Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/January 2023

File:New Orleans, Lake Pontchartrain with highlighted algae bloom, Louisiana - January 6th, 2020.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2022 at 19:20:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Satellite images#North America
Info created by Sentinel Hub - uploaded by Infrogmation - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 19:20, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 19:20, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If this were a normal photo, we'd call it posterized, but it's interesting. I wonder, though, whether it's really an FP without a key explaining what the different colors in the water indicate. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:03, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support You can even make out that famous set of power lines in the "round Earth" view off I-10 just south of the lake west of the city ... (If someone gets a good-quality pic of that, they should nominate it here). Daniel Case (talk) 04:32, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support –-Wieggy (talk) 09:59, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:40, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Red-whiskered bulbul (Pycnonotus jocosus) Reunion.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2022 at 19:35:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Pycnonotidae (Bulbuls)
Info A bird introduced onto the island of La Réunion in the 1970s and already widespread. No FPs. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:35, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:35, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 01:41, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Slight halo on the left side of the bird that you might want to do something about, though. Daniel Case (talk) 19:04, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. New version uploaded. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:44, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- IamMM (talk) 14:18, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 10:11, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:35, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good at bigger than life size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:57, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:08, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support –-Wieggy (talk) 09:58, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:41, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Pycnonotidae (Bulbuls)

File:Knightscope K5 and Ford Crown Victoria at gas station San Francisco dllu.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2022 at 21:50:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles
Info created by dllu - uploaded by dllu - nominated by Dllu -- dllu (t,c) 21:50, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think that the dystopian cyberpunk vibe looks pretty cool, with the juxtaposition of an unmarked police cruiser and a security robot in a dimly lit gas station at night. -- dllu (t,c) 21:50, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I see what you were thinking, but the right side is kind of distracting, and obviously it's kind of hard to tell the car is an unmarked police car. Daniel Case (talk) 19:05, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't get it. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:42, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I like the concept of this, but I just don't like the wall at the back. --SHB2000 (talk) 04:21, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I get it. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:36, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:04, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:55, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Badende Knaben-restored.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2023 at 00:15:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media
Info created by Otto Rodewald - uploaded by Schiffnix - nominated by Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 00:15, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ezarateesteban 00:15, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Notably unsharp at full size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:16, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per IK. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:26, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose Unsharpness far beyond that forgivable in an art digitization, plus uneven light on lower right. Daniel Case (talk) 18:33, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Insufficient quality, relatively low resolution, no description, no metadata -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:38, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:54, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cavalluccio su spirografo.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2023 at 12:48:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish
Info created by Odontors - uploaded by Odontors - nominated by Yiyi -- Yiyi (Dimmi!) 12:48, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Yiyi (Dimmi!) 12:48, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Awkward crop. Daniel Case (talk) 16:40, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regretfully oppose it's a nice image but it's a shame that the bottom of the seahorse has been cropped off. --SHB2000 (talk) 23:34, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question How about withdrawing this nomination, since you're allowed two and not three to run concurrently? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:36, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
pinging @Yiyi: . SHB2000 (talk) 08:05, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Yiyi (Dimmi!) 10:23, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:20191215 Camel-drawn carts, Pushkar 1207 8771 (cropped).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2023 at 10:57:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Animal-powered vehicles
Info created and uploaded by Jakub Halun - nominated UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:57, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:57, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose poor background. --SHB2000 (talk) 22:23, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I don't know ... I wish the background was less cluttered, but I kind of like the National Geographic qualities of this ... the juxtaposition of camels, an ancient means of transportation, with carts having very modern (if worn) fully-inflated rubber automobile tires. Daniel Case (talk) 03:03, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Composition is weak, e.g. background. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:41, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 16:09, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Triton-en.svg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2023 at 14:03:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SVG diagram of Triton, the largest moon of Uranus

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy#Natural satellites
Info created by A loose necktie - uploaded by A loose necktie - nominated by A loose necktie (talk) 05:29, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- A loose necktie A loose necktie (talk) 05:17, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose please explain where's the wow factor in a poster? Plus, I'm not a fan of the text being cut off. --SHB2000 (talk) 23:39, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can a poster not have "wow" factor? Lots of other posters of moons and planets have been Featured Pictures on Commons. I don't understand your objection to this one.

Also why did you nominate this again when this has been nominated before (and failed) --SHB2000 (talk) 03:03, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The text actually doesn't cut off when you look at the poster full size, but that's still sloppy, and other celestial-body infographics that we've elevated to FP have been more informative than this. Daniel Case (talk) 05:28, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

More informative... I think this one is pretty thorough, but I'd love to know what information you feel it lacks. I tried to give the basic known facts about this moon including its chemical composition and likely proportions of its various layers. It has no rings, no magnetosphere, no seas or mountain ranges; it has geysers, and those I included. It's southern pole is pink, which I also included. What more would you have me do? A loose necktie (talk) 07:44, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Why is this being nominated again A loose necktie? Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:49, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. If any changes have been made, I don't see them. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:27, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Hey, you know what? Despite the fact that Charles messed this nomination up last time, I'd like to withdraw it from consideration. Too much opposition from too many other artists. F*ckZZit. Thanks! A loose necktie (talk) 11:36, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 16:10, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Galería Sciarra, Roma, Italia, 2022-09-16, DD 117-119.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2023 at 21:58:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Glass ceilings and skylights
Info View up of the courtyard of (it), Rome, Italy. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 21:58, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:58, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:37, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 07:12, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:37, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ditto. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:15, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support –-Wieggy (talk) 09:59, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:17, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:20, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 14:47, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:04, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 16:52, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great. BigDom (talk) 09:54, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive! --PierreSelim (talk) 12:28, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:47, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:49, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 21:03, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:06, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:16, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice! Have you considered a portrait orientation? I tried to rotate the image 90 degrees CCW and thought it looked more balanced and with additional emphasis on those beautiful arched windows --Julesvernex2 (talk) 17:03, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, will try it out later Poco a poco (talk) 21:27, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done, do I need to ping everybody? Poco a poco (talk) 23:45, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Wilfredor (talk) 20:57, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:09, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:18, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support very good suggestion from Julesvernex2. -- Ivar (talk) 08:21, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:45, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Glass ceilings and skylights

File:Basílica de San Pedro, Ciudad del Vaticano, 2022-09-17, DD 21-23 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2023 at 21:57:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Vatican_City
Info Dome of the Clementine Chapel in St. Peter's Basilica, Vatican City. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 21:57, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:57, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 07:11, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the details. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:39, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful and neat! --SHB2000 (talk) 09:15, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support –-Wieggy (talk) 09:59, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:18, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:20, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 14:47, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:01, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:47, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 21:07, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:06, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:16, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:23, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:17, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:45, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Vatican_City

File:Christmas Island Red Crab.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2023 at 01:43:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
Info created by ChrisBrayPhotography - uploaded by ChrisBrayPhotography - nominated by SHB2000. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:43, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support the only issue I have is the leaf, which doesn't really bother me much. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:43, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much is out of focus. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:39, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. Daniel Case (talk) 05:05, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support –-Wieggy (talk) 09:58, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 10:52, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mauritius fody (Foudia rubra) male.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2023 at 13:05:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Ploceidae (Weavers)
Info An endangered bird endemic to Mauritius. A wild bird that has been ringed as part of a successful conservation plan. One FP of a close relation, the Madagascar fody. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:05, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:05, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 16:23, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 02:59, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Oversharpened. While perhaps not as familiar as the signs of traditional sharpening overuse ("wormy" fine details, increased noise in smooth areas), the cues of an AI sharpening algorithm going overboard are equally discernible: artificial fine detail (e.g., breast feathers), artifacts in slightly out-of-focus areas (e.g., tail, foreground wing, branch), and masking halos in transitions (e.g., background wing). Charles, I understand your point that the "right" amount of sharpening is somewhat subjective, but I think there are objective reasons to err on the side of caution. An under-sharpened image can always be sharpened further by the user without requiring access to the original Raw file (some software even does this automatically e.g. printing applications), but an over-sharpened photograph is irrecoverable. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 10:08, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above and the wing in the center is oof. -- Ivar (talk) 10:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Can't do anything about the oof wing. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:59, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alla fonte.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2023 at 19:45:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla
Info created by Mauro Oldmen - uploaded by Mauro Oldmen - nominated by Civvì -- Civvì (talk) 19:45, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Civvì (talk) 19:45, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice photo, but very small and with no EXIF. Small photos with no EXIF are routinely successfully nominated for deletion as likely copyright violation, and I don't see how we could even consider promoting one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:41, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek: It depends a lot on the circumstance. Here, we have two images of similar subjects with the same resolution, and together they tell a plausible story of how they could be own work as claimed. Also, it is a photo of nature rather than a person (which is much more likely to be a copyvio). Overall, I find the probability of a successful deletion nomination to be low. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:41, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thanks for that. But even so, could you imagine featuring a photo under such circumstances? Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination It's a WLE picture, I'll contact the uploader to ask for a better version with all the data. Thanks. --Civvì (talk) 12:34, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Himalayas, Nepal.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2023 at 10:45:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Nepal
Info View to the east from Cho La, 5,400 metres (17,700 ft) a. s. l., a feature-rich mountain pass to the south of the Great Himalayan Range in Cho Oyu-Everest Zone in Nepal. Glacial field covered with snow, sheer black cliffs exposing geological layers and a small glacial lake in the valley ahead. Created, uploaded, nominated by --Argenberg (talk) 10:45, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Argenberg (talk) 10:45, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful! This would easily be a delightful front page photo for a travel blog titled "Why you should visit the Himalayas" or something alike /s. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:52, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 19:50, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very striking. The snow in shadow on the upper right looks unusual to me, but I can't put my finger on exactly why. Does it look unusual to anyone else? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:20, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:09, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:10, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:05, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A well balanced photo --Michielverbeek (talk) 07:48, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Michielverbeek. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:32, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:02, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Very nice scenery, but what this lacks is a strong foreground. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:42, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:21, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support The people in the lower right corner, though easy to miss, make the image extra special imo. :) --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:54, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:46, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Nepal

File:Seattle (WA, USA), Pier 66 -- 2022 -- 1792.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2023 at 10:48:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#United_States
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 10:48, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 10:48, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I spent a day trying to decide whether I should support this or not (due to a lack of a wow factor), but I'm going to support this. I like the quiet, peaceful setting, and the subject (the 66) is in the perfect spot. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:25, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:55, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 15:33, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:38, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:55, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support –-Wieggy (talk) 09:57, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:09, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ezarateesteban 17:01, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There must be something extraordinary to see here, I guess, because there are a lot of supporters already. However, I am unable to see it, sorry. --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:16, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Uoaei, maybe would have worked at Blue hour with the neon lights on. --A.Savin 14:12, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good, but not an extraordinary motif or composition to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:36, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, per others, not enough wow. --Milseburg (talk) 07:46, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I've to agree, sorry. Poco a poco (talk) 09:15, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support This works similar to some of Edward Hopper’s more abstract paintings. I like the composition very much – the “66” is placed exactly at the right point to create a tension and contrasts nicely with the innocent blue sky. --Aristeas (talk) 10:15, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Ugly structure at the lower right corner. Also per A. Savin -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:09, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:39, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral No wow. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:52, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per A. Savin. -- Karelj (talk) 16:42, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 7 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 18:51, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cimitero Austro Ungarico Squarci di Luce.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2023 at 13:09:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Italy
Info created by Maurizio Moro5153 - uploaded by Maurizio Moro5153 - nominated by Yiyi -- Yiyi (Dimmi!) 13:09, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Yiyi (Dimmi!) 13:09, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thriller movie decor. Yann (talk) 13:12, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Atmospheric mood. -- Radomianin (talk) 16:10, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:13, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:28, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Yiyi, you are allowed two, not three concurrent nominations. Please withdraw one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:30, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I've withdrawn one of the other two candidatures. --Yiyi (Dimmi!) 10:24, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --SHB2000 (talk) 23:34, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:24, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:44, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Qualified support Background and edges look a little weird, possibly overprocessed, but it's mitigated by the use of grayscale. Daniel Case (talk) 18:18, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent use of B/W. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:41, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 10:15, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Maanshen (talk) 13:49, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 09:18, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Works excellent in B&W. --Aristeas (talk) 10:30, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 12:26, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:21, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:45, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:01, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support This image (probably) deserved to win the 2022 Italian WLM. --Terragio67 (talk) 22:26, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:15, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 00:57, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Other#Italy

File:Aerial view of Olympic Stadium of Montreal.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2023 at 20:55:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Canada
Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 20:55, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Valuable QI/VI, well composed, but not a fantastic motif to me. Maybe in the fall, with colorful trees, there might be enough for me to support, but I'd have to see it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:32, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 03:26, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose a good QI, but seems a bit monotonous to me. --SHB2000 (talk) 03:56, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 00:58, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cyrtomium falcatum 2.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2023 at 13:23:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Others
Info created by Anatoly Mikhaltsov - uploaded by Anatoly Mikhaltsov - nominated by Abalg
Support -- --Abalg (talk) 13:23, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Beautiful, but what are the vertical lines, such as I see on the upper right? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:24, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but I don't see what you are describing. Only little horizontal lines which are artefacts of the leaf. ----Abalg (talk) 06:33, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I tried to mark the area, although I didn't see the lines while adding the note, only at around 50% of full size or greater. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:35, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps these lines are due to the screen settings on your computer? ----Abalg (talk) 10:19, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Screen settings which make the lines show up on this photo only? That would be a neat trick, don't you think? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral until we get an explanation or correction of these lines. Daniel Case (talk) 03:20, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You see some lines you too? ----Abalg (talk) 10:19, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There are lines; but rejected as this looks like a poor quality focus stack (lots of blurred areas) with extensive poorly-executed cloning top right. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:44, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 00:58, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kleine kaaszwam (Skeletocutis nivea). 09-12-2022. (d.j.b.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2023 at 07:58:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Fungi#Family : Polyporaceae.
Info Skeletocutis nivea on a dead twig. Focus stack of 55 photos. (Diameter of the small dead twig ~21mm.)
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 07:58, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 07:58, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Top left fork of twig is not in focus and slightly overexposed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:21, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. New version. Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:28, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support Some haloing and light ringing around the broken twig. Daniel Case (talk) 18:49, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Light noise reduction and refinement. Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:45, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Good closeup and nice details. What is causing the shiny little white blotches on the upper left? Is that just how part of the fungus looks? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:24, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your question: all white dots on the fracture surface of the twig is the beginning of mold and will continue to grow. It's all still tiny. If you see such a small twig in nature, you can easily pass it by. --Famberhorst (talk) 06:09, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Indeed. It's very easy not to notice interesting things that are 21 mm in diameter. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:35, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:07, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:16, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I miss something here, sorry, quality is great, but wow effect is very limited to me Poco a poco (talk) 09:16, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:18, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:22, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 19:02, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Fungi#Family : Polyporaceae

File:St John the Baptist church in Calmont (7).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2023 at 11:43:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#France
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 11:43, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 11:43, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Awkward crop of tree at left, and really not that exceptional a photo. A QI yes, but not an FP. Daniel Case (talk) 19:26, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 17:31, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cucumis metuliferus fruit cross section.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2023 at 10:03:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Fruits (raw)
Info all by Ivar (talk) 10:03, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 10:03, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --D-Kuru (talk) 10:31, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support !! -- Radomianin (talk) 10:50, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't know if I've seen this fruit (vegetable?) before. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:50, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support cool-looking fruit (or vegetable, idk which as I've never seen this before either). --SHB2000 (talk) 00:32, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:11, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting Poco a poco (talk) 09:20, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:40, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 12:24, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:39, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:20, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:33, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:14, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 22:22, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 22:43, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:38, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:13, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tuxyso (talk) 12:26, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 17:30, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food and drink#Fruits (raw)

File:Neckargerach - Mittelberg - Westhang an Oktoberabend.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2023 at 10:08:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Agriculture#Germany
Info created & uploaded by Roman Eisele – nominated by Ivar (talk) 10:08, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 10:08, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 00:27, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the quiet mood and the colors. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:54, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you very much for the nomination, Ivar, and for your support! --Aristeas (talk) 14:43, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:21, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 17:10, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:38, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Frank. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:47, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:21, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Big fan of Aristeas' golden hour shots! --Julesvernex2 (talk) 11:30, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:16, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very fine picture, with its layers broken up by trees and so on. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:51, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Argenberg (talk) 20:40, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Even the sky is very beautiful, drawn by soft lines that create a happy union with the geometry of the land below...--Terragio67 (talk) 22:20, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 22:42, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:38, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:12, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support VERY nice composition and stunning detail quality (especially with the high resolution in mind) --Tuxyso (talk) 12:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support A cozy photo without stress.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:44, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you all for your nice words! --Aristeas (talk) 17:35, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Relaxing scenery --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 21:08, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 10:35, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 17:31, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Agriculture#Germany

File:Musee du Piano in Limoux (1).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2023 at 11:47:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#France
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 11:47, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 11:47, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 00:32, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 22:16, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:44, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:30, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:07, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:39, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Fischer.H (talk) 18:10, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:40, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive, even thought I would up a bit the dark down. Nice catch anyway. --PierreSelim (talk) 07:04, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:40, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 23:13, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Single stained glass windows

File:Iglesia del Gesù, Roma, Italia, 2022-09-16, DD 109-111 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2023 at 09:12:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Italy
Info Ceiling of Church of the Gesù, Rome, Italy. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 09:12, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 09:12, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is one of those images where you can stare at it for minutes on end and still find something that you hadn't noticed before. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:15, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:37, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 12:23, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 12:56, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 15:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:16, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:40, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:59, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:19, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 22:08, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:41, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:40, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:09, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I wish the crop weren't so tight but it looks like you were at the bare minimum focal length (Was it possible to lie down on the floor and look up at the center of the rotunda? That's how I took this picture. Daniel Case (talk) 19:29, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Case I've uploaded a new version offering a little bit more on each side. I could offer more but I don't think that the composition would actually get better showing more of the contiguous circles. Why should I lie on the floor, I select the focus and move to manual, set a timer and put the camera on the floor. The only thing I've to make sure is that nobody steps on the camera but there is no better tripod than that. Poco a poco (talk) 19:22, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK ... since I usually don't take pictures like this it was just what occurred to me. Daniel Case (talk) 19:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 06:05, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:38, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 16:15, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Italy

File:Iglesia de San Ignacio de Loyola, Roma, Italia, 2022-09-15, DD 27-29 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2023 at 09:13:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Italy
Info Ceiling of Church of Ignatius of Loyola, Rome, Italy. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 09:13, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 09:13, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive! --SHB2000 (talk) 10:14, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It is. Are the white spots all paint defects? Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:36, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Likely yes, compare File:Andrea pozzo, gloria di sant'ignazio, 1685-94, 02.jpg. MER-C 13:45, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - Indeed, thanks for intervening, MER-C Poco a poco (talk) 17:22, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    - Support Very good then. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:17, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 15:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:17, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support In full-screen mode with the monitor in portrait position, the impression is more intense. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:59, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:59, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:45, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:20, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 22:06, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 22:40, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very detailed, well shot. I am always a little undecided whether landscape format could be better or not. --XRay 💬 13:27, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

XRay: I agree, landscape would be probably better, but I opted for portrait due to the orientation of the painting in the middle. Poco a poco (talk) 07:50, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral CA on the window muntins at top. Can that be addressed? Support Better now. Daniel Case (talk) 19:35, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Daniel Case: I've made some improvements, but the CA was hard to see for me to be honest, better now? Poco a poco (talk) 19:13, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 16:14, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Italy

File:Spotted-backed weaver (Ploceus cucullatus spilonotus) male Mauritius.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2023 at 10:33:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Ploceidae (Weavers)
Info Bread isn't actually bad for birds, but it's not a healthy diet if they rely on it. Vendors outside the Botanic Gardens in Mauritius feed bread to the birds to attract tourists. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:33, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:33, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 12:23, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:17, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support What a face! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:05, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support chirp chirp /s. --SHB2000 (talk) 23:24, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:00, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 07:51, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice background, too --Schnobby (talk) 08:58, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Much better use of sharpening than in your previous nomination, in my opinion. The face still looks a bit crispy to my eyes, but well within the realm of personal preference --Julesvernex2 (talk) 11:27, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:22, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 22:35, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 23:18, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:07, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support The unusual perch makes the difference for me, but the colors work well together, too. Daniel Case (talk) 03:30, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice colors. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:27, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support but that kind of food can be lethal to birds. -- Ivar (talk) 15:54, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bread is not lethal in itself. But bread does not contain the right ingredients and it a the bird (like us) feel full; so if a bird relies on tourist bread it's health can deteriorate. So it's a bad thing to do. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:40, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Support. Nice picture, but the tail and the left leg are not sharp.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:37, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

With my equipment, I can't get the whole bird in focus unless I move further away from the subject and sacrifice detail. I chose to minimise cropping. What focal length and other settings would you have used? Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:36, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: I don't know. I never photograph birds and I don't have the equipment to do so. We are talking about FP level here and notice that the photo is not sharp everywhere. That makes the photo less special to me.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:49, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Check out the animal close-up animal POTY winners and finalists. Every one has unsharp areas. That's how long lens cameras work. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:55, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

At your request I have looked at those photos and these photos also do not appeal to me.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:57, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support --GRDN711 (talk) 19:28, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 17:33, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Ploceidae (Weavers)

File:Mole Antonelliana di sera.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2023 at 12:58:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Italy
Info created by Abbrey82 - uploaded by Abbrey82 - nominated by Yiyi -- Yiyi (Dimmi!) 12:58, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Yiyi (Dimmi!) 12:58, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Dust spot left of upper center.-- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:32, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I like this photo very much and don't mind the foreground, but the dust spot really should be eliminated before the photo is featured - or since it will be featured, at least before it's made Photo of the Day. I hope the photographer comes back. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:31, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:10, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great light, colours and atmosphere, they make the whole city look like a scene from Schuiten’s & Peeter’s Les Cités obscures. I would clone out the fragment of a crane jutting into the picture from the right edge – and that dust spot, of course. --Aristeas (talk) 10:26, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:19, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 18:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 22:00, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose since the dust spot remains. The foreground is also disturbing. --Milseburg (talk) 09:02, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support The foreground is indeed unfortunate, but the rest of it makes up for it. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:50, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:00, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The unfortunate foreground and minor oversights in this image can't make me underestimate it, because overall it's just too good... --Terragio67 (talk) 23:13, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:17, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 00:58, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:19, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Italy

File:Dülmen, Heilig-Kreuz-Kirche, The Cast Whale Project -- 2022 -- 0624.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2023 at 12:38:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Germany
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 12:38, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info An unusual composition but I like this composition with the sculpture around the crop and the lines converging towards the top with the cross as the central element. --XRay 💬 12:41, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 12:38, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I understand why it was nominated, but the composition still feels sort of random to me. Daniel Case (talk) 16:38, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I quite like this. --SHB2000 (talk) 23:35, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like you minimalist approach in general. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:00, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:21, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Frank. -- Radomianin (talk) 08:08, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Daniel, sorry. Poco a poco (talk) 09:18, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:28, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:39, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:58, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Daniel Case. -- Karelj (talk) 16:38, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Frank Schulenburg. -- Terragio67 (talk) 02:06, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:17, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Other

File:Tartu asv2022-04 img28 StPaul Church.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2023 at 23:54:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Estonia
Info Exterior of St Paul's Church (Pauluse kirik) in Tartu; all by me --A.Savin 23:54, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 23:54, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is a very good QI/VI to me, really sharp, but there's nothing else really exceptional to me about it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:29, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I disagree. Although this church is nowhere near some of the best churches known for its architecture, it still is exceptional to me (granted that I haven't been to the Baltic states before, but still looks nice). --SHB2000 (talk) 03:01, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I like the church but don't find the composition exceptional, although it's a nice slice of life. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This church, designed by Eliel Saarinen, is in the Finnish style and is the only one of that kind in Estonia and is definitely considered architecturally outstanding for that matter. BTW it is rather difficult to get a good photo of that church due to its location (like the road in front of it has very dense traffic, problems with shadows for most of the day etc). Kruusamägi (talk) 00:43, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. Definitely a QI but doesn't stand out enough for FP for me. Daniel Case (talk) 17:39, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above Poco a poco (talk) 09:19, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. --GRDN711 (talk) 19:44, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 00:50, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 02:03, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Horbachpark - Ettlingen 05.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2023 at 11:58:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Other
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 11:58, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 11:58, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the strong contrast of the chaotic, random nature of the trees and the relentless regularity and rectilinearity of the sculptures. Daniel Case (talk) 17:43, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Daniel. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:50, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 00:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Daniel. --Aristeas (talk) 10:33, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:12, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Virtual-Pano (talk) 13:14, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:45, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 10:35, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:44, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:56, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Other

File:Quinault Rain Forest June 2018 011.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2023 at 06:43:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United States#Washington
Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:43, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:43, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I really like this and look forward to moving my eyes around it some more. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:26, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think this too. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:26, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:15, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Irresistibly beautiful capture. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:32, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is the very sharp rainforest capture! Maanshen (talk) 12:31, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Typical lush green, however the image looks a bit choppy. Ultimately, this also reflects the diversity of the rainforest. --XRay 💬 13:20, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 13:49, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 15:23, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 17:34, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:43, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:37, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tuxyso (talk) 12:16, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:44, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 21:03, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support The kind of pictures that deserves to be seen in fullscreen or print. --PierreSelim (talk) 12:10, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:38, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I can practically smell this one. Daniel Case (talk) 22:55, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fresh and wild -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:19, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:59, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:06, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:57, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/United States#Washington

File:Mauritius fody (Foudia rubra) male 2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2023 at 13:38:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Ploceidae (Weavers)
Info An endangered bird endemic to Mauritius. A wild bird that has been ringed as part of a successful conservation plan. One FP of a close relation, the Madagascar fody. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:38, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:38, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 13:48, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:04, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:43, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 22:05, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:22, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:36, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mile (talk) 09:10, 5 January 2023 (UTC) p.S. Do calibrate[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:50, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:44, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PierreSelim (talk) 07:00, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 10:34, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 19:24, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:04, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice color, pleasant homogeneous background -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:21, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:59, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:57, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:24, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Ploceidae (Weavers)

File:Salzburg Stiftskirche Nonnberg Vorhalle 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2023 at 20:20:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Austria
Info East narthex in the north aisle of Nonnberg Abbey church, Salzburg, federal state of Salzburg, Austria. All by me --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:20, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:20, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the interplay between different light sources and different degrees of shadows. --Aristeas (talk) 20:11, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree. It has an air of mystery, in a way. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:34, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas and Ikan. Strikingly in the portrait mode of my monitor. -- Radomianin (talk) 16:18, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:06, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 01:58, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:10, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:55, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:42, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:55, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:02, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:23, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Austria

File:Palmenhaus Schönbrunn at Schönbrunn Palace in Vienna, Austria-oblique PNr°1000.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2023 at 10:25:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Austria
Info created, uploaded and nominated by D-Kuru
Comment An alternative FPC would be this image with same info as above --D-Kuru (talk) 11:06, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But that one has that awkward crop of the fountain on the left. Daniel Case (talk) 19:24, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support --D-Kuru (talk) 10:25, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:52, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Doesn't really stand out, probably because of the dull sky and light. Daniel Case (talk) 19:24, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unappealing light and sky -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:05, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 14:49, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gokyo Ri summit, Gokyo Lake, Nepal, Himalayas.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2023 at 11:55:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Nepal
Info View of Gokyo lake system from Gokyo Ri, 5,300 metres (17,400 ft) a. s. l. Ngozumpa Glacier, the largest and longest glacier in the Himalayas, is right below, along with commanding views over nearby Cholatse, Taboche, Kangtega, Thamserku and other peaks of the Khumbu Himalayas. Created, uploaded, nominated by --Argenberg (talk) 11:55, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Argenberg (talk) 11:55, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:57, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Could you add image notes for the names of the peaks, base camp etc? --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 06:03, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Likeable shot, ~~but need to correct CA over mountain ridge on left~~. Also, what should mean "Reprocessed for higher fidelity" ? Argenberg. --Mile (talk) 10:55, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Mile, I already did my best to remove those aberrations, and I'm not sure if it could be improved further without sacrificing other parts. It seemed as I found the balance right there. The history of edits is available for review and comparing. Corrections were applied to chromatic aberrations, fine detail sharpness, saturation and toning. So I collectively named it “Reprocessed for higher fidelity”. --Argenberg (talk) 12:25, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support The near right and left corners aren't sharp at full size, but this is such a striking composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:46, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 09:11, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Indeed a striking composition, very good quality for 2009, still good, and from high mountains photos we cannot require the same technical perfection as e.g. from a studio shot. --Aristeas (talk) 09:25, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 16:09, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support As Aristeas said. CA is removed, to me much better. --Mile (talk) 17:09, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the revised version as of this afternoon (GMT). Thanks for your work, Mile. -- Radomianin (talk) 18:08, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 10:44, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:04, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:42, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:54, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:03, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:50, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Nepal

File:Wood duck female (73468).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2023 at 20:41:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus_:_Aix
Info Female wood duck (Aix sponsa). The males get a lot of attention for their bold patterns/colors, but I find the females to be very pretty, too. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 20:41, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 20:41, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The one weakness of this photo is that the head is not the sharpest part of the duck. I tend to prefer File:Wood duck female in Prospect Park (73714).jpg, which also shows more color in the feathers. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:41, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. I probably wouldn't nominate that one because it's facing away slightly and the water is even "dirtier" than this one. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 20:57, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination — Rhododendrites ^talk | 20:57, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eugène Delacroix - La liberté guidant le peuple.jpg, delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2023 at 02:12:30

Info Way too small for such a large painting (Original nomination)
Delist The other versions (this and this) are not big enough either. -- StellarHalo (talk) 02:12, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Not big enough for an FP of a painting anymore, though if it were a bit better lit, I might oppose delisting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:36, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist , wow, all I can say is that is small. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:15, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:38, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist An extremely important painting, but we need a better reproduction. --Aristeas (talk) 17:30, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Daniel Case (talk) 04:45, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist +1 --El Grafo (talk) 14:23, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Kruusamägi (talk) 00:55, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:41, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 9 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. /--Aristeas (talk) 07:29, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sadko.jpg, delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2023 at 01:41:17

Info When File:Ilya Repin - Sadko - Google Art Project levels adjustment 2.jpg got successfully nominated to FP back in 2016, it was supposed to be a delist and replace. (Original nomination)
Delist -- StellarHalo (talk) 01:41, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:38, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist --SHB2000 (talk) 10:16, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:38, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Thank you for finding and nominating this relict! --Aristeas (talk) 17:30, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist -- Karelj (talk) 16:30, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Daniel Case (talk) 04:44, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Kruusamägi (talk) 00:55, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:41, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 9 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. /--Aristeas (talk) 07:32, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Portal, Pitam Niwas Chowk, City Palace, Jaipur, 20191218 1000 9059.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2023 at 10:43:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Doors
Info created and uploaded by Jakub Halun - nominated by UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:43, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:43, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I'm not in love with the excessive shadows; although nothing can be done about it, it ruins the picture for me. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:02, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. The shadows in the original did bother me as well because I thought they were too dark, which is why I reduced them, but I think the shadows are an authentic representation of the structure of the gate. The large outer frame of the gate protrudes significantly out of the wall, while the door is at wall-level. A shadow-less image, if it even is possible, would make the gate look rather two dimensional imo (though I imagine it would still be a very beautiful image). UnpetitproleX (Talk) 07:01, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support A fascinating portal and a well-done photograph. The shadow may distract at the first glance, but on the other hand it shows the 3-dimensional structure of the portal; without shadows the portal would look flat. --Aristeas (talk) 08:09, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas --Schnobby (talk) 08:38, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support according to the explaining context of UnpetitproleX. His editing is an enhancement to the image. These shadows add a special charm that makes the scenery appear like a painting, imho. -- Radomianin (talk) 16:20, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:43, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support The image would look more boring in flat light, and the shadows give it depth. A painter would have included them. Daniel Case (talk) 18:01, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:03, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:38, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 20:36, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Doors

File:A B-1B Lancer.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2023 at 16:03:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Air_transport#Military jet aircraft
Info created by Master Sgt. Nicholas Priest - uploaded & nominated by ToprakM -- --ToprakM ^✉ 16:03, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- --ToprakM ^✉ 16:03, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There's what looks like a big dust spot on the upper left. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:43, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ikan Kekek: I have removed the dust spot. --Aristeas (talk) 09:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Normally military stuff is not my cup of tea and if you try hard enough you can find some minor technical issues in the photo, but altogether this is certainly a big wow photo and well done. --Aristeas (talk) 09:38, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas, and thanks to him for the edit. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:53, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support striking! - Benh (talk) 10:01, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per supporters above. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:08, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 10:42, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:54, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Oversharpened but lots of wow here Poco a poco (talk) 20:05, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 00:55, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:44, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:42, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:54, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:04, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Fischer.H (talk) 18:26, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I feel the speed -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:23, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:49, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 17:47, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 20:39, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Air_transport#Military jet aircraft

File:Ранковий туман над пагорбами.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2023 at 16:06:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Ukraine
Info created and uploaded by Zysko serhii - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 16:06, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:06, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not huge but beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:04, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Agreed. --SHB2000 (talk) 23:24, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like Serhii's photos, he often captures magical moods. -- Radomianin (talk) 05:18, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I might have supported this for its setting, but the resolution is indeed quite low for a photo taken with a Canon EOS 6D (5,472 × 3,648 20MP) in 2019. I also can't see any particular reason why a landscape shot like this should be cropped.--Peulle (talk) 07:50, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much distorted. Horizon is quite bent. --Milseburg (talk) 08:57, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive and beautiful, the resolution is more than sufficient for this subject. (IMHO the bending of the horizon appears so strong just because of the shape of the fog/clouds; it does not damage the beauty of this photo.) --Aristeas (talk) 16:14, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Milseburg. -- Karelj (talk) 16:26, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:11, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support A romantic-looking mood, beautiful. The few blurred branches do not interfere. The categorization could perhaps be better. --XRay 💬 13:25, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:42, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:40, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:30, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice mood. Cottony universe -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:13, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 16:14, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:41, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 20:32, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Ukraine

File:Australian House of Representatives - Parliament of Australia.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2023 at 10:09:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Australia
Info created and uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by SHB2000 --SHB2000 (talk) 10:09, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support this image is already an FP on enwiki (for reference) and this area was taken in a no public access area (while the House of Reps is open to the public, you can only view it from the balcony), so good photos like this are rare. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:09, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is a perfect FP for Wikipedia because it's an excellent, even if not evenly lit photo of an important legislative body. However, for Commons, I think it's just an excellent QI/VI, because as a view, it's rather boring. It's possible that I might think differently if I were an Australian and were thinking about the place from which the photo was taken, as you do, but it's impossible to know, and anyway, I am what I am and see and react the way I do. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I just think any photo that was taken in a restricted area has an interesting wow factor given how rare it is to find such photos. --SHB2000 (talk) 23:01, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think File:Australian Senate - Parliament of Australia.jpg is a more interesting photo to look at. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:29, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Will nominate that once it's been promoted to QI (which should be any moment now). --SHB2000 (talk) 02:43, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose It may not have been the easiest photo to get as a free image, yes, but I still find the background too distracting. If that same angle used in the Senate chamber photo had been used, it might be different. Daniel Case (talk) 18:11, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support More a support to make my point: this photo looks clearly very well thought of, is clean and the place is usually prohibited from access. Yet it gets opposed on the ground of petty reasons. On the same FPC page, I see noms of more easily accessible subjects, with very simple compo, that anyone can shoot, getting loads of supports. And then we wonder why none of us gets to POTY final round. - Benh (talk) 13:54, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Indeed an excellent photo. --Aristeas (talk) 09:19, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Plus for the educational value, and for the difficulty of access. --Yann (talk) 16:11, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 14:07, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Daniel Case. -- Karelj (talk) 22:41, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:41, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 20:35, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors#Australia

File:Saint-Charles Cemetery 05.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2023 at 22:34:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Canada
Info Although it may seem incredible, the image is not in black and white. The surrounding fog and mist, characteristic of the winter weather this year, give this cemetery in Quebec an eerily cinematic feel, as if it were straight out of a horror movie. The bleak, monochromatic scene is made all the more haunting by the knowledge that it is a place of rest for the dead. Yet despite the eerie atmosphere, there is a sense of peace and solitude that pervades the cemetery, a reminder that even in death, we are not alone.All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 22:34, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 16:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love the atmosphere of this photo: on the one hand it is somewhat gloomy, on the other hand peaceful, just as you say. Just one hint: Some of the inscriptions on the gravestones seem sharper than the gravestones themselves; this is a bit irritating. If you have applied any additional sharpening to the inscriptions, I would reduce/remove it, IHMO the inscriptions should be just as sharp/unsharp as the stones. --Aristeas (talk) 17:26, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the suggestion about adjusting the noise reduction on the image. Sometimes it's difficult for me to know when it's too much or too little, so please feel free to modify the image as you see fit and upload a new version if you think it's necessary. I appreciate your help and expertise on this matter. You will find the raw here --Wilfredor (talk) 20:54, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:49, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support This image also unfolds its entire effect in full screen mode. When I look at it, I feel deep melancholy. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:40, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:40, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Just great! -- KennyOMG (talk) 16:06, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ghostly! --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:09, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support The atmosphere is well struck.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:39, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Like the bleak, haunted feeling but found my attention being drawn to the trees at the edges. IMO it needs a stronger graphic pull to the middle to stand as an FP. Perhaps a tighter crop all around would work. --GRDN711 (talk) 19:56, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:54, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:58, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 07:45, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Other#Canada

File:Олень з кленовим листком.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2023 at 16:11:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Cervidae (Deers)
Info created and uploaded by Byrdyak - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 16:11, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:11, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support What a pose! Yann (talk) 16:28, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support has a potential to be a POTY finalist. -- Ivar (talk) 17:30, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Nice portrait but pretty noisy --Poco a poco (talk) 18:13, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Great composition but soft and noisy. ~~No EXIF~~ No EXIF so I can't tell why it is soft and noisy. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:00, 2 January 2023 (UTC) edited Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:44, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I could support it even so, but not without an EXIF. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:02, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Crossed out per persuasive discussion on talk page. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:09, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support, given the consensus that the EXIF is not an issue. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regretfully oppose Normally, I would support this but no EXIF data = no FP, sorry. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:05, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Better some noise than excessive noise reduction. I would love to see the EXIF data, too, but is there a rule requiring FPs to have EXIF data? Maybe we should add that rule (for all new nominations), but right now I can’t find such a rule. We could discuss this on the discussion page. --Aristeas (talk) 16:17, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
while I agree that EXIF are extremely useful to contextualize a photo or just learn about photography, it is so easy to fake them that I wonder if it really makes sense to require them? - Benh (talk) 16:34, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We should discuss this more on the talk page, so all I'll say here is that you might want to make that argument at Commons talk:Deletion requests, because the lack of an EXIF is so often a major reason for successful deletion nominations. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:47, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I won't really expand on that, but deleting based on lack of EXIF alone is a stupid reason. EXIF can be easily made up and therefore are also to be trusted with pinch of salt - Benh (talk) 21:12, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

People who delete images here based on the fact that those photos lack EXIF data should ask themselves whether they should take on a different hobby. Sorry to sound harsh, but this is getting more and more ridiculous. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:22, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support as per Ivar. Furthermore I will not find it "less featurable" even if I learn that it was taken with a big megapixel potential camera. Good wine tasters do it without seeing the label, the others, who absolutely need to see the labels each times, don't know much about wine tasting. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 17:51, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support If this was about paintings, would we reject an image because the artist used the wrong brush and easel? (or wouldn't tell is which brush and easel he/she used) – The large majority of this year's Picture of the Year Top-10 (or was it all of them?) wasn't taken by Commons photographers. Has anyone ever wondered why that's the case? Do we perhaps focus on the wrong criteria? Is photography really only about the technical tools and who can do the best focus stacking? --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:18, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment We can't see what settings the photographer used, but it may have included a very high ISO or just an inadequate camera. The result is barely QI and is a routine composition. The leaf detracts. There are times of the day and poor weather conditions, when taking an FP of a large mammal is impossible. You just have to wait and try again. I do agree though that we promote too many easy-to-replicate photos, many of which are focus-stacks. I would limit FP to Commons photographers, but I suspect that is a minority view. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:14, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment That leaf does not distract, it is the point of the photo and gives it a real chance at the next POTY competition. --Aristeas (talk) 20:49, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per supporters above. -- Radomianin (talk) 07:08, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support A little image noise yes. The interplay of colored leaf and animal makes a lot of difference, even if the leaf distracts a bit from the animal. --XRay 💬 13:23, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 13:51, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 08:34, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:29, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:42, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:07, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Only problem for me is bottom crop. @Ikan Kekek for EXIF, yes and no. There are some who try to hide, but you can always ask for original (unedited) photo, where you can see the real stuff - EXIF. I checked shots from Byrdyak, and many are very good. Trying to find camera: D3 (12 Mpx - 4256×2832 px) and D800 (36 MPx, 7,360 × 4,912) he used. I got feeling, since softness was mentioned, this was even enlarged (D3 4256×2832 to 4500×3000) on Nikon software ViewNX. Ratio 4500:4256 equals to 3000:2832 better than downsizing from D800. Just a theory. --Mile (talk) 11:47, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:00, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 20:34, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Cervidae (Deers)

File:Réunion stonechat (Saxicola tectes) male.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2023 at 20:12:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Muscicapidae (Old World Flycatchers)
Info A stonechat endemic to the island of La Réunion. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:12, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:12, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really good quality and nice image --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 21:09, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Indeed. Sharp from head to tail plus both feet, and I like being able to see the outline of the evergreen (it looks like) in the background on the right. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:43, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. -- Terragio67 (talk) 01:55, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:23, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:54, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 10:39, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support So it is possible. The whole bird sharp!--Famberhorst (talk) 18:31, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

apart from one toe! Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:36, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

trifle. Are you forgiven.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:25, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:45, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:42, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:53, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:05, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:23, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support High resolution -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:20, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:40, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:50, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:09, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 20:40, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Muscicapidae (Old World Flycatchers)

File:Postna sarma (vegetarian sarma, Cuisine of Serbia).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2023 at 15:44:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Food
Info Postna sarma (vegetarian sarma, Cuisine of Serbia). My photo. -- Mile (talk) 15:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mile (talk) 15:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support The dish is very sharp, so I support although the background and foreground are not sharp at full size. And I'd like a recipe, because it looks delicious! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:40, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Agreed (as a side note, Serbian food is very underrated, IMO). --SHB2000 (talk) 01:37, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:13, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well done image. I've been wondering for a while if the wow factor is big enough. --XRay 💬 13:21, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I am not convinced by the photo, neither from the aesthetic nor from the photographic point of view. The composition with the red diagonal running in opposite directions (from the bottom right to the top left) is strange and, in my opinion, does not support the image effect positively, but merely crosses the plate in a disturbing way. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:21, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is Serbian postna related to Polish post ("fast", i.e. Lent)? If so, it might be worth mentioning in the description that these are normally eaten during Lent (hence being vegetarian). BigDom (talk) 13:57, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@BigDom : post if before X-mas too. Serbian Orthodox is on 7 January. Also mentioned as vegetarian since some dont eat meat, so it's just normal sarma for vegetarians. It's not jest Lent time. --Mile (talk) 14:39, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, thanks for the explanation. They look delicious whenever they're eaten. BigDom (talk) 14:58, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support The photp seems fine. — Sadko (words are wind) 15:08, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:43, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:03, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Perhaps not the most successful background, but the quality is very good, and the subject original -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:18, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile Morin. -- Terragio67 (talk) 02:01, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 14:00, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 20:38, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food and drink#Food

File:Iglesia de Santa María sobre Minerva, Roma, Italia, 2022-09-15, DD 17-19 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2023 at 21:48:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Italy
Info Ceiling of the Church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva, Rome, Italy. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 21:48, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:48, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice perspective, bravo. -- Terragio67 (talk) 01:27, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:57, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:48, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 10:35, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 14:03, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 16:31, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:34, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:41, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:50, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:08, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:19, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:28, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:59, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 02:41, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Italy

File:Iglesia del Gesù, Roma, Italia, 2022-09-16, DD 112-114 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2023 at 21:46:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Italy
Info Main altar of Church of the Gesù, Rome, Italy. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 21:46, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:46, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's worth having the very dark areas to accentuate the light on what I figure is the altar. One question: Is the block with the irregular golden stripe a modern, copyrighted work? I hope not, so that there's no possibility of the photo being deleted under a determination that that element is not de minimis but emphasized by being lit and centered. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:32, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how old thatis, but IMHO that kind of work is below the threshold of originality, and therefore not subject to copyright. Poco a poco (talk) 14:36, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt it, but I hope it never has to be argued. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:35, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Ikan. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:02, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent and impressive. --Aristeas (talk) 09:47, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:58, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 14:03, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 16:32, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:41, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 08:59, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:51, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:07, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:27, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:57, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 02:40, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Italy

File:Great blue heron eating a snake (94629).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2023 at 21:27:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Ardea
Info Great blue heron (Ardea herodias) eating a brown watersnake (Nerodia taxispilota, about 1.5m long). This is taken at a moment of lurching its head back to swallow more of the snake, with the snake's tail flung outward like a long, bizarre tongue. The technical quality/sharpness is not good enough for a typical FP of this bird, of course, but it's a special moment/action shot. Would be curious to hear if folks have suggestions for how to improve it in post-processing. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:27, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:27, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support You might be able to do local retouching around the head, but it's never going to be 'FP quality'. I'd just be happy at a great shot. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:05, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Badass bird, great moment and good composition! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:33, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Charles & Ikan. -- Terragio67 (talk) 01:47, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support !! -- Radomianin (talk) 08:48, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:41, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 10:37, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 14:06, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:04, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Charles. Capturing this is enough for FP for me. Daniel Case (talk) 04:16, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:41, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support This snake looking like a giant tongue is really awesome. It's a shame the quality and light are very average, and the background a bit busy. Still support for the originality -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:07, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:52, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:07, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:56, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is exactly the kind of shot we need more of at FPC. BigDom (talk) 07:02, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 02:39, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Ardea

File:SJ Norge BM 93 Mosjøen - Eiterstraum.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2023 at 10:48:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Norway#Northern Norway (Nord-Norge/Nord-Noreg)
Info created & uploaded by David Gubler – nominated by Ivar (talk) 10:48, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 10:48, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support A tad dark, but excellent compo and converging lines - Benh (talk) 11:01, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 14:02, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:50, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Strong image in my view: the river and the eroded rock layers add a wild charm to the scene. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:25, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 22:35, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Landscape and subject -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:04, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 05:55, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:41, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 09:09, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:50, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Radomianin. --Aristeas (talk) 10:09, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:09, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:21, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Some CA in lighter portions of rock near the edges, and more unsharp areas than I generally like. But the focus is on the train where it should be. Daniel Case (talk) 03:41, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:39, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 22:25, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:01, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Texture on the trees is a bit 'smudgy' but it's undoubtedly a great composition. BigDom (talk) 14:17, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:47, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Too much denoising but overall a solid FP Poco a poco (talk) 08:51, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support Minor CAs and details could be better. --XRay 💬 12:56, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:24, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Norway#Northern Norway (Nord-Norge/Nord-Noreg)

Xiphydria camelus female, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2023 at 10:55:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

Side view
Dorsal view

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera#Family_:_Xiphydriidae_(Wood_Wasps)
Info all by Ivar (talk) 10:55, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 10:55, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think you're a very fine macro photographer. Not only because "it's sharp" but because I love most of your compositions and soft lighting schemes. - Benh (talk) 11:04, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Benh -- IamMM (talk) 16:06, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 16:29, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:45, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the set. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:30, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 22:36, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Exceptional quality. Educative -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:03, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:41, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:49, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Benh. --Aristeas (talk) 10:10, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support ~~Might be a small error. see note.~~ Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:10, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment minor edit done. -- Ivar (talk) 15:39, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 11:10, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Argenberg (talk) 14:16, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:16, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:35, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 22:22, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:10, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful set.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:50, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Benh --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:35, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:24, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera#Family_:_Xiphydriidae_(Wood_Wasps)

File:Kloster Banz Luftbild-20220921-RM-122046.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2023 at 14:13:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Germany
Info Aerial view of Banz Monastery in the district of Lichtenfels. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 14:13, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 14:13, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive capture. One of my favorites among the German WLM winners. -- Radomianin (talk) 14:44, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:17, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support The dramatic wall of clouds provides an impressive background for the sunlit monastery. --Aristeas (talk) 15:25, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 16:51, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:02, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:42, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 22:04, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 00:19, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful, though not very big. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:20, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support. Beautiful clouds and colors. With less than perfect sharpness at 5 MP, it's not an ideal amount of true resolution, but just meets the minimum standard for a drone photo in 2022. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:57, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mile (talk) 09:10, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:52, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral everything is very good, except the resolution. -- Ivar (talk) 15:52, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:28, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:45, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Iifar, I don't understand why the resolution had to be that low. --A.Savin 20:59, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Info@A.Savin: I had to crop the image.--Ermell (talk) 22:37, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - Just fly the drone closer. --A.Savin 00:18, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    the composition would not be the same... cropping is equivalent to using a longer focal, and that is not necessarily avail on accessible to mortals drones. Also, it might be prohibited to get close to some buildings, depending on local regulations of course. - Benh (talk) 09:31, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The composition would not be equivalent, yet not necessarily worse IMO. --A.Savin 11:53, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Around that monastery there are nature protection areas (in which the use of drones is not allowed). When we discussed this photo in the German WLM jury, we checked that this photo has been taken from a point which is allowed. But Ermell had certainly not much freedom in positioning the drone here. --Aristeas (talk) 12:28, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    There are so many points in Germany where, in theory, drones are not allowed... That is, actually nearly everywhere is off-limit for you, if you have only the "Kleiner Drohnenführerschein" (and the uttermost of us will have only this, if anything). According to coordinates, the drone was nearly above residential buildings or private properties, this is (in theory) prohibited as well. --A.Savin 12:56, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 10:34, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not huge size but gorgeous composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:22, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support The German tourism ministry should use this image as a badly-needed alternative to that angle on Neuschwanstein that is probably the most frequently taken photograph in the country. Daniel Case (talk) 20:27, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:55, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:42, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 09:12, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 04:03, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Germany

File:Poranek w Pozowicach pod Krakowem, 20220612 0528 6501.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2023 at 16:19:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural_phenomena#Fog
Info Fog and crepuscular rays in the early morning in Pozowice village near Kraków. All by me -- Jakubhal 16:19, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks interesting --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:42, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support. I don't like the tree at the right because it breaks the symmetry. But still very good overall. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:52, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per King of ♥ --Llez (talk) 16:47, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Fnd the tree branches on right too distracting. --GRDN711 (talk) 19:23, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Once you've seen the branches on the right you can't unsee them. Daniel Case (talk) 20:34, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:42, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per GRDN711 and Daniel. Interesting sun rays but the foreground is distracting -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:59, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I wish the trees at right weren't there, too, but it still works for me. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:10, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 22:00, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 04:02, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Goslar asv2022-06 img29 Rathaus.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2023 at 02:23:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Germany
Info Historical Market Square of Goslar, Lower Saxony -- a part of a World Heritage Site. All by me --A.Savin 02:23, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 02:23, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely square, beautiful sight lines. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:04, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:49, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 10:11, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Perfect --Bijay Chaurasia (talk) 10:33, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support !! -- Radomianin (talk) 11:04, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:11, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 15:12, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:14, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love it --Wieggy (talk) 09:52, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Distortion evident near either side, and the chairs and table at lower left are a little distracting. But overall the image's leading lines are strong enough to overcome that. Daniel Case (talk) 21:40, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:12, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 21:58, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 00:25, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:48, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PierreSelim (talk) 07:25, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:49, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support Furniture at the left a little bit disturbing. --XRay 💬 12:55, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 09:51, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Germany

File:Quartz-400kg-Arkansas-Naturmuseum-Dortmund.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2023 at 23:33:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Large Quartz (weight: over 400kg), Location: Jessieville (USA). Photographed in museum Naturmuseum Dortmund.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Rocks and minerals
Info Very Large Quartz (weight: over 400kg), Location: Jessieville (USA), year of find: 1973. Photographed (hand-held) in museum Naturmuseum Dortmund.
Info all by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 23:33, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 23:33, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I probably would have nominated this if you hadn't. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:16, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose nice and educational, but it looks very unnatural with the black background. --SHB2000 (talk) 05:14, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment SHB2000, the "natural" background in a museum consists of several lights, vitrine glass, people walking around and a lot of other disturbing things (see here: [1], [2]) I have deliberately darkened the background to focus on the beautiful object shown here. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:28, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Black background is OK for me --Llez (talk) 09:39, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Llez. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:08, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:54, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support fine with me and it has monster size, if compared to those minerals, what I have photographed. -- Ivar (talk) 15:49, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:27, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 20:09, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 10:33, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:27, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:13, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:42, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:55, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 09:52, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Rocks and minerals

File:Australian Senate - Parliament of Australia.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2023 at 06:29:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Australia
Info created and uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by SHB2000 --SHB2000 (talk) 06:29, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support As suggested here, I'm nominating this for a similar reason as the House of Reps photo (though this appears to be taken from the balcony). Also an FP on enwiki, too. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:29, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very nice composition and quite rightly an excellent image in the English Wikipedia. From a purely photographic point of view, however, I find the yet strongly overexposed white walls quite disturbing. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:15, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support, on balance. It doesn't bother me that the areas in direct light are blown. Overall, I think this is a good composition and well-executed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:32, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Measured support It feels like the WB is off, but that's only a feeling, since the image is heavy with those reddish-maroon tones (augmented by the earth tones of the wood) ... a deliberate design choice (I think), since the antecedent House of Lords and Canadian Senate chambers both have strong red carpeting. Otherwise I like the symmetry and detail ... we can see the scuff marks on the wooden steps. Daniel Case (talk) 19:22, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:42, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:26, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Torre di Tertiveri.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2023 at 00:42:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#Italy
Info created and uploaded by Expepper - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 00:42, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 00:42, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The wires at the bottom are distracting. Many uploads by this photographer are over-processed (with extreme contrast and vignetting), so I would not be surprised that this picture here suffers from heavy post-treatment too, because it seems over-saturated -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:25, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Compare also File:Particolare affresco Villa Giulia.jpg by the same photographer to realistic colors -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:08, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't mind the wires as much, but would love to see what the original of this shot looks like - like Basile I suspect over-processing. The shot itself is dramatic enough and I would support if the colors were natural. --Kritzolina (talk) 08:02, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In general I agree with your concerns, but honestly the colours seem not too exagerrated in this case – when a ray of sunshine hits a stubble field it can really shine with vivid bright colours. I have seen that several times. So there has probably been some boosting of the colours in post but the result seems still realistic to me. I do mind the wires; maybe we could clone them out (and upload the result as a derivative file and nominate it here as an alternative) – do you think it’s worth to try it? --Aristeas (talk) 11:31, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Cloning out the wires sounds like a good idea, but if voters have found post-processing to be overkill, then offering an alternative version will only waste your time. It would be good to hear more opinions before deciding whether to offer an improved alternative or withdraw. -- IamMM (talk) 16:46, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thank you, I agree with you. --Aristeas (talk) 18:53, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment taken on midday in the july, but looks like sunset/sunrise time. -- Ivar (talk) 12:25, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I wonder if that might be a fill-in sky from Photoshop? Daniel Case (talk) 05:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ivar and my comment above -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:00, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral per Kritzolina, but Iifar's comment is concerning, to say the least. Daniel Case (talk) 05:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others, both on the wires distracting and the unnatural look. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:36, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral IMO the wires are too disturbing. --XRay 💬 12:53, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thank you all for your comments. This nomination does not seem to have a chance to pass. -- IamMM (talk) 19:25, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Crested hawk-eagle (Nisaetus cirrhatus cirrhatus) with Indian garden lizard.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2023 at 16:21:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes#Genus : Nisaetus
Info One FP. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:21, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:21, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great catch, for the bird and for the photographer. Cruel animal, but probably tasty meal :-) Basile Morin (talk) 01:15, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Question Good capture in both senses, per Basile, but is there a bit of chromatic aberration on the top (viewer's left) of the lizard? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:01, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

new version uploaded. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:18, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks. I actually meant viewer's right. I'm not positive it's all gone, but this is a great photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:49, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 09:08, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 09:51, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 18:37, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 22:18, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 22:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:35, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 02:42, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 09:48, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:14, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 00:26, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 07:01, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice catch! --PierreSelim (talk) 07:23, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice and I am glad to see that there is no oversharpning here Poco a poco (talk) 08:48, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:20, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 00:20, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes#Genus : Nisaetus

Doolhofzwam (Daedalea quercina) 27-10-2022. (d.j.b) 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2023 at 16:34:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

Development of the fungus until Oct 27, 2022
Development of the fungus until Nov 30, 2022

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Fungi#Family : Fomitopsidaceae
Info All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:34, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:34, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The idea is nice, but just two images don't really tell a great story. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:07, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't know about the pairing, but both are FP worthy for me. Tomer T (talk) 08:40, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I have looked a while on these and IMHO the development in just one month is astonishing. I also like the corresponding change in the background colours, from green/yellow in October to more reddish tones in November. --Aristeas (talk) 08:48, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 09:51, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Tomer T. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:25, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment contrast level of the photos is different, can you make it more even? -- Ivar (talk) 18:44, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: I will look up the RAW file tonight. Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:45, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Contrast evenly.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:54, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Ivar (talk) 18:05, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ermell (talk) 22:58, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:31, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 02:42, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:32, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 00:25, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think Aristeas has a good argument, and I also agree with Tomer and others on quality. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:53, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:19, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 00:20, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Fungi#Family : Fomitopsidaceae

File:Greater kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros strepsiceros) female, with flies and oxpecker.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2023 at 22:01:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Bovidae (Bovids)
Info The oxpecker's lunch is being served. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:01, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:01, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I find the plant of the foreground distracting. The focus is on the ear, not on the eye. Also the light is not very appealing. Most parts are in the shadow -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:43, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All true. Getting the flies to show up well lit was the idea, together with the oxpecker. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:25, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question. Didn't you make a wrong choice when offering this photo?--Famberhorst (talk) 05:59, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nothing wrong in trying something different... You can't always judge what will appeal to FP voters. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:53, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose All is wrong excepted the subject, head in shadow, composition not appealing, eye not in focus. Barely a QI when just thumbnail and not open to full resolution. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:19, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Also, looks a little overprocessed. Daniel Case (talk) 06:09, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:09, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fossil-Mammutbaum-Miozän-Naturmuseum-Dortmund.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2023 at 17:53:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Cupressaceaes
Info Fossil of a very well preserved tree slice of a sequoia from the Miocene. Weight: over 500 kg, photographed in the foyer of the museum Naturmuseum Dortmund
Info all by Tuxyso
Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 17:53, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 02:40, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I enjoy looking at all the fine details of the tree slice; it also works as an abstract artwork. --Aristeas (talk) 07:49, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 08:15, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cool! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:34, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:16, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 20:31, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 00:23, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:20, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:44, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 12:53, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:43, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:21, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:08, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family_:_Cupressaceaes

File:Road M-5 in Montenegro.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2023 at 18:15:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Transport
Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 18:15, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pudelek (talk) 18:15, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose If there is some subtle symbolism here, I don't see it. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:29, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Harsh light and not so special in my opinion. Boring road -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:14, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Seems like a random composition to me. BigDom (talk) 13:56, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:09, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flooded walnut orchard in Butte County, California-L1001234.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2023 at 16:28:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Agriculture#United_States
Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:28, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:28, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:30, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 22:14, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:55, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 02:41, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:47, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kritzolina (talk) 07:50, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:08, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:11, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 09:10, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:15, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:26, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:08, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 22:01, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 00:26, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Unusual. Quiet. Wish you had good boots :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:19, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PierreSelim (talk) 07:22, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice. --XRay 💬 12:54, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:44, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:21, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:07, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Agriculture#United_States

File:Hiddensee asv2022-08 img05 Gellen Strand.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2023 at 15:06:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#Mecklenburg-Vorpommern
Info Sand dune and beach at Gellen on Hiddensee Island; all by me --A.Savin 15:06, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 15:06, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow for me, too normal --Michielverbeek (talk) 16:34, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing outstanding. Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:26, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination --A.Savin 16:24, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:20220810 St. Nikolaikirche Potsdam 04.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2023 at 00:47:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Domes
Info created and uploaded by FlocciNivis - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 00:47, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 00:47, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral A bit of noise that could be cleaned up. Daniel Case (talk) 05:48, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, too much noise. I'm not so sure that a sufficient level of detail for FP can be kept after denoising Poco a poco (talk) 08:42, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I reduced the noise. Is this sufficient? FlocciNivis (talk) 11:14, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
When I look at the details I get the impression that the photo has already been treated with noise reduction, but with limited success – some details are already a bit slushy (look at the statues in the niches directly below the dome). So more denoising is not the way to go here … --Aristeas (talk) 10:54, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You should at least rotate it CCW to get the symmetry (but that will take a big toll on the framing). - Benh (talk) 18:17, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
and brighten it. The four characters in the corners are hard to figure out - Benh (talk) 18:20, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Benh Rotating is no problem, I can do that without a big toll on the framing. The four paintings at the corners will however not have much detail, if I brighten them, leaving Ezekiel on the bottom right with kind of an "Ecce Mono"-look.

Do you have any advice how I should proceed? FlocciNivis (talk) 22:08, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok... I now rotated the image and brightened the four pictures at the corners a bit FlocciNivis (talk) 10:35, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 14:55, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Emaille-Kreuz DreiE Hof 20221223 HOF07310-HDR.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2023 at 21:04:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media/Religion#Christianity
Info An enamel cross by Hermann Jünger, photo created by PantheraLeo1359531, cross created by Hermann Jünger - uploaded by PantheraLeo1359531 - nominated by PantheraLeo1359531 -- PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 21:04, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 21:04, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm not sure why I'm not feeling awed by this, but I want to give the photo a little love because it's an unusual subject for FPC and I think it's very well photographed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:25, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:11, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:41, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:06, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is an image of a modern artwork in a German church. In my opinion it is a copyright violation to share this image without explicit permission by the artist! --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:06, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment That's a good point, unfortunately. He died in 2005. This photo would be deleted if nominated at COM:DR, absent the permission that as Uoaei1 states is needed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:05, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Wait a moment. I thought the same, too, but when you scroll down on the description page, there is a hint: “Permission, see: File:Ornamientiertes Altarkreuz von Hermann Jünger 20200203 HDR.jpg”. That photo shows the same cross and actually contains a permission ticket. So it seems that there is an explicit permission by the heirs of the artist, Hermann Jünger … Could you confirm this, PantheraLeo1359531 😺? --Aristeas (talk) 06:47, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I asked for permission and the cross is licensed (by the heirs) via CC-BY-SA-4.0 as stated here: File:Ornamientiertes Altarkreuz von Hermann Jünger 20200203 RAW.png, greetings --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 13:37, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PantheraLeo1359531, you should provide the copyright information for all images in the same way as in File:Ornamientiertes Altarkreuz von Hermann Jünger 20200203 RAW.png. Not just for one image, where it can be easily overseen. --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:17, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done Uoaei1 Thanks for the hint, I fixed it --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 16:17, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Ikan (at the top of the votes). --06:47, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
This vote is not valid due to incomplete signature, sorry. --A.Savin 14:46, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, I made a very stupid error here – somehow the signature shortcut was not resolved correctly. I apologize for the inconveniences. Sorry, --Aristeas (talk) 17:00, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:54, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Technically excellent but a boring subject IMO. Would support as a Quality Image but not getting the "wow" for FP. BigDom (talk) 13:54, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I've to agree, the subject is not really beautiful to me and although the quality is really good I miss something else here (lighting, historical value,...) Poco a poco (talk) 08:55, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose pretty disturbing and unflattering background, zero sense of scale (actual size of cross), not a historical artifact to make up for shortcomings. Renata3 (talk) 02:23, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 14:46, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lukmanierpass, Passo del Lucomagno. 20-09-2022. (actm.) 26.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2023 at 05:37:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Switzerland
Info Lukmanierpas Passo del Lucomagno. (Shelter at the pass at an altitude of 1915 m) This dilapidated shelter is almost one with the wild surrounding mountain landscape. The De Lukmanier pass was already used during the Romans and the migration of peoples.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:37, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:37, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The quality that you are able to get from this camera needs a special subject in mitigation. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:56, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: If desired, I can soften the image.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:30, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think it needs to have more definition, not less, actually. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:34, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. More definition. Thank you for the explanation.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:50, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Wieggy (talk) 07:41, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Grass highlights could be toned down. Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:31, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. *@Daniel Case: Highlights green lowered. Thanks for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:00, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Kruusamägi (talk) 23:05, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:34, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 00:24, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral It looks too yellowish to me and the wow effect is moderate Poco a poco (talk) 08:53, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Poco a poco: Reduced yellow glow. Thanks for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:25, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nythar^T^.^C 06:13, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:53, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Switzerland

File:Watzmann von Südwesten.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2023 at 21:56:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#Bavaria
Info Rarely shown perspective of the Watzmann in the Berchtesgaden Alps. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 21:56, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Milseburg (talk) 21:56, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive view, high quality. --Aristeas (talk) 08:48, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. BigDom (talk) 19:22, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:14, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 23:03, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment IMO can be brightened so that the snow is actually white. I typically shoot snow at 1/500s or 1/640s @ f/8. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
+1. That's what happens when we don't compensate the exposure and let the camera pick an average one. - Benh (talk) 18:15, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:43, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 11:35, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:23, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:23, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:03, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Könntest Du bitte die Belichtung korrigieren? Der Schnee sollte weiß und nicht grau sein. Lass mich bitte wissen, ob ich irgendwie helfen kann. Beste Grüße, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:28, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:27, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:54, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Germany#Bavaria

File:Green iguana (06643p).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2023 at 21:03:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Iguanidae_(Iguanas)
Info Almost all of the FPs we have of iguanas are headshots/partial body shots. This makes sense -- their heads are striking, and they're very long creatures relative to their size. This one was probably about 1.5m or so, so I opted for a panorama (4 frames). all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:03, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support This was the first one I've seen in person. It was just basking along a wall by the water in a residential area. They're so much larger than I realized! — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:03, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Composition is great, but unfortunately there is serious blurring on one section and a stitching error as well as issues at the top edge towards middle/tail. See note. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:41, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Temporary oppose until faults corrected. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:48, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

stitching error improved. Still partly blurred. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:11, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Charles Poco a poco (talk) 08:44, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- IamMM (talk) 00:21, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Undecided yet, but currently leaning to the oppose side, because the background is really cluttered and so distracting. I agree the animal in full is interesting, compared to the other FPs showing only the head, however the blurry white and black patterns are very awkward, in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:12, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I know about the blurriness, and probably see the stitching error (but mainly I just see where the blurriness meets the not blurriness). I think this'll take some time to fix, which I unfortunately won't have until next week. Happy to come back to it, but I understand if that means folks might oppose. I'll also say I'm not sure if it's something that's properly fixable; we'll see. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:05, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Rhododendrites: your comment seems related to Charles's review. My main concern personally is the background. And I'm split, because the animal is great but the general appearance unattractive and cluttered -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:14, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, yes, wrong place. Meant to be under Charles' initial comment. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 02:42, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral after more consideration. A bokeh behind would have made the foreground more appealing -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:59, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Yes a chunk of the tail is a bit blurry and the background could have benefitted from more blurriness IMO. But that is a very eye catching longitudinal and thorough view. Better have this kind of flawed eye catching candidates then flawless boring ones. - Benh (talk) 11:28, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Please try to fix the marked stiching error. – Like Behn I think the result is still very impressive. We should also consider the resolution – if we would downscale this photo to the rather modest size most wildlife photos use, the defects would become invisible. --Aristeas (talk) 11:33, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment We don't "use" 'modest size'. We try to fill the frame. Why would you downscale when the height is a modest 2517 pixels out of 3456 available? Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:51, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Benh. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:34, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support It might be 1st Panoramic shot of Animal; Rhododendrites, Charles ?! Well done. That small part, minor mistake- to small area. Front is top. --Mile (talk) 12:07, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Never tried it. Probably will now! But like a landscape, it does need to be technically OK. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:11, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I did check, colors are great, i saw you were on end of zoom - 300mm. If you have that 400mm and with multiplyer you could try one more - anoted. Just head. Would be marevlous shot. --Mile (talk) 17:23, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have the 150mm with 2x teleconverter=300. There is a 300mm and a 100-400mm of similar quality, which work with the teleconverter, but both are too expensive for me. There's another lower quality (not quite as expensive) 100-400mm, which I tested at one point, but didn't find the quality good enough, and it doesn't work with the teleconverter so it's just effectively a 100mm difference. So, alas, no more zoom for me anytime soon, I'm afraid. Besides, I was only in Florida for a week, and the only lizards we see in New York City are quite small. :) — Rhododendrites ^talk | 18:03, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Ivar (talk) 12:27, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support More than impressive enough to overlook the minor (IMO) technical issues mentioned above. BigDom (talk) 19:25, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral per the issues Charles points, which seem like they're fixable. Daniel Case (talk) 20:01, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cool! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:33, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:22, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 14:37, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--UnpetitproleX (Talk) 09:56, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
New version uploaded - Very thankful to Mile for taking the time to improve this image -- I've just uploaded his version, which addresses some of the blurriness, stitching error, and halos. Pings to those who expressed concern: @Daniel Case, Aristeas, Benh, Basile Morin, Charlesjsharp, and Poco a poco: — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:29, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Many thanks to Mile for his work! --Aristeas (talk) 16:36, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support great idea, most of the issues mentioned above seem to be resolved. --El Grafo (talk) 15:46, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Mikael Häggström (talk) 20:34, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:54, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Iguanidae_(Iguanas)

File:Pepper No. 30.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2023 at 22:22:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink
Info created by Edward Weston, uploaded by Bammesk, nominated by Yann (talk)
Info Pepper No. 30 is an iconic photograph by US photographer Edward Weston. This is a print by his son, Cole Weston. It depicts a solitary green pepper in rich black-and-white tones, with strong illumination from above. It was shot at an aperture of f/240 with an exposure time of 4–6 hours.
Support -- Yann (talk) 22:22, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:27, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Now this really is something special. At first I thought this was a sculpture. What a way to capture a bell pepper! --Kritzolina (talk) 07:58, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support really great. BigDom (talk) 08:54, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support A classic. --Aristeas (talk) 10:45, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Kritzolina. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:48, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 11:33, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:25, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:44, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This isn't actually a print made by Weston himself, but by his son Cole (that's why the print is so cheap on Southeby's; an original by the photographer would go for far more that $5–7K). Why's that even important? Because in the analogue age, prints might look slightly different depending on how they were treated during the printing process. I'd be ok if the image description got changed (both here and on Wikipedia). The current way we're presenting this as a work by Edward Weston is not entirely correct. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:17, 14 January 2023 (UTC) P.S. I'm also not so sure about the "removal of dust spots" performed by the uploader unless we can confirm that the dust spots aren't on the print. P.P.S. And, yes the photo itself is great – I've been an admirer of Edward Weston for years now[reply]

Done Yann (talk) 08:37, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 09:26, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:08, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 15:56, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:06, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I see the back of a boxer with raised hands :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:18, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wait... f/240?! Gyrostat (talk) 12:25, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Well, Weston used a 8×10″ view camera, therefore the aperture must go to much higher numbers than on our small cameras. --Aristeas (talk) 08:32, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:41, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food and drink

File:Iglesia de San José, Florencia, Italia, 2022-09-18, DD 06-08 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2023 at 08:27:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Italy
Info Ceiling of the Church of San Giuseppe, Florence, Italy. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 08:27, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 08:27, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 12:50, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 14:05, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:21, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:13, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:06, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 19:45, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Wish it could be a little sharper closer to the edges. Daniel Case (talk) 19:46, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Top stained glass window burnt. Paintings are too soft for me. I also don't like the cut at the bottom. No FP for me. --Famberhorst (talk) 06:08, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral Thanks for the improvements. I have withdrawn my dissent, but I still have trouble with the stained glass window and the cut-out.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:06, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Will look into your 2 first points this evening Poco a poco (talk) 11:05, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Famberhorst: I've increased the sharpening (focus on paintings) and improved the hightlights, Poco a poco (talk) 19:06, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 16:38, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Great resolution, but I agree with Famberhorst about the top window and the cut-off painting and I just don't think it's a particularly interesting ceiling altogether. BigDom (talk) 05:22, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 451050 08:39, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:51, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:45, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Italy

File:Lakefront Lugano 2022.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2023 at 05:53:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Sitting people
Info created, uploaded, and nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 05:53, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 05:53, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't get why this would be an FP. I'm sorry, but there's nothing outstanding about the composition to me. If it's a portrait of sitting people, we're looking at them from the back, and there's much more of the picture frame that doesn't include them but is an OK foreground and a hazy background across the lake. Details like the "DIVIETO DI PESCA" buoy and the backpacks aren't helping me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:22, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In my view it isn't really about the people sitting there, but more about the view in general. And I mainly like the colors and consider that the most interesting part of the photo. (And I think it is better to keep the people unidentifiable.) There seemed to be also several other options like Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Switzerland, but I struggled to choose what to put there. Kruusamägi (talk) 01:09, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Hazy / Blueish background -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:47, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

+ Tilted -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:26, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I would have considered support if there'd been more symmetry in the foreground ... i.e., no tree at left and only the tree between the two benches. Daniel Case (talk) 06:22, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this kind of compo can work, but too many distrating things here as the tree at left, the branches at right. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 17:50, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Colors are nice, but for FP level there's not enough symmetry in the foreground, and the background is too covered to provide a really nice view. Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:36, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:46, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Museos Capitolinos, Roma, Italia, 2022-09-16, DD 40-42 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2023 at 08:34:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Italy
Info Ceiling of Sala di Annibale, Palazzo dei Conservatori, Capitoline Museums, Rome, Italy. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 08:34, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 08:34, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 12:50, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 14:04, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 17:21, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 09:20, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:29, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:03, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 19:45, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:53, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:54, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 11:14, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 14:37, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:25, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 09:53, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Those off-centre chandeliers are really infuriating to look at but I can't deny it's great quality overall for a difficult subject. BigDom (talk) 05:36, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 451060 08:39, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:51, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:45, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors#Italy

File:Edelwicke (Lathyrus odoratus) Blüte focus stack-20200628-RM-175552.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2023 at 21:50:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Fabaceae
Info Focus stack of the blossom of a sweet pea (Lathyrus odoratus) in a garden in Bamberg, Germany. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 21:50, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 21:50, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:37, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 09:19, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support !! -- Radomianin (talk) 09:27, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:32, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:55, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:17, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:06, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 16:13, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 17:44, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice light, excellent quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:02, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Question How big is it? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:26, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Info About 1,5 to 2 cm.--Ermell (talk) 11:11, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Seems impressive, considering. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:46, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Per Basil. Also size could be in description. --Mile (talk) 11:21, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 16:16, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:25, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:38, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:19, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 451920 08:39, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:51, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 10:51, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family_:_Fabaceae

File:서산 9품 알타리무.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2023 at 01:37:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food_and_drink#Vegetables_(raw)
Info created by Seosan City Government - uploaded by Motoko C. K. - nominated by Sadopaul -- — Sadopaul 💬 📁 01:37, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- — Sadopaul 💬 📁 01:37, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support unususal subject well executed --Kritzolina (talk) 07:50, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 09:51, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The cropped leaves. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:30, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. High-quality VI (and QI, if we awarded that title to non-Commoners' pictures), but the composition is all skewed toward the upper left corner and the haphazardly cropped leaves are not good. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:39, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. -- Karelj (talk) 17:43, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Daniel Case (talk) 19:28, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm fine with the cropped leaves, but the over-all composition feels unbalanced, the lighting is quite flat, and the background uneven. --El Grafo (talk) 12:10, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Quality if fine, but position-crop not so. Here i would put more to right side and rotate it to be more diagonal (anticlockwise), croped leaves are no bother for me. Or to crop some right side. White color could be increased. --Mile (talk) 17:18, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 10:51, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Terebellum terebellum var. punctulatum 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2023 at 09:38:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Shells#Family : Seraphsidae
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 09:38, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 09:38, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very beautiful. --Aristeas (talk) 10:00, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 11:21, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:24, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:06, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 16:11, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:23, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:10, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:50, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:23, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:38, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:57, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 452988 08:38, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:51, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 15:18, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Shells#Family : Seraphsidae

File:Grey Shrikethrush 4084.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2023 at 09:12:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Pachycephalidae_(Typical_Whistlers)
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison – nominated by Ivar (talk) 09:12, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 09:12, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent. (I guess it will be suggested to crop this photo; please do not crop it.) --Aristeas (talk) 09:57, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:19, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:07, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 16:12, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 17:45, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 17:58, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:20, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:55, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 14:35, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:24, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellant. -- Nythar^T^.^C 06:08, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:38, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:48, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good light -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:48, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 452739 08:38, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:51, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 15:16, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Pachycephalidae_(Typical_Whistlers)

File:Trollius europaeus flower - Keila.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2023 at 09:16:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Ranunculaceae
Info all by Ivar (talk) 09:16, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 09:16, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impeccable. --Aristeas (talk) 09:59, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:21, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:07, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:18, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:11, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:59, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 14:36, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:24, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 09:31, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:54, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support The fact that the fly stayed still for 82 frames is remarkable, and the flower is nice too. BigDom (talk) 05:30, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 451971 08:38, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 15:17, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family_:_Ranunculaceae

File:Saint Patrick Catholic Church (Junction City, Ohio) - stained glass, Saint Patrick - detail.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2023 at 15:36:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Single stained glass windows
Info created by Nheyob - uploaded by Nheyob - nominated by Nheyob -- Nheyob (talk) 15:36, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nheyob (talk) 15:36, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Works for me. This is the larger context. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:16, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:15, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 19:46, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:51, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:25, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 451781 08:39, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:44, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Single stained glass windows

File:Stift Melk Westseite 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2023 at 16:26:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Austria
Info West view of Melk Abbey, Lower Austria. All by me. --Uoaei1 (talk) 16:26, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 16:26, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very detailed I am even able to read the text on the top of the church --Michielverbeek (talk) 16:36, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support good light and outstanding reso. -- Ivar (talk) 16:39, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent, I would be proud to have taken such a photo. --Aristeas (talk) 17:06, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:34, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:21, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Special to me.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:36, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:42, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 09:30, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 18:05, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 18:14, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:44, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:50, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 16:43, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:22, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting view -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:49, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:24, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Have to support just for the level of detail. BigDom (talk) 05:17, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 452533 08:38, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:51, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 16:29, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:03, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:37, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Carsten Steger (talk) 18:03, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 25 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:54, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Austria

File:Container-Terminal Bremerhaven 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2023 at 21:20:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Machines
Info created and uploaded by Llez - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 21:20, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 21:20, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:21, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cranes are nicely depicted.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:33, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 07:28, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I also like the clear colours. --Aristeas (talk) 16:41, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 18:04, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nomination --Llez (talk) 18:14, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:31, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really good eye and imagination to see the good composition in these ordinary objects. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:38, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:52, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think really very tight crop at the bottom, isn't it? --A.Savin 16:40, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The background is a bit blurry, and I agree that the crop is rather tight at the bottom. Otherwise nice structures / patterns taken in good light -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:53, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Surprised it took this long for someone to nominate a photo of some port cranes. Daniel Case (talk) 04:27, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Basile. I really like the composition, but I have to agree about the crop and the OOF areas. BigDom (talk) 05:17, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 451247 08:38, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 00:30, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:03, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Machines

File:New snow on young oaks in Tuntorp.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2023 at 22:17:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural#Sweden
Info created by W.carter - uploaded by W.carter - nominated by George Chernilevsky -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:17, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support as nominator. Very pretty and has the WoW factor IMO -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 22:17, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful light.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:30, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Perfect winter morning atmosphere --Kritzolina (talk) 07:54, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great! Yann (talk) 08:27, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Kritzolina. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:45, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely and atmosperic. The winding path in the background seems to lead into the sunlight. --Aristeas (talk) 16:43, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice. (@W.carter: Please try to remove the CAs.) --XRay 💬 18:03, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 18:15, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:00, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:36, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:55, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 16:37, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 452985 08:38, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:22, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:02, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:37, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jakubhal 05:58, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 00:30, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lotje (talk) 16:55, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:00, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Sweden

File:Waldbillig (LU), Schiessentümpel -- 2015 -- 6033.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2023 at 17:52:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Luxembourg
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 17:52, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 17:52, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:58, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:22, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:58, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 452745 08:37, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:51, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 16:28, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:36, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:42, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:08, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:17, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 00:31, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 18:22, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 00:40, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Luxembourg

File:St David's Hotel from Cardiff Bay Wetlands Reserve.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2023 at 14:30:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#United_Kingdom
Info First time I've dared to nominate one of my photos for FP. I like the colours in this one and the way the huge hotel looms over the peaceful wetlands and dwarfs the buildings in the background. Created, uploaded and nominated by BigDom -- BigDom (talk) 14:30, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- BigDom (talk) 14:30, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good technical quality. To be honest I am not a fan of this kind of architecture ;–), but the contrast between the modernist hotel building and the peaceful nature in front of it makes this a “wow” photo for me. --Aristeas (talk) 18:59, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the coots. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:58, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:44, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm not fascinated neither by the level of detail nor by the composition, it lacks wow to me, sorry. Poco a poco (talk) 08:41, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support A UK winter scene that doesn't deny it's winter, but at the same time doesn't make you think you'd be perfectly miserable if you were in it. Daniel Case (talk) 20:43, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:25, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:05, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Poco a poco. -- Karelj (talk) 15:33, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Poco.--Ermell (talk) 11:06, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others --Uoaei1 (talk) 16:20, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 15:42, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose It's okay, but not exceptional. The building at the right, included in the composition, is ugly. The main one at the left is slightly original but apart from the roof, its architecture is still very moderately innovative -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:42, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 473185 09:11, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 00:42, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#United_Kingdom

File:Church, Göttweig Abbey, Austria, 20210729 1426 1033.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2023 at 08:24:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Austria
Info Facade of the Göttweig Abbey church. All by me -- Jakubhal 08:24, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jakubhal 08:24, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:43, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:28, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:10, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Midday light, quite tight crop, and quite low resolution. Sorry. --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:51, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:41, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 19:44, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's a really nice facade, but I think the photo is somewhat suboptimal. Maybe having it more from the front, and at a time of day/weather with less abrupt shadows covering it? Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:33, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I have to agree with the others, sorry. BigDom (talk) 05:15, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 17:26, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 470664 07:42, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:10, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:35, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Austria

File:FrankfurtOder asv2022-07 img17 Marienkirche.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2023 at 16:33:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Germany
Info Ceiling of the Marienkirche, Frankfurt (Oder) -- due to ~~restauration~~ restoration work, parts of the vault are removed and you can see the roof interior too. All by me --A.Savin 16:33, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 16:33, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Please add the hint about the restauration work to the description page of the photo. --Aristeas (talk) 09:08, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Done. --A.Savin 12:57, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good and interesting (parenthetically, it's restoration). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:27, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 09:53, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina R 470282 10:02, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:51, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:52, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:08, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 20:05, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Qualified support Loses sharpness near the corners. Daniel Case (talk) 02:55, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 13:52, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 00:32, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 18:22, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:53, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Germany

File:Wachau vom Gochelberg 20220519 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2023 at 15:42:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Austria
Info View of Dürnstein and Wachau, Lower Austria
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 15:42, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Trivial light, but outstanding scenery and resolution. --Milseburg (talk) 16:47, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:53, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:38, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 455260 07:42, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:28, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 17:58, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 11:41, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:31, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:52, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Settlements#Austria

File:Божићна вечера (traditional Christmas dinner; Folklore of Serbia).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2023 at 18:25:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink
Info Traditional Christmas dinner by the candles. My photo. -- Mile (talk) 18:25, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Info Try to check the photo by night.
Support -- Mile (talk) 18:25, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. My only concern is a non-compositional one: for fire safety, could the leaves be further from the flame? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:10, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The crop is tight at the left, and at the top. Although this is a special lighting, I think the picture is slightly underexposed overall -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:45, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ikan Kekek thats Badnjak, it suppose to be burnt day before X-mas, but not in the flat. Basile Morin i added exsposure, if i put it a bit more, exposure would be unreal. So i asked to be checked by night. --Mile (talk) 06:13, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lighting slightly improved in my view. But vote ~~Neutral~~ because not enough space at the borders. (Imagine this picture with a frame eating away at the margins, then the content lacks space) -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:10, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Basile Morin OK, we agree with exposure, i would not push EV more. I also just added 150 px in wide and 100 px above. --Mile (talk) 07:51, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support yes, acceptable now in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:12, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 19:46, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I just find it a little too busy. Daniel Case (talk) 05:52, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Daniel. The arrangement doesn't work for me: The food should be the clear star of the show here, but somehow it's not. --El Grafo (talk) 15:54, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Atmospheric and educative. The arrangement works for me, assuming that it shows a typical traditional table decoration for this meal. --Aristeas (talk) 16:40, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Daniel Poco a poco (talk) 19:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. BigDom (talk) 20:38, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina R 453529 10:09, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Daniel. -- Karelj (talk) 17:24, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:05, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:51, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food and drink

File:Grant DeVolson Wood - American Gothic.jpg (delist), delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2023 at 07:03:54

Info Out of all the famous paintings in the history of western art, this painting is one of my least favorites. But, given its importance to 20th century American art, we should probably keep a version of it as FP. Since the current FP is too small, we should replace it with the larger version I uploaded recently. (Original nomination)
Delist and replace The Google Art Project version is actually slighter larger than the version I uploaded but its bottom left corner is blurry. -- StellarHalo (talk) 07:03, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace -- Ivar (talk) 09:19, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace I fixed the license. --Yann (talk) 09:28, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace --Aristeas (talk) 13:56, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace Higher resolution, and the colors seem slightly improved -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:14, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace --Uoaei1 (talk) 16:17, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace Daniel Case (talk) 19:41, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace Rosalina R 466784 08:42, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace --SHB2000 (talk) 00:07, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 9 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. /--A.Savin 13:39, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Caspar David Friedrich - Wanderer above the sea of fog.jpg (delist), delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2023 at 07:38:28

Info The quality is no longer good enough 16 years later. (Original nomination)
Delist and replace This proposed replacement is the best version I could find online and while it is a huge improvement, it is not perfect. So, I do not mind if any of you would like to delist without replacing -- StellarHalo (talk) 07:38, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace -- Ivar (talk) 09:18, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace I fixed the license. --Yann (talk) 09:25, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace Indeed the replacement is not perfect (somewhat oversharpened), but much better than the current FP. --Aristeas (talk) 09:57, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace --Wilfredor (talk) 15:55, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace Clearly better than the previous one -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:12, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace --Uoaei1 (talk) 15:43, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace The improved version does enough justice to this mesmerizing painting. Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:29, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace Daniel Case (talk) 05:45, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace Rosalina R 470981 08:42, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 10 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. /--A.Savin 13:40, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Basílica de Santa María la Mayor, Roma, Italia, 2022-09-16, DD 22-24 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2023 at 15:48:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Italy
Info Ceiling of the Basilica of Saint Mary Major, Rome, Italy. The church, completed in 1743, is a UNESCO World Heritage Site, a Major papal basilica as well as one of the Seven Pilgrim Churches of Rome and the largest Catholic Marian church in Rome. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 15:48, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 15:48, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:46, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:51, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 23:15, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very impressive. It makes me want to travel to Rome again to admire the art of the ancient painters. -- Radomianin (talk) 23:21, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina R 457370 01:59, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jakubhal 08:10, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Radomianin. --Aristeas (talk) 08:40, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:05, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 16:01, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 16:37, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:52, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:09, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Carsten Steger (talk) 17:55, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:42, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:41, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 18:36, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 14:06, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 21:39, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 21:17, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Italy

File:Fuente de Trevi, Roma, Italia, 2022-09-15, DD 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2023 at 15:40:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Fountains
Info The Trevi Fountain (in italian Fontana di Trevi), Rome, Italy. The fountain is an 18th-century fountain in the Trevi district in Rome, Italy, designed by Italian architect Nicola Salvi and completed by Giuseppe Pannini and several others. Standing 26.3 metres (86 ft) high and 49.15 metres (161.3 ft) wide, it is the largest Baroque fountain in the city and one of the most famous fountains in the world. Note: there is only one partial FP (statue of Oceanus) of this subject. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 15:40, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 15:40, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well captured, interesting angle. -- Radomianin (talk) 23:25, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Definitely should replace Livio's picture where it's still being used. --A.Savin 15:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:35, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:09, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:51, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 471941 07:41, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 00:32, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fresh take on a building that I would say is the most frequently photographed in Rome, but for the several other buildings in Rome one could say that about. Ideally I'd photograph this in grayscale, at night, with Anita Ekberg and Marcello Mastroianni frolicking in the waters, but one can only wish for so much. Daniel Case (talk) 03:52, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Although I would have welcomed a bit more contrast on the sculptures. ;–) --Aristeas (talk) 10:14, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Will look into that this evening Poco a poco (talk) 11:06, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that would be great! Looking again at it, I think you could just try to increase the contrast (of the midtones) in the complete image, no need to select the sculptures. --Aristeas (talk) 15:14, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:39, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 18:27, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 21:17, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Sculptures#Fountains

File:Castle of Varazdin (17).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2023 at 11:46:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Croatia
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 11:46, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 11:46, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 14:21, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 21:51, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Special, good lighting mood. -- Radomianin (talk) 23:33, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Appealing composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:57, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina R 470128 01:59, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good light and framing. --Aristeas (talk) 08:42, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:05, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:26, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:53, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:08, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:29, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:24, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:34, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 18:25, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:30, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mile (talk) 13:30, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Croatia

File:Wschód słońca nad Kanałem Łączańskim w Brzeźnicy, 20211009 0711 3152.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2023 at 07:57:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural_phenomena#Fog
Info Sunrise over foggy Łączany-Skawina channel in Brzeźnica, Poland. All by me -- Jakubhal 07:57, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jakubhal 07:57, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very atmospheric, well done. --Aristeas (talk) 08:56, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support +1 -- Radomianin (talk) 09:33, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:04, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is a perfectly captured sunrise. --A.Savin 15:10, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 16:00, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:51, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:09, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others, especially Alex. I can feel the sunrise to such a degree that I am imagining the birds singing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:33, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 463175 07:41, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 13:51, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Carsten Steger (talk) 17:53, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:49, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:43, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 13:47, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 18:37, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Pretty Poco a poco (talk) 13:02, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 14:05, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:29, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good shot. --Mile (talk) 18:37, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:50, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 21:38, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Jakubhal 11:17, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural_phenomena#Sun

File:20210131 twig withBuds coveredByIce DSC05404 PtrQs.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2023 at 08:36:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Ice
Info Twig with buds, covered by ice. Created and uploaded by PtrQs - nominated by me, --Aristeas (talk) 08:36, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Under all the submissions for this month’s photo challenge, this one immediately caught my eye. Yes, it’s simple, but I like exactly the simplicity. Most of us have seen a branch like this covered in ice, but most of the time we don’t look closely; the photo shows how much elegance and beauty we miss out on. Since it’s an ice-and-snow shot, the almost blank white background is fine, it enhances the minimalist composition. --Aristeas (talk) 08:36, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nomination and the apt image analysis. (That photo caught my eye while sorting the recently promoted QIs.) -- Radomianin (talk) 09:27, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:03, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jakubhal 13:31, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 15:58, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:51, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:09, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I was walking in December in similar conditions and felt sorry not to have my camera with me - but this is a much better capture than I would have managed. Thanks for nominating, Aristeas! --Kritzolina (talk) 18:47, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others. Great details of the buds below the ice. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:31, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 454576 07:41, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 13:53, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:45, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 18:38, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 06:27, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 09:11, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good catch, this is different Poco a poco (talk) 13:01, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 14:04, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support unusual Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:28, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support good finding --Mile (talk) 18:37, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cool! --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:49, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 21:36, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 07:52, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena#Ice

File:Katholische Pfarrkirche St. Julitta und Quiricus, Andiast (d.j.b.) 07.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2023 at 05:41:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Single stained glass windows
Info Katholische Pfarrkirche St. Julitta und Quiricus, Andiast Stained glass window.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:41, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:41, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 05:54, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the simplicity of the window with its clear subject, nicely taken. --Aristeas (talk) 16:46, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 18:02, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 18:16, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:58, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:32, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, it's obviously good quality but I just don't personally get the "wow" for FP with this one - seems like a pretty typical stained glass window. BigDom (talk) 05:26, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 451076 08:38, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per BigDom. -- Karelj (talk) 16:59, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. Daniel Case (talk) 19:29, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support In this IMG, IMHO, it's possible to see more than good quality.
Per Aristeas. --Terragio67 (talk) 21:19, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:10, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Single stained glass windows

File:Groom Nepal.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2023 at 08:01:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info created and uploaded by Krish Dulal - nominated by UnpetitproleX (Talk) 08:01, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 08:01, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The messy background is distracting in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:30, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Basile. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:31, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 17:30, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile and Ikan Daniel Case (talk) 02:33, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose no way can I support this with that background. --SHB2000 (talk) 00:31, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 16:10, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kiwifruit 'Red Passion' cross section - Italy.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2023 at 15:40:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Fruits (raw)
Info very tasty variety, all by Ivar (talk) 15:40, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 15:40, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Perfect in my opinion.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:50, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:09, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Famberhorst. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:02, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:29, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rosalina R 463331 03:48, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 07:50, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very appetizing. --Aristeas (talk) 08:00, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support It looks like the fruit is pealed, but apparently not -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:39, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:10, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 13:46, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:51, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 18:39, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 12:58, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 14:03, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:27, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:07, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 21:30, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:11, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food and drink#Fruits (raw)

File:Breil-Brigels in Graubünden. 23-09-2022. (actm.) 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2023 at 05:53:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/Switzerland#Grisons_(Graubünden)
Info Breil-Brigels, Panorama road between Waltensburg / Vuorz and Breil/Brigels, Canton of Grisons, Switzerland. Carved out passage. Huge carved rock overhanging the trail.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:53, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:53, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Track not for trucks :-) Basile Morin (talk) 12:36, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 470709 13:28, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 02:49, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality and the composition works for me Poco a poco (talk) 12:59, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice. May be a touch too warm. --XRay 💬 14:02, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:43, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:31, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Poco a poco and XRay. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:15, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:45, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:13, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Switzerland#Grisons_(Graubünden)

File:Red Kangaroos at Sturt National Park NSW.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2023 at 15:35:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family_:_Macropodidae_(Macropods)
Info created & uploaded by PotMart186 – nominated by Ivar (talk) 15:35, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 15:35, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support It’s great how they look almost symmetrical at the viewer. Maybe a tiny little bit dark, but sweet soft light and good out-of-focus surroundings. --Aristeas (talk) 07:59, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Surprise :-) Basile Morin (talk) 12:40, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:21, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I've tried to take a photo of red kangaroos around 400 km from here (near Broken Hill) and all I have to say is it was hard (they're not very still unlike the ones found closer to the coast). This one was well taken. --SHB2000 (talk) 12:44, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 471317 13:28, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 13:45, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:49, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 18:38, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 06:30, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 13:00, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:27, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 21:35, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yeriho (talk) 15:11, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:19, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:11, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals#Family_:_Macropodidae_(Macropods)

File:Église Sainte-Famille-de-l'Île-d'Orléans.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2023 at 03:48:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Canada
Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 03:48, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice place and symmetry, but the perspective from above doesn't really work in this case, with the lamps blocking the view. Also, there's something strange going on at top right. Mikael Häggström (talk) 23:29, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per that weird anomaly at the upper right that Mikael points out. Daniel Case (talk) 19:21, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 16:12, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Human karyotype with bands and sub-bands.png, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2023 at 17:20:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/Computer-generated#Biology
Info created by Mikael Häggström - uploaded by Mikael Häggström - nominated by Mikael Häggström -- Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:20, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The work integrates Public Domain source images by Was A Bee, Kelvin Ma and Michał Komorniczak
Also, a special acknowledgement to everyone involved in the Human Genome Project for generating the source data.

Support as creator/nominator. As the Human Genome Project finally reported the completion of the sequencing of all 24 human chromosomes last month [3], this is an overview of the human genome. Even at low magnification, each chromosome pair is seen, with its main changes during the cell cycle (top center), and the mitochondrial genome to scale (at bottom left). Higher magnification more clearly shows annotated bands and sub-bands. This image helps explain genetics-related concepts in 64 English Wikipedia articles (see global usage). I think this png version is preferable to feature, as the svg version used to generate it shows some rendering issues in the wikis (such as the arrowheads between the cells at top pointing to the right). Further information on the image description page. Mikael Häggström (talk) 17:20, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:24, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive work! It’s great that you have even a SVG version available. --Aristeas (talk) 08:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per the nomination text. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:34, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina R 458416 11:05, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:01, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:07, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:50, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic_media/Computer-generated#Biology

File:Dülmen, Heilig-Kreuz-Kirche, The Cast Whale Project -- 2022 -- 0509-13.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2023 at 17:59:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 17:59, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Info It's a detail. The detail of a whale with wavy shapes is opposite the round window, the rather monotonous gray is opposite the colorful window, the sharp whale is opposite the blurred window. In this form, I see the image as photo art. Or not? My guess is that the contrasts will continue in the reviews. -- XRay 💬 17:59, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 17:59, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Guess what side I am on ;) --Kritzolina (talk) 19:39, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:21, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Works perfectly in portrait full screen mode. -- Radomianin (talk) 07:14, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 452680 08:37, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive juxtaposition of the colourful rose window and the grey, but richly structured whale detail.--Aristeas (talk) 09:07, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 11:20, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Here is the contrast opinion. This is a very experimental image, and I considered it for a while. But sorry, no, I cannot go with it. One of my points: not only the background, but almost half of the whale or what we see from it is out of focus. --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:40, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your assessment and good description of your motivations. It is helpful like that. When I took the shot, it was important to me that the foreground be sharp and the window have the appropriate degree of blur. This conditions that the slightly more distant part of the whale already shows a slight blur, but without being really noticeable in the overall impression. --XRay 💬 05:53, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:08, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:19, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:51, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Pedro Américo - D. Pedro II na abertura da Assembléia Geral.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2023 at 23:24:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical
Info The Emperor's speech (Pedro II of Brazil in the opening of the General Assembly). Created by Pedro Américo - uploaded by PeterSymonds2 - nominated by Vinícius O. -- Vinícius94 (talk) 23:24, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Vinícius94 (talk) 23:24, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is that glare or damage in the lower left? By the way, "Created by" needs to be the name of the painter. Considering the size of the painting, this file is probably too small to be considered one of the most outstanding examples of a reproduction of a painting on this site. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:38, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not exactly an innovative painting in its time. ;–) --Aristeas (talk) 10:03, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 21:05, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Like Ikan said, digital reproductions of paintings of this size will need to be many times larger to qualify for FP. StellarHalo (talk) 00:49, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 08:57, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Catedral, Arezzo, Italia, 2022-09-17, DD 74-76 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jan 2023 at 09:12:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Italy
Info created and uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 09:12, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 09:12, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support The placement of people is random. Otherwise wonderful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:34, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Awesome! -- Radomianin (talk) 10:29, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice, thank you IamMM! Poco a poco (talk) 11:04, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 464457 13:28, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:55, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 09:11, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 12:03, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 14:01, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:26, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Indeed an impressive church. (Arezzo is IMHO one of the underrated places in Tuscany, it deserves more attention.) --Aristeas (talk) 17:14, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Arezzo is definitely a great place to visit. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:04, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:21, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:39, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Case: It looks like you really liked it :) Poco a poco (talk) 21:42, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I guess I did. Daniel Case (talk) 21:43, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support But why are the people in the pew so unnaturally broad?--Llez (talk) 15:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, Llez, I reduced the distortion on both sides. Poco a poco (talk) 17:22, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:20, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 02:10, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Italy

File:Пейзаж на Венере.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jan 2023 at 09:11:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Rocks and minerals#Others
Info created and uploaded by AlexmarPhoto - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 09:11, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 09:11, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support That's quite attractive, and at first, I thought it was a user's abstract artwork. I think the wording "crystals growing from molten sulfur" is more idiomatic, if it's accurate. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:29, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Works perfectly as a modernist painting of a mountain landscape or as a completely abstract artwork (only at the bottom the artist was a bit hasty ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 10:11, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per supporters above. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:25, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 458766 13:28, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:56, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support cropped version to exclude the artifacts at the bottom. Mikael Häggström (talk) 02:54, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I agree with Mikael Poco a poco (talk) 12:55, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support --XRay 💬 14:00, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 15:29, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Shouldn't be adress somehow "correct". When i saw "abstract artwork" and name "Pejsaž na Venere" - "Venera Landscape" i was sure it was painting. Till description. Not so good idea. --Mile (talk) 18:33, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The cropped version has been uploaded. MaHaN ^MSG 21:55, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thanks Mahan, but unfortunately I had to revert to the previous version. There is no EXIF data in your file and I'm not sure if this includes a non-controversial minor crop as this is supposed to be a scientific image, not a pretty one. If you upload the cropped version with EXIF as a new file, it will be OK. -- IamMM (talk) 22:08, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Here is a cropped version with EXIF data etc., properly uploaded under a new filename. If you prefer it … I am fine with both versions. --11:18, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Comment Thank you Aristeas. From an aesthetic POV, I find the cropped version more worthy of FP status although if it is to be used in a WP article, I would probably still prefer the original version. Do we need to ping all voters before replacing the improved version? -- IamMM (talk) 15:15, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment IamMM, I agree with you about the pros and cons of both versions. Well, I think the cropping is a minor change of the image (< 10% have been cropped) but still worth mentioning, so IHMO we could just switch the nomination to the cropped version and then ping all previous voters. --Aristeas (talk) 17:06, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with your suggestion Aristeas, but before changing nom let's fix the file name issue that Daniel Case mentioned. According to the translator app, the current name is unrelated to the image, but it would be better if someone familiar with the Russian language confirmed this. -- IamMM (talk) 00:27, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear IamMM, this version has got so many supporters now that I think we should just forget about the crop ;–). But it would indeed be useful to rename the file (and my cropped version accordingly) to a more descriptive name – “Contryside on Venus” is a very poetic name, of course, but misleading; such names are common on Flickr, but not here on Commons. --Aristeas (talk) 07:05, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support I like this per Aristeas. But ... Daniel Case (talk) 20:46, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question ... why is it called "Countryside on Venus"? Daniel Case (talk) 20:46, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:10, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 19:07, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:20, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 02:10, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Rocks and minerals#Others

File:Массив Ачешбок, Адыгея, Acheshbok, Adygea.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2023 at 11:32:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Russia#Southern Federal District
Info Acheshbok mountain massif and Shisha River headwaters valley in somewhat menacing weather conditions, Republic of Adygea, Western Caucasus. The landscape represents the Early Mesozoic evolution of the Western Caucasus, its Triassic-Jurassic sedimentary and magmatic history. Created, uploaded, nominated by --Argenberg (talk) 11:32, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Argenberg (talk) 11:32, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 14:21, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:14, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 23:38, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina R 474585 01:59, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice landscape, good framing. I wish the background was even sharper, but there was probably some haze. --Aristeas (talk) 08:52, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 15:13, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:08, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Snow on the distant mountains looks more like slopped white paint, but it's so far away as to make up a minuscule part of the image. Daniel Case (talk) 03:05, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:32, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 18:24, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support, though I wish the background was sharper. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:12, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jakubhal 14:46, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dull light, and the technical image quality does not convince me --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:52, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yeriho (talk) 15:13, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lots of positives in this image but lacks sufficient wow for FP. Agree with Uoaei1. --GRDN711 (talk) 19:02, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mile (talk) 14:28, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Russia#Southern Federal District

File:Saint John church in Caselles (8).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2023 at 12:47:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Andorra
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 12:47, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 12:47, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful composition, light and clouds. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:37, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The light is quite bad, in my opinion, because the sun is in front. It is visible from the shadow of the pillar oriented towards us. And what we see in this picture is the shadowy side of the building. It cannot be fixed, but I think it's worth mentioning it -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:55, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In music, sometimes a moment can be emphasized by being softer than the rest. I think a similar thing can happen with the darker part being the subject, against a bright sky. Perhaps that's an unorthodox reaction. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:52, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would have preferred the music brighter :-) Basile Morin (talk) 12:27, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak support~~ Support I second Ikan’s point that the church stands out due to the shadows; in addition in full-size view it does not appear too dark but shows many details. I am rather irritated by the stuff at the right; probably it was unavoidable, but it is still a bit ugly. --Aristeas (talk) 08:54, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to full support thanks to cropping. --Aristeas (talk) 17:11, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I would crop the road sign and the pole at right. Yann (talk) 10:47, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:08, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 478146 07:41, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Dull light, washed out colors, and the right part is distracting in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:27, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Agree, bad timing and I've had probaly croppe a bunch at the right Poco a poco (talk) 15:17, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Poco a poco, cropped; it's better? Tournasol7 (talk) 11:23, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm not bothered by the stuff at the right as the image's leading lines are strong enough. For those who are, I have suggested a crop.
Nor does the light bother me ... it's early spring, of course it will be harsh, and to me that gives it its own beauty. Perhaps some !voters think it would only look good in midsummer with trees in full leaf and blue sky with little white fluffy clouds. But that would look too much like so many other FP nominees. Here we have a landscape whose colors reinforce/are reinforced by that of the subject building, which wouldn't be the case in warmer weather.
Plus it's also nice to have an FP of Andorra. Daniel Case (talk) 19:58, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We have already 4 FPs from Andorra. Poco a poco (talk) 21:29, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Then it'll be nice to get another one. Daniel Case (talk) 02:20, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:37, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ The road sign and the pole at right should be cropped. Yann (talk) 10:54, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yann, cropped; it's better for you? Tournasol7 (talk) 11:20, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ah yes. Yann (talk) 11:43, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Per others opponents, cropp of the image could help. -- Karelj (talk) 11:17, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Karelj, it's cropped now. Tournasol7 (talk) 11:22, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. -- Karelj (talk) 13:47, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I would have preferred it to be cut a little more from the right so that the cars are not visible, but the composition is interesting anyway. -- IamMM (talk) 20:47, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support the cropped version, which highlights the subject much better. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:09, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mile (talk) 14:29, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Andorra

File:Gurabija (гурабија,Qurabiya; Cuisine of Serbia).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jan 2023 at 18:44:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food_and_drink#Sweet_food
Info Gurabija (гурабија, Qurabiya). Food of Middle East, Magreb, Kavkaz and Balkan. My shot. -- Mile (talk) 18:44, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mile (talk) 18:44, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great details and sharpness. Are the ones with almonds on the outside otherwise different from the ones without them or with powdered sugar on them? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:54, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Ikan Kekek You mean walnuts ? Yes, base of all is of walnut. Sugar-one (added above) is for guests who like more sugar. "Healthy" are those others with added honig and honig+hazelnuts. Walnuts is just inside. --Mile (talk) 20:15, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. The Wikipedia article about these states that they're made with almonds. Thanks for explaining. I don't see any walnuts, though?? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:28, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Walnut are filled with wheat flour as a base of each cookey, not in whole peace but more like "powder". They might be too strong (hard) if i put them on like hazelnuts. Sometime i might try. Many recipes there. --Mile (talk) 08:21, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support I would love to try one and the picture looks like I could just pick one up --Kritzolina (talk) 21:11, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 07:01, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well done and appetizing. --Aristeas (talk) 10:06, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Question Very detailed. The description does not mention any {{focus stacking}}, but I'm surprised that F/5 (from the metadata) produces such a large DoF. Does this picture really come from a single shot? -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:22, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Basile Morin it is stacked, that is also wrtiten in EXIF. Think around 6 shots. No need for chablone now.--Mile (talk) 08:12, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Small comment spotted now in the exif. Thanks for the answer. I've added the related category -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:38, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Basile Morin It's more a technical shot so stack, but i should go to single shot too, romance is there. --Mile (talk) 11:07, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PetarM: what do you mean with "chablone" (written above)? Not in the dictionary. Also I don't understand "it's more a technical shot so stack". -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:19, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think he means "template" (шаблон in Serbian, from French chablon). BigDom (talk) 14:27, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, šablon=Template. I was so sure word is from french language. ch-sh (č-š)... but Germans have Schablone, while i see French say Pochoir. Russia similar "Šablon" (шаблонэ). --Mile (talk) 14:58, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was from French too, guess you learn something every day. BigDom (talk) 19:28, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:05, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:59, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:10, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:54, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 469830 12:27, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Would eat. --Explodingcreepsr (talk) 17:01, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 02:03, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food_and_drink#Sweet_food

File:Dunnock (Prunella modularis occidentalis).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jan 2023 at 15:22:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Prunellidae (Accentors)
Info No FPs of this bird family. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:22, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:22, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 18:08, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment ~~Seems underexposed.~~ --Mile (talk) 18:36, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My default setting is -1 exposure stop, so exposure is usually adjusted. So this is my choice, but happy to change if there is a consensus. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:28, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support The head could be a little sharper and a little better lit, but I love the hoarfrost and find the bird sharp enough to support featuring the picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:59, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support I see no regarding the exposure --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:38, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 13:47, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 20:29, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Weak color banding in the background but o.k.--Ermell (talk) 21:54, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; new version. Reprocessed from RAW in TIF/16bit mode rather than JPG/8bit. Slight tweak to exposure Mile. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:43, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I checked, you did better with banding, removing pink by bird and sky is better. Worsen for me: tree (it lost that morning soft colors) also bird; its lost some nice colors. I wouldnt touch EV, contrast,sharpening on the bird itself. --Mile (talk) 08:17, 25 January 2023 (UTC) p.S. Uncalibrated vs sRGB maybe failed now[reply]

Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:39, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:38, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Carsten Steger (talk) 19:55, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Delicate icy branch, soft light -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:13, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:06, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the edited version. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:35, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:58, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:42, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile & Radomianin Terragio67 (talk) 02:32, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:19, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 02:04, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Prunellidae (Accentors)

File:Redhead in Central Park (15503).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Feb 2023 at 02:06:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus_:_Aythya
Info Male redhead (Aythya americana). all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 02:06, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 02:06, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful, the soft reflections in the water provide a nice background. I first wanted to suggest a small CCW rotation (cf. the shadow of the head), but it probably looks more natural as it is. --Aristeas (talk) 10:11, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice, especially on the head. I'm very surprised that there are no QIs of this type of duck yet. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:12, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:09, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 15:29, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:00, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:00, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:53, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:19, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 451092 12:26, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 06:18, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus_:_Aythya

File:Main Range Track, Kosciuszko National Park 12.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jan 2023 at 09:25:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Australia
Info created and uploaded by Dhx1 - nominated by SHB2000 --SHB2000 (talk) 09:25, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support as nominator. The image is already a QI and a VI and we don't have any FPs of snow in New South Wales (or Australia for that matter). --SHB2000 (talk) 09:25, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Ok, we give it a plus for lack of FP in this field but unfortunately the composition is not working for me, quality is fine but the result presented here is not extraordinary for FP IMHO, sorry Poco a poco (talk) 12:57, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Agreed on the composition, and also, I think that snowscapes are snowscapes, and there's nothing that makes this one obviously different for being in Australia. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:02, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 05:58, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination. I knew this was borderline, but thought there was no harm trying. --SHB2000 (talk) 05:27, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:U.S. Coast Guard Wreath-Laying Ceremony Commemorating the 75th Anniversary of the USS Serpens Destruction (49460922396).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Feb 2023 at 08:00:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Musicians and singers performing
Info US Coast Guard bugler playing the Last Post - created by Elizabeth Fraser - uploaded by Quenhitran - nominated by Gbawden -- Gbawden (talk) 08:00, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Gbawden (talk) 08:00, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The branch above the bugler is distracting and while the bugle is pretty sharp, the bugler is a bit grainy. All in all, definitely a useful photo but not outstanding to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:07, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I do have to agree, this branch is disturbing :( PierreSelim (talk) 14:53, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have made a copy without the unsharp branch at the top and without the unrecognizable yellow something at the right border. If you like it better, we could nominate it instead of the original … (And it would be great if somebody could tell me how I should state the PD state of the derivative version correctly ;–) The original is {{PD-USGov-Military-Army}}; for my derivative I have used {{PD-because}}, is that OK or should I use {{CC0}} instead? Or yet another license template?) --Aristeas (talk) 11:10, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Gbawden: Now that two users have criticized that branch: would it be OK for you if we would nominate the edited version as an alternative version in this nomination? I can do that if you agree … --Aristeas (talk) 17:03, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ːWill do so. Thanks for the efforts Gbawden (talk) 06:23, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:53, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Patio del Belvedere, Ciudad del Vaticano, 2022-09-14, DD 73-75 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Feb 2023 at 21:19:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors
Info View of the Courtyard of Belvedere (in italian «Cortile del Belvedere»), Vatican City. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 21:19, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:19, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the lighting (especially of the clouds) looks a bit unnatural to me, but I realise that you can indeed see such sunsets in some places (I have seen some similar ones before as well). Was the Cortile del Belvedere naturally like this? If that's the case, then I support. --SHB2000 (talk) 22:17, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I can assure you that it looked like this. I was fascinated when I saw it by chance, namely, to get to the Apostolic Palace where the Sistine Chapel is located, you have to cross a passage looking to this courtyard from where I took the shot. It looks like it was the perfect mix of blue hour and red clouds right after sunset. Poco a poco (talk) 22:41, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, Support. --SHB2000 (talk) 23:21, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
From my experience, most pink sunsets actually look more vibrant in person than in photos. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:19, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful and not strange to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:43, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:19, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support obviously. And +1 to KoH’s comment: actually it is hard to catch the vibrance of a pink sunset in a photo. --Aristeas (talk) 10:17, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice colours. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:21, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support according to Poco a poco's additional comment. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:58, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 12:19, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Must be great being there at that time of day. -- Nythar^T^.^C 13:45, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 19:31, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 00:29, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Special sunset. Nice clouds, and good timing with the lightings visible in the buildings. Interesting view -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:31, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:15, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:02, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:53, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 450175 05:11, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another +1 to King of Hearts's comment. When I try to take a photo of a pinkish sunset like this, it either turns out red or not at all. --Explodingcreepsr (talk) 17:33, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:43, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:00, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors

File:Basílica de San Pedro, Ciudad del Vaticano, 2022-09-17, DD 09-11 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Feb 2023 at 21:19:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Vatican_City
Info Rich ceiling of the main nave of St. Peter's Basilica, Vatican City. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 21:19, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:19, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fascinating, beautiful, striking! -- Radomianin (talk) 22:00, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 22:15, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Radomianin. --Aristeas (talk) 10:16, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 12:06, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 00:29, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:46, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:01, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive! --Nheyob (talk) 17:40, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:54, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:18, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 07:30, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 458775 12:26, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:23, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 09:17, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Vatican_City

File:Chernobyl fox 2016 - 3.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Feb 2023 at 04:55:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Canidae_(Canids)
Info created by Vic Harkness - uploaded by Amakuha - nominated by Gdefreitas -- Gdefreitas (talk) 04:55, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Gdefreitas (talk) 04:55, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Insufficient quality and there is a watermark. --A.Savin 07:57, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Watermarks are not allowed per the image guidelines. --Explodingcreepsr (talk) 17:11, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Watermark. Yann (talk) 10:27, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Havana - Cuba - Man giving a V sign - 1326.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Feb 2023 at 16:52:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info Smiling man giving a “V” sign in Havana, Cuba. Created and uploaded by Jorge Royan (†), nominated by --Aristeas (talk) 16:52, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jorge Royan has passed away in 2014, but his galleries still contain many undiscovered treasures. For example I love this portrait – yes, it’s simple, but it’s so likeable and warm-hearted. I don’t think the “V” sign is a political statement here; the smiling of this man is so friendly and self-ironic that he rather seems to express the natural wit and admirable perseverance with which the ordinary people of Cuba manage to cope with their lives despite all the difficulties. --Aristeas (talk) 16:52, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cbrescia (talk) 17:22, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 19:00, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 19:30, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 19:58, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 23:11, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 00:30, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support The lighting is a bit harsh and seems to blind the man, but the composition of the picture is fine -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:50, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jakubhal 06:53, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:04, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 10:10, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:18, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:02, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:08, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 18:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:52, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Argenberg (talk) 12:03, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support The image of a man holding the symbol of peace in his hands with a tired and innocent look on his face is a haunting reminder of the struggles faced by the people of Cuba. The country, once a tropical paradise and a destination for writers like Ernest Hemingway, has been ravaged by years of hardship and difficulty. Traveling to Cuba is like traveling back in time, not to the glamorous days of Hemingway's Cuba, but to a post-apocalyptic world where the human spirit has been broken by the absurdity of poverty and oppression. This photograph touches me deeply, as I also come from a country that has suffered under a similar dictatorial regime. The man in the photograph stands as a symbol of hope, holding the symbol of peace with a look of tired on his face. But the reality is that the struggles of the Cuban people continue, and the road to true peace and freedom is still long and uncertain. The photograph is a sad and nostalgic reminder of the human cost of political oppression and the resilience of the human spirit in the face of adversity. Abajo la dictadura Cubana! --Wilfredor (talk) 12:11, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your emotional comment, Wilfredor; I fully agree with it. Through our longtime Cuban friends, I know that your analysis is more relevant than ever. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support I could tell without even reading the caption that the man was Cuban. Not sure what it was that tipped me off. It may have been the car. Regardless, great photo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Explodingcreepsr (talk • contribs) 18:30, 27 January 2023‎ (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Wilfredor, to me looks like something you might have seen in Life magazine back in the late '50s/early '60s. Daniel Case (talk) 20:46, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 16:21, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 18:51, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:01, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People/Portrait#Men

File:Aerial image of Stromboli (view from the northeast).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2023 at 17:49:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Volcanism
Info created by Carsten Steger - uploaded by Carsten Steger - nominated by Carsten Steger -- Carsten Steger (talk) 17:49, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Carsten Steger (talk) 17:49, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Currently the white balance is off in my opinion. Overall too cold. All the greenery is blueish and the blue of the sea is too intense -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:08, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Info Basile, thank you very much for your review. I have uploaded a reprocessed image that hopefully removes the blueish appearance. --Carsten Steger (talk) 17:24, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes the tones seem more natural to me now, thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:14, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Karelj (talk) 16:15, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Daniel Case (talk) 21:03, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Carsten Steger, was this taken from a helicopter or other aircraft? From how high up, do you suppose? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:48, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Info Ikan Kekek, the photo was taken from an aircraft (a Cessna 172) flying at an altitude of 3600 ft (1100 m) --Carsten Steger (talk) 05:03, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support That's quite impressive, and it deserves more support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:29, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Excellent overview of the island, beautiful and educative. --Aristeas (talk) 10:00, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support especially given the new information about how it was taken. BigDom (talk) 12:20, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan Kekek and Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 06:15, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It is tilted slightly to the left (see the horizon right of the island in the background) --Llez (talk) 15:51, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment It was difficult for me to align this image because the horizon is practically invisible because of the haze in the distance. I used the inversion layer that is barely visible in the haze for alignment. The dark area to right of the island in the background (Lipari) is not the horizon. This area is just waves caused by the wind blowing in the channel between Lipari and Salina, which lies to the right of Lipari outside the image. --Carsten Steger (talk) 18:25, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:57, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 467412 05:11, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 16:22, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:00, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena#Volcanism

File:Convallaria majalis inflorescence - Keila.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Feb 2023 at 15:48:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family_:_Asparagaceae
Info all by Ivar (talk) 15:48, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 15:48, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:37, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:48, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:16, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:58, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Delicate light and impressive sharpness everywhere -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:20, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 02:59, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 07:40, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile. --Aristeas (talk) 08:05, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think I can smell the flower --Schnobby (talk) 09:39, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Me too :-) -- -donald- (talk) 09:58, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support !! -- Radomianin (talk) 10:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support wow! --Terragio67 (talk) 11:49, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:09, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:51, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:49, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very, very impressive control of the camera's focus. The whole thing is very sharp. Great photo. Explodingcreepsr (talk) 16:42, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:03, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:38, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 16:20, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:57, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:20, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 16:19, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:46, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Asparagales#Family_:_Asparagaceae

File:Messier83 - Heic1403a.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Feb 2023 at 10:11:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy#Galaxies
Info created by NASA - uploaded by Fabian RRRR - nominated by Q28 -- Q28 (talk) 10:11, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
SupportThis is the one that takes up the most space picture I've ever seen-- Q28 (talk) 10:11, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
CommentThis image is currently also participating VIC, Go and have a look if you are interested. Q28 (talk) 10:29, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wonderful, gorgeous, awe-inspiring! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:19, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 12:01, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Too cool! --Nheyob (talk) 16:00, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:04, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great. --Aristeas (talk) 16:32, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 17:21, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 18:51, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Perhaps there are people somewhere around there reviewing pictures of our Milky Way? :-) Basile Morin (talk) 01:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good and educational for a space pic. --SHB2000 (talk) 03:00, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 09:40, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 475393 12:26, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 22:22, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Explodingcreepsr (talk) 17:20, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:03, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:07, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 16:20, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:03, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:48, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Astronomy#Galaxies

File:Rüdersdorf asv2022-06 img7 Museumspark.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Feb 2023 at 02:01:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry#Germany
Info Airview of the Museum Park Rüdersdorf, Brandenburg. The structures all belong to former limestone-processing factory, and at the right a part of the local limestone surface mine is visible --- all by me --A.Savin 02:01, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 02:01, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Quite a good and extensive drone picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:51, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:07, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 00:29, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think it would be stronger, though, if it were cropped in more on the subject factory and quarry. See note. Daniel Case (talk) 04:49, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 475881 12:26, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. -- Radomianin (talk) 17:30, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 16:21, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:02, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:22, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:49, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Industry#Germany

File:Les subsistances (noir et blanc).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jan 2023 at 17:08:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors
Info Les Subsistances (Lyon, France) seen from the other side of the Saône, photo taken at night. All by me -- Librospect (talk) 17:08, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Librospect (talk) 17:31, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:57, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I like the aesthetic, but can't help feel it might be better with a bit of a crop at the sides to focus on the building itself more. BigDom (talk) 19:30, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose a bit too dark for my lighting; also can't help but notice the poor crop. A shame because I too like the aesthetic of the shot. --SHB2000 (talk) 12:01, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Thanks for your feedback SHB2000 and BigDom! I added a note with a proposed crop, to understand what you suggest about it. -- Librospect (talk) 12:57, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  That crop works for me. SHB2000 (talk) 01:07, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  @Librospect Me too. BigDom (talk) 18:42, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  @BigDom @SHB2000 @Explodingcreepsr That's done. Thank you again for your feedback! Librospect (talk) 19:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I can see what it's going for. I definitely agree that the crop would be better. --Explodingcreepsr (talk) 17:27, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The cropped version works better. --Aristeas (talk) 09:40, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 16:21, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:38, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:50, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors

File:PeruRail 758 La Joya - Guerreros.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Feb 2023 at 15:54:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Peru
Info created & uploaded by David Gubler – nominated by Ivar (talk) 15:54, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 15:54, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:36, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:49, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:11, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is one very subtle dust spot a bit to the right and slightly less down from the upper left corner. I don't think it's obvious enough to figure in voting, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:40, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support nicely taken. --SHB2000 (talk) 02:59, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:15, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 06:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 07:22, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 07:37, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:06, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great as always. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:35, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 10:54, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 11:48, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:12, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 15:02, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:51, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:50, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice shot. --Explodingcreepsr (talk) 17:14, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:03, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I wish there would be more details. --XRay 💬 13:37, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 16:19, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:39, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:20, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:45, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Peru

File:All Saints Catholic Church (St. Peters, Missouri) - stained glass, sacristy, Immaculate Heart detail.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Feb 2023 at 15:24:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural_elements#Single_stained_glass_windows
Info created by Nheyob - uploaded by Nheyob - nominated by Nheyob -- Nheyob (talk) 15:24, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nheyob (talk) 15:24, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the idea to take good photos of representative details of stained-glass windows. We ususally try to show the whole window in its splendid abundance; but this has the disadvantage that the viewer overlooks the beauty of details. Here additional high-quality photos of carefully selected details can be very helpful and instructive, and deserve a feature. --Aristeas (talk) 08:11, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree with Aristeas and I also really like the way the light works here --Kritzolina (talk) 19:53, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 20:21, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 453063 05:10, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:58, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:47, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:49, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 16:20, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:51, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:47, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural_elements#Single_stained_glass_windows

File:Burg Hochosterwitz Westseite 02a.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Feb 2023 at 07:18:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Austria
Info West side of Hochosterwitz Castle, municipality of Sankt Georgen am Längsee, Carinthia, Austria. All by me. --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:18, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:18, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:04, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful view which emphasizes the castle’s impregnability. – There is a small spot in the sky which looks strange (see image note); I suggest to clone it out. --Aristeas (talk) 09:12, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Done Spot is removed. It was some kind of stitching error. You have seen this very well, I did not notice it! --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:57, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thank you very much! --Aristeas (talk) 08:02, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I would also clone out those dark clouds at the top, they don't help in the composition --Poco a poco (talk) 09:59, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very striking. The spot in the sky looks like a little wispy cloud. I think it's OK to leave the clouds in; that's what it looked like, and it's good. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:16, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 12:05, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:20, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support But per Poco a poco --Llez (talk) 16:03, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support no cloning needed, the clouds are part of the nature. -- Ivar (talk) 17:22, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:51, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Please do not clone clouds; not what cloning is for. But a top and bottom crop would highlight the subject better. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:14, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Too much sky for my taste (I would crop 1 quarter of the top) otherwise fine view, and huge resolution with an impressive amount of detail -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:11, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Basile. --SHB2000 (talk) 03:01, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:17, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support impressive, nice Je-str (talk) 16:42, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Info I have applied a tighter crop now. --Uoaei1 (talk) 16:38, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 16:20, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 18:53, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:49, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Austria

File:Turmfalken IMG 2659.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Feb 2023 at 15:27:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Falconidae_(Falcons)
Info created by Fischer.H - uploaded by Fischer.H - nominated by Fischer.H -- Fischer.H (talk) 15:27, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Fischer.H (talk) 15:27, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:50, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The birds are nice, but the nest is not ideal. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:18, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Kestrels are rock breeders and do not build nests. Building niches or wall holes serve as nesting sites Fischer.H (talk) 18:15, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kestrels choose a variety of places to lay their eggs Fischer.H. The chosen place is known as a nest. I am quite aware they do not build twiggy nests like many birds. They are not 'rock breeders' as you state. Kestrels will use other birds' nests, wooden nest boxes or other man-made structures as well as a wide range of natural locations. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:24, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment In German-language literature Kestrels are often described as „Felsbrüter“ (rock breeders); and while it is mentioned that they often use nests of other birds, the chosen place is normally not called „Nest“, but „Brutplatz“ or „Nistplatz“ (nesting site). It is possible that all of this is wrong, of course, and it is possible that these are just differences between the linguistic habits of bird specialists in different languages. But if it is wrong it is a common error and not Fischer.H’s error. --Aristeas (talk) 09:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Cute and a good composition to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:45, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support cute. --SHB2000 (talk) 02:59, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 07:42, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:05, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful motif and good composition. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:31, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 11:51, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rosalina 🍵 476758 12:26, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:07, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support Original -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:51, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:55, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:48, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support One of my favorite animals, great subject and photo. --Explodingcreepsr (talk) 17:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:38, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 16:20, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 18:52, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The unsharp background areas are a little noisy, suggesting some hefty amount of processing to make the birds as subject work. But the point is that they do. Daniel Case (talk) 19:54, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 16:19, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:47, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family_:_Falconidae_(Falcons)