonderful, fun people like me there must exist the opposite. What's there to do but accept reality?? ;o) --Tomascastelazo (talk) 01:49, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
          • Wow, I wish I could cope with your gongoristic style and deep, genuine modesty... But no, the only thing I have to offer in exchange is a little photographic experience, hardly conquered througout all these long years.-- Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:46, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
            • Yes Alvesgaspar, I can see that you hardly have conquered little photographic experience. But it is ok, time is a great and patient teacher, just stick with it and some day it will come to you. ;o) --Tomascastelazo (talk) 16:59, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
              • Yes, thanks, maybe I'm luckier than you ;-) -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:54, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
                • Probably... they say ignorance is bliss. ;o) --Tomascastelazo (talk) 01:27, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Uuhm, no --Richard Bartz (talk) 23:52, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
    • In all seriousness, this is a critique I would like to hear. I am not a bug photographer so I don't really have all the fine distinctions of the art. I appreciate the quality of your work, and have followed it since your makro freak days. A few opinions as to why not would be a great lesson for all, or at least to me. I take it by your reply that you evaluated the picture, so I really want to know your thoughts. Besides, you wont need a lot of words, your elocuence is evident!!! Cheers! --Tomascastelazo (talk) 02:40, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
      • It looks sad/jailed. Better - a positive picture in his nat. env. (with a majestical angle from beneath, maybe) --Richard Bartz (talk) 08:25, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 14:29, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Lauhanvuori Kivijata 3.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Dec 2008 at 09:53:38
English: Former coast stones in Lauhanvuori National Park, Isojoki, Finland. The place is called ”Kivijata”. Suomi: Kivijata eli pirunpelto Lauhanvuoren kansallispuistossa Isojoella, Suomessa.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Roquai - uploaded by Roquai - nominated by Joku Janne --Joku Janne (talk) 09:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Joku Janne (talk) 09:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This really looks normal, but... Well, it is something in the picture that I really like. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calandrella (talk • contribs) 14:07, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice picture to nice article. kallerna 17:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition is "ruined" by the grass in the up right corner. I suggest a crop. (Varcos (talk) 21:19, 8 December 2008 (UTC))
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow at all. --Karelj (talk) 22:43, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose JalalV (talk) 04:23, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose composition? --Latzel (talk) 07:15, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 14:30, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Roman Infantry 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2008 at 20:51:03
This is a roman soldier of the I century B.C.

result: 1 support, 2 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured (rule of the 5th day). Benh (talk) 21:08, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Roman Infantry Edit.jpg, not featured[edit]

Roman Infantry Edit.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by David Friel - edited and uploaded by --Lošmi (talk) 01:56, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I removed a lot of noise, used some color balance, and removed the border. --Lošmi (talk) 01:56, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Simonizer (talk) 08:34, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (Varcos (talk) 09:45, 9 December 2008 (UTC))
  • Symbol support vote.svg Cool! --Mr. Mario (talk) 15:14, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - ChrisDHDR 17:16, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good work --Böhringer (talk) 22:05, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, decent enough. --Aqwis (talk) 22:06, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry ,but the artefacts especially on the face are really too strong. In general a good shot though. --AngMoKio (talk) 08:21, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Over 9000 saturation, Oversharpened, Border and Noise. Noodle snacks (talk) 12:38, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • What the heck! There is a border!?!? --Mr. Mario (talk) 04:42, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 15:29, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Suetonius (talk) 17:09, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Interesting perspective, but technically low quality: it looks as if the whole photograph had crinkles Manuel R. (talk) 17:43, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per previous, thumbnail is really great, full size is scary --Pom² (talk) 23:04, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Terrible quality, not mitigated by the fine composition -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:15, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Quality. Look at the artefacts in the neck area, to take just one example. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:29, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quality. Look at the artefacts at the left side. It's a shame if you look at the thumbnail. --Herrick (talk) 19:36, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeSymbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I'm sorry, but the noise reduction method you use is... distracting. The composition is wonderful however. --J.smith (talk) 23:41, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Change to neutral - the noise is bad at 100%, but can't be seen at more reasonable review sizes. J.smith (talk) 21:40, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I believe on a regular photo print it will look great and artefacts aren't visible --Richard Bartz (talk) 00:00, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Yes, it would look great a postcard-sized print. J.smith (talk) 03:37, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
    • I agree with you, but isn't this true for nearly all noise problems? --AngMoKio (talk) 08:53, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
      • Thats why noise shouldn't be a problem @ 6 Mpx. --Richard Bartz (talk) 11:43, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
        • I started to write a rebuttal, but I think I've talked myself into agreeing with you, to a degree. Scaled to the same size as my monitor I can't see the noise at all. That means it would (likely) look fine even printed at 8x11. --J.smith (talk) 21:40, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 8 support, 7 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 14:32, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 

Image:Atlantis launch plume edit.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2008 at 00:06:07
Atlantis lanch plume

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Fir0002w:NASA - uploaded by Fir0002 - nominated by neighbours564eva -- Neighbours564eva (talk) 00:06, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Neighbours564eva (talk) 00:06, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lošmi (talk) 02:14, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg OMG! --Mr. Mario (talk) 03:44, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ! Diti the penguin 07:58, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor quality. --Kosiarz-PL 13:25, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Idem as Kosiarz. Quote from the guidelines: "Pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality." This is not. No anonymous votes. --Mr. Mario (talk) 15:11, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, no double standards, please. --Aqwis (talk) 14:33, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Idem as Kosiarz. Quote from the guidelines: "Pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality." This is not. (Varcos (talk) 16:58, 9 December 2008 (UTC))
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Discussion moved to here --Richard Bartz (talk) 19:03, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support can't see a quality problem - ChrisDHDR 17:07, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 22:47, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose JalalV (talk) 04:17, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - As previous opposers. Maybe it has a chance as a Valued image. As for Mila comments, it would be nice to see you back, as a creator and a reviewer. Criticizing the evaluations of the other reviewers is not nice role for you. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:14, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
Thank you, Alvesgaspar. I did not criticize anybody. I just stated my opinion, that's all.What is really not nice it is you using the words "not nice" with no reason whatsoever--Mbz1 (talk) 15:04, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Latzel (talk) 14:47, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think this image has enough wow factor to overcome the technical issues. --J.smith (talk) 23:37, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It looks spectacular but the quality is not good enough. --Estrilda (talk) 07:52, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 8 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 14:33, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Aleurites moluccana-cropped.png, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2008 at 09:59:08
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info original created by User:Shahibbul - cropped by A302b - uploaded by A302b - nominated by A302b -- A302b (talk) 09:59, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- A302b (talk) 09:59, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Latzel (talk) 14:44, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
    • You're supposed to give a reason for your vote. Muhammad 19:51, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
      • Do I? Allright. Bad backround (sheet of paper?), pale and missed "WOW" --Latzel (talk) 07:06, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too pale and nothing special. --Aktron (talk) 15:18, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Georgez (talk) 20:49, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • This image is quite useful (might be the most valued image in it's category) but there isn't anything about it that pops out to me as featured. At review size the background looks like noise. --J.smith (talk) 23:32, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support with reserves : would it be possible to edit out the black lines on the rightmost edge ? Otherwise, I think i perfectly fits its category. --JY Rehby (talk) 07:31, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I have to agree with JY Rehby. I love the soft-colored textures, and would give it my support. But the black lines really need to go. Can someone put an alternate version up for vote (without the lines)? --JalalV (talk) 00:48, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 14:35, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Tea-grower-hangzhou.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2008 at 09:57:37
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info original created by User:JalalV - uploaded by JalalV - nominated by A302b -- A302b (talk) 09:57, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- A302b (talk) 09:57, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Latzel (talk) 14:44, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
    • You're supposed to give a reason for your vote. Muhammad 19:51, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Do I? Allright. Bad position and backround. Maybe it's useful for illustrating but I missed the "WOW". --Latzel (talk) 07:05, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The topic is not clear and the background is a bit cluttered. Sorry, not special enough for FP. --Estrilda (talk) 16:46, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like how it captures the subject in a natural context. Although to be perfectly honest, I prefer this version: File:Tea-grower-hangzhou-edit.png --JalalV (talk) 01:05, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 14:34, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Ferry loading.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2008 at 09:00:45
Ferry Loading

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Muhammad Mahdi Karim -- Muhammad 09:00, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Muhammad 09:00, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Latzel (talk) 14:45, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
    • You're supposed to give a reason for your vote. Muhammad 19:50, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
      • Do I? Allright: Resolution - Photographs of lower resolution than 2 million pixels are typically rejected unless there are 'strong mitigating reasons'. Note that a 1600 x 1200 image has 1.92 Mpx, just less than the 2 million level. --Latzel (talk) 07:02, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
        • The picture above is more than 3mpx. Seriously, we need to teach people the difference between megabytes and megapixels. Muhammad 08:04, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
            • "Size matters?" Look at the compression artefacts and the perspective distortion. Focal length in 35 mm film under 28 mm? Seriously, we need to teach Muhammad about nice and good pictures, sorry, but you are persistent. --Latzel (talk) 10:25, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
              • Where are the compression artefacts and the distortion? FWIW, nice and good have very little difference if any at all. Again, I ask you take back your comments about the size since the image is well above the requirements. Perspective distortion, artefacts are not related to mega pixels. Muhammad 14:00, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Size of image, nothing special, wow missing. --Karelj (talk) 15:32, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
    • You got to be kidding me. Size of image? Muhammad 17:46, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
      • I am not so courageous to kid man as you. I mean - the resolution for FP should be minimum 2 Mpixels. Yours is 0,75 Mp. But this is not substantional. For me the missing wow is the main reason in this case. And do not be angry and try again. As me. --Karelj (talk) 22:04, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
        • 2717*1200 is more than 3 Mpixels in my book - !? --AlexanderKlink (talk) 22:36, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
        • Pictogram voting info.svg Info There is here a confusion between the number of pixels (3,26 Mpixels) and the size of the file (0.75 Mbytes). Only the first number is relevant for the guidelines. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:13, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
        • OK let´s forget size (even I think that 0,75 MBytes is important and is too low) but quality of this image is not good enough for FP anyway. --Karelj (talk) 21:35, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (admittedly more as a protest vote against the previous opposes). --Aqwis (talk) 20:36, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Pom² (talk) 14:34, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:GunnarSønsteby.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Dec 2008 at 17:24:11
One of the best portraits ever! Please vote for this!

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by User:Arnephoto - uploaded by User:Arnephoto - nominated by Profero -- Profero (talk) 17:24, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Profero (talk) 17:24, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AlexanderKlink (talk) 18:18, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 18:33, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Richard Bartz (talk) 19:21, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MichaelMaggs (talk) 22:55, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support /Daniel78 (talk) 22:56, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 07:31, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Simonizer (talk) 11:53, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AngMoKio (talk) 12:43, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 18:12, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --TheWB (talk) 02:05, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour (talk) 18:54, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yvonnefm (talk) 09:55, 10 December 2008 (CET)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very decent portrait. Lycaon (talk) 19:38, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Excellent portrait and excellent quality. We need more of these. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:19, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --B.navez (talk) 09:34, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support – Good picture, but there's no "wow" at all. – Jerryteps 10:13, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
    Norwegians will get a “wow,” as this person is the most highly decorated person in the history of Norway (he is a World War II hero). --Kjetil_r 17:32, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mr. Mario (talk) 15:14, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mbdortmund (talk) 01:18, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great. --Kosiarz-PL 06:45, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kjetil_r 17:19, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportAitias // discussion 23:43, 18 December 2008 (UTC), sorry, late, Lycaon (talk) 07:24, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Pom² (talk) 14:31, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Alpstein Pano.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2008 at 20:40:14
Alpstein in the Rhine Valley

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- Böhringer (talk) 20:40, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Böhringer (talk) 20:40, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice --Simonizer (talk) 22:12, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good job! --Karelj (talk) 22:22, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice colors. --Kosiarz-PL 13:28, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the composition and the colors. (Varcos (talk) 13:58, 9 December 2008 (UTC))
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very fine !--JY Rehby (talk) 16:42, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice, good quality. ---donald- (talk) 20:32, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, left part of the picture is overexposed and uninteresting, and the bright sun is very disturbing. Personally, I would have cropped it just to the right of the tree. --Aqwis (talk) 22:05, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --D-Kuru (talk) 22:34, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is nice! --Mr. Mario (talk) 00:34, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice colors! JalalV (talk) 04:22, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really nice! Georgez (talk) 20:44, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Avala (talk) 18:08, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The sun is a little bit bothering me, but the overall impression gives the thumbs-up. --Estrilda (talk) 07:54, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very cool colours, and very well done technically - Benh (talk) 21:21, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Pom² (talk) 14:32, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Deathvalleysky nps big.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2008 at 08:51:49
Milky Way. Deep Sky

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A deep sky photo in the Dead Valley national Park created by Dan Duriscoe - uploaded by MagpieShooter - nominated by Sotcr -- Sotcr (talk) 08:51, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Sotcr (talk) 08:51, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 22:07, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I like the picture but IMHO top sky should be cropped a bit, there is too much distortion. And a minor detail: a dark grey border on bottom --Pom² (talk) 10:24, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I disagree with Pom. The The Milky Way arc is an important part of what makes this image interesting. J.smith (talk) 23:29, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
    • I only mean the upper part of the sky, maybe ~150px height , where stars looks like blurry elipses --Pom² (talk) 08:42, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lošmi (talk) 03:58, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 20:40, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive and very interesting. -- MJJR (talk) 21:33, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A superb and very amazing panorama... I wonder how author kept the "stars still" during the (multiples!) long exposures... (Does someone know ?) - Benh (talk) 21:52, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Technically excellent. Do not crop. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:41, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral => featured. Pom² (talk) 14:36, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Neuer Leuchtturm Borkum.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2008 at 17:10:50
The New Lighthouse called "Neuer Leuchtturm" in Borkum, Germany

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tola69 - uploaded by Tola69 - nominated by Tola69 -- Tola69 (talk) 17:10, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tola69 (talk) 17:10, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 22:09, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose tilted to the left --AlexanderKlink (talk) 22:40, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Poor angle and technical quality -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:05, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Alvesgaspar - Considering the subject, what angle would you have used? Ground level camera position? Crane? Helicopter? And what about the technical aspect? Is it exposure? Dynamic range? Lighting? Noise? ISO? Statements like "poor angle" and "technical quality" are so vague as esoteric. Those statements, in keeping with honorable critique practice, should be followed by an explanation that points to specific and relevant elements so as to be useful to the author and the reader, so people can learn from the experience. The lack of specificity is useless, it leaves nothing, it is sterile. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 00:24, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info - Considering the angle, the shot should have been made much further away from the building, IMO. As for the technical e quality, the image could and should be sharper -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 09:23, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Camera to subject distance is a valid point, which affects angle and it is valid from the personal preference point of view. If, however, we increase the camera to subject distance, sharpness decreases. Sacrifice sharpness for point of view or sacrifice point of view for sharpness? Image, in my opinion, is sharp enough, and ca be sharpened with photoshop to suit certain reproduction needs. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 18:09, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support in cause of the angle ;-) --Latzel (talk) 07:13, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support An interesting example of a lighthouse. Good lighting, exposure, DOF. Tilted a tiny bit to the left, author should correct this minor aspect. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 14:42, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Georgez (talk) 20:50, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Awkward perspective and not really sharp for a static object. Lycaon (talk) 22:44, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - angle --Avala (talk) 18:07, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Lycaon --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 20:41, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Lycaon as well. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:38, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 20:48, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:S7 Il-86.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2008 at 20:05:28
Ilyushin Il-86

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dmitry A. Mottl| - uploaded by Dmitry A. Mottl - nominated by Dmitry A. Mottl| -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 20:05, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dmitry A. Mottl (talk) 20:05, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Size of image, nothing special - just a picture of aircraft on airport, no wow. --Karelj (talk) 22:13, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
    • The picture is 3.84 mp, almost 2 times the 2mp requirement.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Muhammad 04:33, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Exposure, composition, colours. Useful for illustrating but nothing special --Latzel (talk) 07:11, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry - messy background. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:25, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Latzel0. Diti the penguin 08:37, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Georgez (talk) 20:50, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Meh. X! (talk) 00:32, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Avala (talk) 18:06, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 20:49, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:A Wilde time 3.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2008 at 06:07:48
SHORT DESCRIPTION

result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 20:49, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Isla todos santos.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2008 at 00:05:24
Todos Santos Island Lighthouse

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 00:05, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Taken at Todos Santos Island, Ensenada, Baja California, Mexico, using a very big ladder. -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 00:05, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeSymbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The main subject in the picture isn't the lighthouse, but overall it's still nice. --Mr. Mario (talk) 15:13, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment That is correct, the main subject in the picture isn't the lighthouse. It is the lighthouse, the greenery, the cliffs, the ocean. The group of elements within a context, with their respective scale and proportion. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 02:49, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lošmi (talk) 03:55, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Interesting composition but poor image quality (overall unsharpness and lack of detail). I don't like the harsh shadows of the buildings either. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 09:19, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 15:37, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Avala (talk) 18:06, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is a bit too unsharp for me for the size of the photograph. --Estrilda (talk) 07:56, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per other opposers --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 20:42, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It's a bit nice indeed... Georgez (talk) 22:12, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Something different... I like it. For an aerial shot, I also thought it was sharp enough. --00:44, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Aerial views are really beautiful. --ComputerHotline (talk) 10:49, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose great composition but quality is too bad in my opinion --Simonizer (talk) 19:14, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Quality mitigated by difficulty of shot. Freedom to share (talk) 12:27, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition doesn't pull me in. There isn't a clear primary subject, and the eye skips between the cliff, the lighthouse, and back again. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 21:44, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 7 support, 5 opposes, 2 neutral => not featured. Lycaon (talk) 00:06, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

There might be perhaps a slight chance that photography does not require one clear subject, don´t you think? If your eye goes back and forward, that suggests that there is movement in the picture. Imagine if one were just to look at a photograph and zoom in in one clear subject. How boring. This photograph illustrates the interaction of several elements, the lighthouse and the cliffs, it speaks of the utilitarian aspect of one of the subjects, hence the eye skiping. Usually they build lighthouses in order to avoid ships crashing into the cliffs, but I guess some of them might be built as pretty props to be featured in Commons. An aerial photograph of such elements provides a visual dimension of these elements that are seldom seen from this perspective and scale. Now, if you no likey, you no likey. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 02:33, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Gustave Doré - The Holy Bible - Plate I, The Deluge.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2008 at 00:24:46
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Gustave Doré - scanned, uploaded and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:24, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Special thanks to Mike.lifeguard, who removed some pencil marks just below the image, but above the caption.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info From Gustave Doré's illustrations to the Holy Bible. I saw his in a bookshop today - it was fairly expensive, but with a 10% student discount, I could just about afford it, and my long-standing desire to finally get some high-quality Doré featured won out =). I believe the resolution, nearly 30 megapixels, should be sufficient for quite some time.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:24, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportThis a true treat, thanks for sharing it.... got any more??? --Tomascastelazo (talk) 02:44, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
    • There's about 200 in the volume I just bought. I'm going to try and scan them all, but obviously we probably shouldn't feature them all - I'll try to pick the highlights. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:21, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lošmi (talk) 03:56, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Technically well done, but not my cup of tea. Lycaon (talk) 06:59, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Dear Lycaon, It is OK not to like certain type of art, each is entitled to their own taste, or lack of it. Not to like Dore, in this instance, on the personal level, you have that right. There is, however, another side that is much larger than the personal taste: the fact that Dore is one of the Great Masters of engraving, and as such, his work is an inheritance to humanity, and as such, the importance of his work transcends the personal taste of a particular individual. FP is a vehicle that promotes quality images of encyclopaedic value, consistent with the goals of Wikipedia, and I am sure, Dore´s images fall within that category, much more above personal preferences. At the very minumum, you may oppose this particular image based on the technical merits of the digital capture, but according to you, that seems to be OK, but to oppose the image and deprive it of its opportunity for diffussion in this wiki effort seems to me, a little unfair.--Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:20, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Lycaon --Latzel (talk) 16:16, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Adam, Engravings were done at 100% of their mechanical reproduction, this is important considering that the reproduction size also determines in a way the viewing distance. In the case of the bible, the viewing distance would be the reading distance too. If this were always true, a scan of 300 dpi at 100% of original reproduction size would be sufficient. In this case the dpi is at 600 dip at reproduction size, which means that one can get a very fine 16x20 print at 300 dpi, and a decent 32x40 print at 150 dpi, that when viewed at a distance would be fine enough. Point is, keep scanning at this resolution. The only tip I would suggest is to scan in grayscale in order to save space and compress in photoshop at the highest quality. A high quality compression in gray scale will result in a smaller file than a medium to high quality color scan. Unless the color of the paper is important, I would stick to grayscale. In this case the original file is 27.5 megas vs 20.9 megas in grayscale. This is a good opportunity to really have this Great Master in high quality. Another that I would love to see here is some Albretch Durer, which I am sure, you must also love. Keep them coming!!!--Tomascastelazo (talk) 16:49, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
I figured that it's easy to create a greyscale from the colour, but not the other way around, and, as I don't want to scan the book repeatedly - it's 200+ images, after all - that I'd upload a high-res colour version, and people could use photoshop to create an appropriate black-and-white version without the paper texture. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:35, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • OK, I was just thinking about space and upload time, but you are right, better in color first and then convert. Man, I´ve been looking over this one and it is just exquisite. I am going to try a 16x20 print with this one. I will look over some of the other engravings and will suggest a few, if you don´t mind. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 17:44, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Oh, certainly! Could always use some extra eyes. I cannot guarantee how quick I'll get through them all, but I'll try to get the Pentaeuch done before Christmas, possibly Matthew as well (for obvious reasons). Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:00, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Simply because this is non photographic media is no reason to oppose such a technically and asthetically pleasing piece of work. Bravo to the creator! 203.35.135.136 07:45, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very wowwish! Muhammad 17:11, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 20:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Agree with both Lycaon and Tomascastelazo - not exactly my cup of tea, but I have to admire the quality of the image and its encyclopedic value. --AlexanderKlink (talk) 11:30, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support a stunningly dramatic image. God having declared these people wicked and unfit for life are still trying against all hope to save their children. The scan is flawless and I can't find anything to complain about.... and I sure look when it's not something commons has produced. --J.smith (talk) 15:16, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Georgez (talk) 22:13, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 00:33, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Both artistically and technically extremely good. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 22:31, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 9 support, 3 opposes, 0 neutral => featured. Lycaon (talk) 00:08, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Dmitry Medvedev official large photo -1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2008 at 18:21:44
Dmitry Medvedev, official portrait

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Presidential Press and Information Office - uploaded by Russavia - nominated by Avala -- Avala (talk) 18:21, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Avala (talk) 18:21, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- I don't like the cutting around the hair. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 19:18, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, the cutting is terrible. Why didn't they use a white background instead? --Aqwis (talk) 20:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
    • If you ask me, I think it was done on purpose to create soft edges.--Avala (talk) 20:35, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, the image is poorly masked Lycaon (talk) 20:41, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good James Bond-type portrait of one of today's world leaders. Yes the soft edges are terrible, but it seems to be the best picture of this guy. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 02:20, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
    • A leader?! You mean a marionette, right? (scnr) --AngMoKio (talk) 12:05, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
    • If it is the best picture on Commons of this guy, it could do well at COM:VI. But being the "best on Commons" is not a criterion for acceptance as a FP. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 09:32, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The edges kill the picture. --Lošmi (talk) 03:08, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The soft edges are indeed unfortunate. --Estrilda (talk) 07:50, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As per the edging on the photo. IMO, this is a much better photo. --russavia (talk) 09:26, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with russavia. --AlexanderKlink (talk) 10:12, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Well Putin is blurry in that other photo.--Avala (talk) 20:52, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
      • You'll find that is probably supposed to be like that. This is a photo which was done for Medved's presidential campaign. If you followed the election you'll know that the campaign was built around them being a 'team', but you will notice how Medved is placed out in the front of the photo, whilst Putin is in the background; perhaps this matches the reality somewhat. --russavia (talk) 16:51, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree with Lycaon. --AngMoKio (talk) 12:10, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Georgez (talk) 22:14, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 9 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Lycaon (talk) 00:09, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Lauhanvuori Kivijata 3 without grass.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2008 at 20:35:14
English: Former coast stones in Lauhanvuori National Park, Isojoki, Finland. The place is called ”Kivijata”. Suomi: Kivijata eli pirunpelto Lauhanvuoren kansallispuistossa Isojoella, Suomessa.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Roquai - uploaded by Roquai - nominated by Joku Janne --Joku Janne (talk) 20:35, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Same as File:Lauhanvuori Kivijata 3.jpg but without grass in the right top corner. Some users said that the grass in the corner ruins the composition.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Joku Janne (talk) 20:35, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Same as before, with or without grass. --Karelj (talk) 22:21, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It has no "WOW" factor. --Mr. Mario (talk) 02:10, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info - Last edit was undone by me. No anonymous votes are considered and the only way to remove a FPX template is with a support vote -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:11, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support If it is the only way to oppose FPX, I will do support. "No wow factor" is so subjective that it can't be an acceptable argument to make an FPX reject. Sorry but they are problems of logging by now and that's why my signature has not been recognized B.navez 11:14, 14 December 2008 (UTC)~
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Though I agree with Mr. Mario about the lack of wow, this is indeed not an FPX criterion. Lycaon (talk) 13:02, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow factor. X! (talk) 18:17, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Georgez (talk) 22:14, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 5 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Lycaon (talk) 00:12, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Monterey a rock with bird+their crap.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Dec 2008 at 01:27:00
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Mr. Mario (talk) - uploaded by Mr. Mario (talk) - nominated by Mr. Mario (talk) -- Mr. Mario (talk) 01:27, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mr. Mario (talk) 01:27, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose well, it's a rock with birds and their crap, nothing spectacular. Plus I don't like the crop --AlexanderKlink (talk) 10:12, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, too tight crop, uninteresting subject and dull lighting. --Aqwis (talk) 23:47, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the composition of this image is quite lacking and the subject lacks interest. Also, I think the educational value is a bit limited in this case. But, on that note, I could be wrong. Maybe I just don't get it? -J.smith (talk) 15:21, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Georgez (talk) 22:15, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured (rule of the 5th day). Lycaon (talk) 17:15, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Tobiko on grilled Albacore.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Dec 2008 at 23:14:46
How can you not just want to eat this right up...?

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by, uploaded by and nominated by J.smith. -- J.smith (talk) 23:14, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Tobiko (flying fish roe) is a delicacy in Japan. It was on my Sashimi and it has a great smoky/salty flavor. The eggs are approximately .5 - .8 mm in diameter. To get an idea of the scale, the white circles (green onion?) are approximately the size of a pencil eraser. J.smith (talk) 23:14, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, of course. -- J.smith (talk) 23:14, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kanonkas(talk) 19:38, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support   ■ MMXXtalk  20:53, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Felt like a clash of too many colors to me. --JalalV (talk) 00:32, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure how to respond to that. Would you prefer a B&W version? --J.smith (talk) 01:01, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Alright, I'll try be more specific as it is a good quality macro shot. I had an emotional reaction to the picture that it "clashed", hence my comment above. After looking it over in more detail, I believe it it the mayonnaise on the left side that puts me off. I much prefer the following crop: Image:Tobiko_on_grilled_Albacore-edit.png --JalalV (talk) 03:07, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Suboptimal lighting (too dark left bottom quarter) and not crisp enough. Seems yummy though. Lycaon (talk) 13:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lower left not sharp enough. --Mbdortmund (talk) 23:32, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
That would be a narrow depth of field seen in almost all micro photography. The subject of the image isn't in the lower left. --J.smith (talk) 00:04, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose My first reaction was also that it was too dark at the bottom left. /Daniel78 (talk) 09:14, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 10:54, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Jacksonville Skyline Panorama 3.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Dec 2008 at 23:46:21
Jacksonville, Florida

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Digon3 - uploaded by Digon3 - nominated by Avala -- Avala (talk) 23:46, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support it is already listed as quality and I think it deserves the FP status. -- Avala (talk) 23:46, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - a flawless stitch, interesting sky and very well composed. --J.smith (talk) 15:09, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very well made image, interesting. X! (talk) 18:16, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Bland and unappealing lighting, crooked verticals, substandard resolution for a pano, soft focus, washed out. This one by the same user is better. --Dschwen (talk) 19:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Dschwen --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 20:43, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
    • If this photo really suffered such flaws, it would have never been listed as quality image.--Avala (talk) 21:35, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
      • Mistakes happen. QI is a fixed quality standard, which despite requesting a higher resolution than the minimum resolution of FPC, is not that strict. FPs should be the best pictures in their area. If there is a very similar better shot by the same photographer, this image should not get promoted with the enumerated shortcomings. --Dschwen (talk) 13:44, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Georgez (talk) 22:16, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I do not like images with this dimensions ratio. Poor composition - everything is on horizont. --Karelj (talk) 23:29, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As opposers above. --JalalV (talk) 03:24, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't think this picture should be featured. It was taken with my older 4 megapixel camera and doesn't have that good of quality as mentioned by Dschwen (plus there is one stitching error). I don't know why I have not made a panorama of the skyline with my new camera, I will probably do that soon. --Digon3 talk 06:52, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 10:55, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Old wooden door detail.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2008 at 23:53:29
old door detail

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:53, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:53, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm sorry, but nothing pulls me in to the photo. --JalalV (talk) 00:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Unacceptable softness for a motionless subject (camera shake?) -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:16, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Blurry indeed. Please categorize. Lycaon (talk) 13:24, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Lycaon, Either check your monitor for it may be fuzzy or old. Print it at 300 dpi if you have a good or decent printer. I´ve notice that you often mention blurriness. I can resolve small lines that must be 1/50th of a millimiter on a print. You know how equipment is, it gets old too fast. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 16:15, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
      • OK, still out of focus. Lycaon (talk) 21:35, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is not particularly sharp. --Massimo Catarinella (talk) 16:25, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special, for me there is no reason for nomination for FP. --Karelj (talk) 19:17, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Georgez (talk) 20:33, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 6 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured (rule of the 5th day). -- Lycaon (talk) 17:16, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Old truck window.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Dec 2008 at 00:31:22
old truck window

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 00:31, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 00:31, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Didn't like composition. --JalalV (talk) 03:19, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Georgez (talk) 20:34, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 22:26, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Normal picture. Sh1019 (talk) 04:56, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured (rule of the 5th day). -- Lycaon (talk) 17:17, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Edificios-Calle50Panamá.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2008 at 20:47:53
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by 123Hollic - uploaded by 123Hollic - nominated by 123Hollic -- 123Hollic (talk) 03:09, 16 December 2008 (UTC)123Hollic (talk) 02:45, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 123Hollic (talk) 03:09, 16 December 2008 (UTC) 123Hollic (talk) 02:45, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition - sorry. The vertical gantry divides the image into two unconnected parts. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 08:44, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Michael --Herrick (talk) 10:04, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree with Michael. --Maderibeyza (talk) 12:42, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nondescript, unfocused. --JY REHBY (discuter) 18:05, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Georgez (talk) 18:57, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Its more like artistic imagine, than somethink for Wikimedia. Well not bad, quite difficult composition.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 13:45, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Michael kallerna 15:48, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 10:57, 23 December 2008 (UTC) (Rule of the 5th day)

File:Thomas Bresson - Silene (by).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2008 at 14:30:40
Brintesia circe

result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 10:58, 23 December 2008 (UTC) (Rule of the 5th day)

File:Prokudin-Gorskii-09-edit2.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2008 at 03:06:01
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by en:Sergey Prokudin-Gorsky - uploaded by Gorgo - nominated by Russavia -- russavia (talk) 03:06, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- russavia (talk) 03:06, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- The file not good quality and picture not clear. Sh1019 (talk) 04:48, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- nice composition but tilted and noise, sorry --ianaré (talk) 04:53, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment You guys do realise who the photos are by and the history behind these colour photos? If Prokudin-Gorsky can't become featured on Commons, there is something seriously wrong here. --russavia (talk) 15:56, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • So you noticed? Leonardo, Michaelangelo, Ansel Adams, Durer, etc., etc., don't have a chance here at all... Their work is too old, too small or may be even cracking... ;o) --Tomascastelazo (talk) 02:28, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
    • the scan could be denoised/tilt corrected --ianaré (talk) 18:09, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor image quality. Georgez (talk) 19:05, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Alternative An alternative would be File:Nilo-Stolobensky monastery.png. This is the image as it was originally developed using the 3 negatives. This IMO is a better image to demonstrate the work, in that the composition of the monastery is there, but the lakefront also shows the ghosting which was inevitably resulting in this revolutionary method of colour photography in the early 1900s. Remember such images were made in the 1900s using new methods for colour photography; long before the advent of digital photograhy. --russavia (talk) 19:21, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
    • this helps as far as understanding the process better but I still think the scan was not the best. That the original image is a little fuzzy due to a then-new process is entirely forgivable (and in fact adds to the image in a way), however the noise in the image is digital noise resulting from improper scanning equipment or settings, and as such is not so easily forgivable. I did look at the 'originals' from the source site, and they are also very noisy, especially considering it's a 28mb tiff. Maybe the guy doing the scanning was having a bad day or something. Anyway, I think what would be needed here is a little loving care and restoration, performed by someone much more talented than I, unfortunately. ianaré (talk) 21:52, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not sharp.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 13:25, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, per Georgez. kallerna 15:45, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 10:59, 23 December 2008 (UTC) (Rule of the 5th day)

File:Aleurites moluccana edit.png, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2008 at 15:35:18
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Shahibbul - uploaded by A302b - nominated by JalalV -- JalalV (talk) 15:35, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There were three images currently nearing the end of voting that I felt would have been good candidates with just a little cropping or editing. So I am adding edited versions here. Am adding now, as plan to be away for a few days. JalalV (talk) 15:35, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- JalalV (talk) 15:35, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Badly lit, poor background, small size. Lycaon (talk) 19:36, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose to Lycaon, do not cropp it, when having lower resolution next time.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 22:06, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too small. Georgez (talk) 15:20, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 11:00, 23 December 2008 (UTC) (Rule of the 5th day)

File:Domestic cat felis catus.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2008 at 18:14:59
Domestic cat

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Muhammad Mahdi Karim -- Muhammad 18:14, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Muhammad 18:14, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose licensing says For any other concerns, such as need for a higher resolution version of the image, or a commercial license, contact me through my talk page or e-mail me(my emphasis) puts this outside of Commons licensing requirements, while it has a GNU/GFDL license box this tag is included within that, potential FP should have unambiguous licenses. Gnangarra 02:22, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
I do not believe that is the case. A release under GFDL is non-revocable and no other message on the page can "take it back". Besides, I'm sure the message on the image page refers to acquiring permission to use the image in an unrestricted manner for situations where GFDL is impractical. J.smith (talk) 06:38, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - The head is nice but the body of the animal spoils the composition. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:34, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition. Georgez (talk) 15:26, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose kallerna 15:44, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 11:00, 23 December 2008 (UTC) (Rule of the 5th day)

File:Tarnów, centrum města, Rynek, vchod do radnice.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2008 at 22:29:35
Tarnów City hall historic doors

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Aktron - uploaded by Aktron - nominated by Aktron -- Aktron (talk) 22:29, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Aktron (talk) 22:29, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question isn't it slightly tilted to the right ? Otherwise, a fine picture, contrast is vivid and colors are well defined, yet on the muffled side, sharpness is ok. --JY REHBY (discuter) 23:57, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose tilt and composition the portions of stairs are a distraction notably the 10% of step at bottom. Gnangarra 02:09, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment good picture, but tilt should be corrected --Mbdortmund (talk) 11:20, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, per Gnangarra. Also, I find the image, overall, somewhat less than stunning. Sorry. - Anonymous DissidentTalk 11:35, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - Well, I like this image. Yes, it might benefict from a little crop at the bottom and the colours seem a bit sad. But my main concern is focus (especially the stairs). Why use this exposure choice? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:26, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 11:01, 23 December 2008 (UTC) (Rule of the 5th day)

Image:NGC 1672 HST.jpg, Replaced[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Dec 2008 at 11:47:14

Current FP — 1,280 × 919
Proposed replacement — 5,302 × 3,805
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The proposed replacement is the exact same picture, only about 5 times larger (and in this case definitely five times better). I also thought that maybe since it's the same picture it'd be appropriate to just move all the assessments of the current FP to the higher res version. (Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist or upload over the old one -- diego_pmc (talk) 11:47, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace -- Manuel R. (talk) 12:44, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Upload over the old one Or maybe we can upload and store lowres versions for every conceivable use ;-(. Lycaon (talk) 14:54, 7 December 2008 (UTC)--
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace – Also the higher res picture seems to be sharper. – Jerryteps 23:52, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Shouldn't you separate nominations? (Example: This would turn into this) --Mr. Mario (talk) 04:03, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
I honestly think this would just complicate things a lot for everybody. diego_pmc (talk) 06:44, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
Seriously, making the replacement an FP from this result isn't even the right FP procedure! --Mr. Mario (talk) 00:42, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace. I'm not too worried about the mechanics of the procedure as long as there are enough votes. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:23, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace In that case... --Mr. Mario (talk) 00:26, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace --Mbdortmund (talk) 01:21, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Please also mention if you agree to move all the assessments to the higher resolution version. diego_pmc (talk) 06:08, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Frankly if it is the same image, from the same source, but higher resolution, I would just upload it over the original and mark the existing hi-res one as a duplicate. Delisting this one and copying across the assessments is not an appropriate way to do things. If there is a suggestion that the smaller version has been processed in ways other than simple scaling then the hi-res version should be nominated for FP, and this one would only be delisted if that nomination succeeds. --Tony Wills (talk) 00:50, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
That's not quite the same, that is talking about 'improved' versions of images, which always need evalution. But Commons always treats scaled down versions of images as duplicates of the original. Delist and replace as is being suggested here is a new arbitary process that is not appropriate. So I reiterate, if they are just scaled versions of the same image then the solution is simple. If there are processing differences then it is just a normal situation - nominate the new version and delist the old one if the new 'improved' one succeeds. --Tony Wills (talk) 19:00, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Replaced -- Lycaon (talk) 18:03, 21 December 2008 (UTC)


Image:Cartesian Theater.svg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2008 at 08:21:18

JPG Original
SVG proposed replacement

Original nom[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This image is an SVG redraw of Image:Cartesian Theater.jpg by Reverie, which is a FP (see nom). Although I am only proposing this one to be a FP, maybe a possible delist and replace? Created by Pbroks13 - uploaded by Pbroks13 - nominated by Pbroks13 -- Pbroks13 (talk) 08:21, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pbroks13 (talk) 08:21, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A302b (talk) 09:12, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Could you please explain? I like to have criticism if there is a problem with the image. Pbroks13 (talk) 20:10, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Latzel (talk) 14:46, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Would you mind moving it to Delist and replace? I think it is more consistent than the current FP and could replace it. Lycaon (talk) 22:49, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Delist and replace nom, not replaced[edit]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace -- Pbroks13 (talk) 03:51, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace -- Lycaon (talk) 07:10, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:22, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace --Mr. Mario (talk) 15:22, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace --AlexanderKlink (talk) 10:07, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace --Latzel (talk) 13:39, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Original: While the SVG is largely good, the lack of detail in the thing the person is seeing is very damaging - the frying egg in the theatre projection, for instance, lacks a good view of the pan handle; the pan on the stove is squashed flat, having no sides, and the new, black stove lacks contrast with the pan. The photographic images are far, far superior to the SVG versions, while they're replaceable, we should expect better than this. Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:32, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep I agree. I prefer the look of the old one. --Lošmi (talk) 19:06, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Adam has a valid point - did not notice that before --AlexanderKlink (talk) 22:52, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Very valid point. If I get a chance, I'll be sure to try to fix the problems noted above and renominate it. Thanks! Pbroks13 (talk) 08:21, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Haha, and besides it ends right now. My clock is apparently -5 hours from this. Oh well, thanks again. Pbroks13 (talk) 08:23, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

result: witdrawn => not replaced. --Simonizer (talk) 11:33, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

File:Don Quixote 1.jpg, delisted[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2008 at 00:05:57
Don Quixote

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I think we can all agree that, while the original work has merit, this resolution (959 × 1,210) has long ago ceased to be acceptable, particularly in an engraving. (Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:05, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Lošmi (talk) 18:47, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Mr. Mario (talk) 02:15, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --AlexanderKlink (talk) 10:08, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Karelj (talk) 19:30, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Sh1019 (talk) 04:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
result: 6 Delist, 0 Keep, 0 neutral => delisted. --Simonizer (talk) 11:34, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Delist and replace nom, not replaced[edit]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace I agree, but we already have a bigger file on Commons. This should be replaced. --Lošmi (talk) 04:09, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
    • That's not really a fantastic scan, though. Obviously, I agr