Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/March 2014

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

Contents

File:Bibliothèque humaniste de Sélestat 21 janvier 2014-97.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2014 at 04:43:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sélestat library, with statue of Jean Mentel, printer and publisher (1410-1478).
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Claude TRUONG-NGOC, nominated by Yann (talk) 04:43, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Sélestat library, with statue of Jean Mentel, printer and publisher (1410-1478).
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Yann (talk) 04:43, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Nice find. Saffron Blaze (talk) 05:44, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It looks CW tilted. QI? --XRay talk 11:03, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
    • Where do you see that? It seems OK to me. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:31, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice, excellent. Not tilted IMO--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 14:53, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 17:16, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice --Paralacre (talk) 19:20, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:46, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 07:58, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tuxyso (talk) 10:42, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 11:33, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:23, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good job both to the photographer and the discoverer :) I just have the impression that it is a bit ccw tilted Poco2 21:09, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice picture --Pavan santhosh.s (talk) 08:58, 25 February 2014 (UTC) Not eligible to vote --A.Savin 14:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 13:09, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Avenue (talk) 23:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 11:24, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 17:15, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 14:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors

File:Durdle Door Dorset Sunset.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Feb 2014 at 22:42:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Natural limestone arch in Dorset, UK.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Saffron Blaze (talk) 22:42, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thank you very much for sharing this, it is a relief to see a good picture. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Composition is incredible. —Mono 02:29, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sorry; I still prefer your old super FP. Although the subject is interesting; I failed to see the scope for two FPs. Jee 02:48, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A relief to see a good picture?? super FP?? I haven't seen so much sucking up here before. You really are the Lord of the Flies. Correct me if I'm wrong but this picture was a alternative of previous nomination and now you have nominated it again? --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 09:18, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • No; the nom. I mentioned above is at EN which has different review criteria. My comment above is also per my personal POV; not about its quality on aesthetic aspects. There is not a requirement that a reviewer need to be capable to take competitive pictures. But he had a lot of FPs earlier; and this make a Flickr Explore #1 recently. Jee 09:46, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Picture you are referring to is really excellent. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 11:10, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The sea is unnaturally dark and the same with half of the cliff. I haven't been there myself but a quick google search gives me pictures with much better lighting, for example here. Apart from this, a long exposure would certainly add some wow to the photo but now it's just a snapshot. I would expected something more from someone with so "high standards" and extremely critical towards others. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 09:18, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Please do not make personal attacks. You should refer to comment on the image. It is the best way to bring this section, the most balanced, technically and objectively as possible. I invite you to reflect and stop this negative attitude. On the other hand, from the technical point of view, the example you have shown me a picture much more digitally modified than the current nomination (look the sky and overexposition, for example). I lived on the coast for 30 years and have seen similar colors to this photo. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 12:48, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I wished a MUCH tighter crop at the top (see note) and a wider crop at the right. I am unsure if the light is fortunate for that motive. Most parts of the relief are in shadow. Contrary the warm light on the sand is nice. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:52, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good comments by Tuxyso. Hopefully addressed. Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. and Mono are asked if they still support. Saffron Blaze (talk) 22:35, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I will support the tighter crop at the top :) --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 22:52, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support New crop is perfect IMO. --DXR (talk) 00:05, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Better with the new crop. Yann (talk) 04:24, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Much better. You also improved the light (probably a bit overdone, but that's a matter of taste). --Tuxyso (talk) 08:10, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 08:29, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good --Rjcastillo (talk) 13:10, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Nice colours and picture, but I find the people rather distracting. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:29, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
The people is to underestand the real size of the natural monument --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:04, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Oh... (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 16:43, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentI invite you to read this. About using people to measuring scales. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 11:57, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
I've just read it. BTW, please take a look: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Arctic_Kangaroo&diff=117042047&oldid=116984406 (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 16:49, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 06:06, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 10:17, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:06, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tamba52 (talk) 16:04, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Composition is very good, but I am shared, IMO it's a little bit oversatured (yellow, orange and red), I can particularly see it on the clothes of the characters but however the color give the mood. Anyway a nice image. Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:00, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:13, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 17:08, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Leitoxx 13:47, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 17:26, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 12:15, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural

File:Kranensee Wien-Aspern Seestadt-DSC 3676w.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Feb 2014 at 22:35:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kranensee, a ballet performed by construction cranes at Seestadt Aspern. Vienna
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- P e z i (talk) 22:35, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- P e z i (talk) 22:35, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support technisch nicht perfekt aber das Bild hat einen Wow-Faktor. --Ralf Roleček 23:24, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I love the colors, but the composition just comes across as too random. For this sort of thing a video might work better (but then of course it has copyright issues). As it is I can't tell from the image alone that the cranes are performing a ballet. Daniel Case (talk) 05:58, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support레비Revi 08:04, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose quality ain't good enough. Kruusamägi (talk) 10:17, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
I accidentally added "s" instead of "o". Now fixed. Kruusamägi (talk) 18:42, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As Daniel: Colors are nice, but the composition and motive do not work for me. The crop at the right seems very random to me. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:46, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I understand that the motion blur is necessary to convey the sense of movement of the crane arms, but the verticals are out of focus too. Sorry, but not convinced about the composition or quality. --DAJF (talk) 11:12, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg weak oppose Nice image, but the lights are very bright and there is a big dark area at the bottom. --XRay talk 16:29, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Strong oppose Huh what??? I could just oppose by looking at the picture on the FPC page alone. That's how bad it is. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:26, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, thats nothing like blurry cranes (I’m not talking about the motion, but there’s nothing in focus) and overexposed lights. Nothing special at all. No idea what that picture wants to tell me. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 06:59, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Strong oppose No. —Blurred Lines 17:26, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 12:14, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Shirakawago.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Mar 2014 at 04:38:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Night view of the village of Shirakawa-go.
Yes and I am really sorry about that. I will be definitely more careful next time. --Jordy Meow (talk) 07:22, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Qwertz1894 (talk) 18:04, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Brackenheim (talk) 19:36, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 06:06, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It needs some perspective correction (see bottom left) and I wonder whether the top left corner has been darkened in the postprocessing, it looks a bit strange. On the other side the composition is great, so I am ready to support if my comments are fixed/clarified Poco2 11:04, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 17:09, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment location please. --High Contrast (talk) 15:16, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A nice job technically getting the lighting to work, but unfortunately for me it comes out too cluttered (to the point of confusing me as to what I'm supposed to getting from this), plus the snow on the house at the left seems blown. Daniel Case (talk) 05:27, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 12:43, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 17:22, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 12:16, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places

File:Tamme-Lauri Tamm suvel.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2014 at 02:03:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tamme-Lauri Oak at Urvaste, oldest oak tree in Estonia
The Estonian contingent has had a disproportionate impact on the results here and on possibly the POTY, but I would be surprised there is any kind of puppetry going on. National pride is not yet a crime. Would hate to be proven wrong though. Saffron Blaze (talk) 01:16, 27 February 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.253.101.124 (talk • contribs)
Hello Mr. Saffron Blaze, I don't belong to Estonia. I just thought that this was a pic worthy of FP status and I just nominated it. I am neither the sockpuppet of the uploader nor biased towards Estonia. I was browsing through the user page of the uploader and found this pic. Nikhil (talk) 13:49, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
The Italic text is copied from another page and in not a comment by Saffron Blaze to this nomination. Just wanted to warn Estonians for voting here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.253.101.124 (talk • contribs)
Well firstly, it is not great style to post unsigned comments from IPs. I think it would be for the better of this project, if we had people from all countries as engaged as the Estonians here. I cannot speak for POTY, but I see not a lot of issues going on FP. If people think that images should not promoted, they have to oppose - simple as that, I do not think that there are enough people from any country here to get FPs through on their own. --DXR (talk) 14:51, 28 February 2014 (UTC) Edit: I was not aware about the ongoing issue at the talk page. However that does not change my opinion since it is a special issue involving two users, not an entire country... --DXR (talk) 15:45, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
I agree with you, DXR. Whoever is editing from that IP, I think it is not in the interest of Wikimedia Commons to write a reckless comment about bias towards a country without logging in. As I said, I nominated the pic here only when I thought that this would be worthy of being an FP. It had nothing to do with my nationality or that it was a pic from Estonia. One can point out any technical flaws in the nomination without logging in, but please stop making prejudiced comments. Nikhil (talk) 16:07, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Would anyone be surprised the IP address is from Estonia? That aside, I never said there is arranged country block voting. Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:51, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm sorry but I don't want to participate here. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 16:17, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Urmas Haljaste, according to the guidelines you can withdraw photos authored by you. Or am I wrong? --Tuxyso (talk) 16:42, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination thank you for advice. I must have missed this possibility. Thought it is only a nominators privilege. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 16:53, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hausdülmen, Heubach -- 2014 -- 3.jpg

File:Albarracín, Teruel, España, 2014-01-10, DD 154.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Mar 2014 at 23:02:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Peña la Cruz, Pinares de Rodeno (in English Cross Rock, Sandstone Pine Forest) is a protected landscape than spans 6 829,05 ha and is distributed over the municipalities of Albarracín, Bezas and Gea de Albarracín, province of Teruel, Aragón, Spain
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Peña la Cruz, Pinares de Rodeno (in English Cross Rock, Sandstone Pine Forest) is a protected landscape than spans 6 829,05 ha and is distributed over the municipalities of Albarracín, Bezas and Gea de Albarracín, province of Teruel, Aragón, Spain. All by me, Poco2 23:02, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 23:02, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not sharp. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 14:51, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noticeable sensor dust. RalfHuels (talk) 14:20, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Neither light, nor motive, composition or quality is imho appealing. Sorry. --Tuxyso (talk) 14:43, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Poco2 19:28, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Calle Nikhom Makassan, Bangkok, Tailandia, 2013-08-22, DD 01.jpg

File:2013 Patterdale Ullswater Boredale Hause.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Mar 2014 at 17:52:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Thunderstorm coming up over Patterdale, Lake District, England
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thunderstorm coming up – c/u/n by -- Kreuzschnabel (talk) 17:52, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kreuzschnabel (talk) 17:52, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful. Yann (talk) 18:04, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support yes, beautiful! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:38, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looks over-saturated. --Rutake (talk) 09:01, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Ever been in the Lake District on a bright autumn day? --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 09:09, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
    • No I haven't. --Rutake (talk) 09:32, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
      • The EXIF data says "Saturation=High" so it has been boosted a bit, probably in-camera. However, I will confirm the colours can be vivid on a bright autumn day and some adjustment of saturation is quite normal. I guess the turquoise sky next to the orange slopes is a bit clashing in terms of colour harmony. -- Colin (talk) 12:51, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is a beautiful landscape but the composition isn't working for me. The cloud keeps taking my attention off the land. The smoke is a fire rather than a steam train, which is a shame. The path isn't successfully leading the eye. I'd like to see a bit more of the lake and less of the path. The 4:3 ratio doesn't help I think. -- Colin (talk) 12:49, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturation, smoke from a wrong source, bad crop (with the cumulonimbus cut off). (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:59, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I didn’t know there was such a thing like right and wrong smoke sources. Since there is no railway line even near this place, a steam train would be much wronger a source IMO. Is there a list of the goodness of smoke sources I can refer to before taking my next photo of a wrong one? --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 16:10, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
      • Please refer to Colin's comment. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 09:01, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
        • Which one? "The smoke is a fire rather than a steam train, which is a shame"? I can see no point in putting a steam train besides that hedged wall – far off any railway line! – just to please the eye. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 20:25, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great for me. Halavar (talk) 23:18, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination This is a ridiculous discussion about wrong smoke sources. I surely like that pic regardless of a FP tag. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 20:52, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
@Kreuzschnabel: Even if you don't talk about the smoke source, the picture still has other problems, such as the crop and oversaturation. Hope you can understand. I'm not insulting you or your photograph, it's just a comment and my opinion. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:14, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

File:Blue tit front and back-lit.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Mar 2014 at 20:49:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cyanistes caeruleus lit from the front by the sun, and from behind by sunlight reflected from a window
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Baresi franco - uploaded by Baresi franco - nominated by Baresi franco -- Baresi franco (talk) 20:49, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Baresi franco (talk) 20:49, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 21:28, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry Baresi, but the head is not very well-focused. And the bird "stands out" in the picture in the wrong way. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 01:22, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't agree, in my opinion the head is focused well. Halavar (talk) 17:15, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 19:33, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Focus is not on the head / eyes. The FP bird bar is quite high, and this one is imho no FP. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:40, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Tuxyso. This is a common bird. -- Colin (talk) 12:42, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Focus is IMHO acceptable but this picture looks strange to me, have you reworked the bokeh with a noising mask? to me the bird looks isolated from the enviroment, especially around the head. Poco2 21:07, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the comment - I've done some background noise reduction via a mask, but nothing drastic. The isolation from the environment is caused by a very strong backlight from sun reflected off a window, and combined with the facing side getting the direct sunlight is part of the reason I like it so much. If it was just backlit you'd lose contrast in the subject, but here you don't - this does look different, I'll grant you. This here was one that got away (and in a slightly different spot along the same branch), but also shows the same backlit effect. The light was reflected off a small window, and only lasted a few minutes to illuminate this particular spot --Baresi franco (talk) 22:52, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
      Example of the front/backlight
    • I've uploaded a crop from the original that hasn't had any work done to compare - it's second from the top in the file history. Cheers --Baresi franco (talk) 22:52, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Heavy photoshoping. Not realistic picture. --Kikos (talk) 07:33, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Above comments confirm my thoughts that the bird seems to "stand out" in the picture - but not in the good way. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:07, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Tuxyso. —Blurred Lines 17:16, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Obviously not popular lighting conditions for a bird-on-a-twig photo. Thanks for the comments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baresi franco (talk • contribs) 02:11, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

File:MatsaluSuitsuJõgi.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Mar 2014 at 10:46:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fishermen huts in Matsalu National Park
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Urmas Haljaste - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 10:46, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 10:46, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tamba52 (talk) 16:06, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice environmental portrait. You might get some complaints about tilt but with old buildings it is not so relevant. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:12, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment similar FP for reference. Jee 05:29, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looking at the satellite map and the image... this one is flopped image of the same place. --Ivar (talk) 06:42, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is a photograph, not a photocopy. Yes, it is flipped. I think it looks better this way. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 08:57, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Flip doesn't represent reality => clearly disqualifies from FP, and btw the geocode seems incorrect. --A.Savin 09:45, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Reduced educational value; maybe suitable to describe Flipped image. Other similar stuff already FP. Jee 10:32, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I didn't know that. Some of my other FPs are also flipped. I will start to delist them. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 10:50, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Just flip them back then. Why to cause trouble? And why to flip them in the first place? Kruusamägi (talk) 14:58, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Yes; just flip them back. I see no need for a mass delist. Jee 15:16, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
COM:OVERWRITE? --A.Savin 15:25, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
It is a point; but if FPC community accept it, I see no problem. Anyway better wait till POTY ends. Jee 15:57, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • In this case this is the correct flip and better processed. A delist and replace wold be suitable here. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:53, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • It will never happen. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 18:07, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
    Yes, any other user can unflip them but can you be sure the images really are flipped? Even if you tried to locate the places you probably would not be able to recognize the views in nature. This shows how absurd the discussion really is. The sequence of trees or stones doesn't matter. It is not a deception. There are no heritage protection object in these pictures. The flip does not change the nature, the atmosphere nor the quality of the site. I don't know about you but I'm not a google street-view photographer and I'm not environmental copyist. Since my work doesn't fit yours standard, I will not contribute anymore. It must be a relief to many of you. Wish you all the best. -- (unsigned)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose If this one is flipped copy of existing FP (just positioned very slightly different) then I'm annoyed the nominator has tried to fool us into promoting two nearly identical pictures at FP. -- Colin (talk) 12:38, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • @Colin: Note, here the nominator is different. Jee 12:49, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
Didn't spot that. Still, having two mirror images will lead to these mistakes. Which is why I also don't support requesting the "original" be uploaded in cases where the flip doesn't matter. -- Colin (talk) 13:12, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
This one is different as there is an existing FP of the same image. This should not have been nominated. However, it is my opinion this is a superior edit. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:49, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't know about the satellite image but I have actually been at Suitsu and it seems to me that this one is truthful and the other picture is flipped. But I could be wrong. This one just seems more genuine. I guess satellites never lie. In either case, I don't feel deceived. --Rutake (talk) 09:21, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:25, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

File:Nissan Altima at Salton Sea 2013.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Mar 2014 at 12:22:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nissan Altima at Salton Sea
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 12:22, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 12:22, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak Support IMHO, the lighting is excellent and quality is decent but the composition could have been better. I wish the car could have been captured front-on rather than side-on.Nikhil (talk) 13:53, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Pro: Light works well, nice scenery; Con: 15mm equiv. makes the rear of the car superlong, not sure about the gap between palmtree and car. --DXR (talk) 19:23, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
    • @DXR: I've very corrected stretching very moderately. Keep in mind that the car is quite long :) I like the gap between palmtree and car - it brings some tension into the photo. I've used wide-angle to include as much as possible from the interesting environment and placed the car just under the remarkable cloud. I was a bit in hurry because the outside temperature was 47°C (117°F) :) --Tuxyso (talk) 07:13, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
      • I have actually looked up normal images of the car before commenting the first time and stay with my opinion. I see and understand your points, but I just do not really find the overall composition pleasing to my eyes, sorry. But it's just a matter of personal taste of course... --DXR (talk) 09:42, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Has the technical quality and "wow" factor. Deserves to become a featured picture. --DAJF (talk) 02:50, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It seems really partially stretched. The rear wheel is not round, the front is. The upper part of the sky is too dark. Polfilter? -- -donald- (talk) 11:12, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
    • I've used a polfilter. But for this kind of motive I really like it and think it is fortunate :) Nonetheless the sky was very dark blue. Stretching: You have some kind of distortion with such wide-angle shots, I guess that is not changeable anymore. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:08, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:34, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition just not working here. Shame, because there are the elements of a car commercial here. -- Colin (talk) 17:34, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • @Colin: What had you done better? Where do you see room for improvements? --Tuxyso (talk) 22:01, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
    • The critic is entitled to comment without being talented enough to do better!! :-). The components are far apart with a hole in the middle. The elements on the left of the tree are distracting. The car overlaps the sea in a way that seems accidental rather than posed. The white sand needs to be an out-of-focus background rather than something so detailed you see the imperfections (such as the weed near the car's tyre). The car is too small and in an undramatic side-view pose. The front of the car is not as well lit as the back. I don't know what your intention is but I guess I'd be looking to create an image that makes one think "Beautiful car in a perfect setting", but where the subject (the car) is dominant and detailed and the setting is more of an impression. -- Colin (talk) 22:34, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
      • Colin, first: Thanks a lot for your circumstantial comment - I really appreciate constructive comments with ideas for improvements. It's a good question what my original intention of the shot was. I am no commercial photographer thus "Beautiful car in a perfect setting" was not my very intention. The location, the Salton Sea, has been a very popular holiday location in the 19th century. Famous stars like Frank Sinatra had their fincas there. But the sea was massively polluted by farming and is now acid. The past splendour of the place is gone, the villages around the sea become more and more ghost village, see e.g. this photo and tourist do not yet go there. Thus my original intention was not perfection. At the first glance the setting implies such perfection (blue sky, nice clours sea, palms, ...) but at the second glance this perfection is undermined: dirt on the sand, the gap between car and palm tree, the massively leaning electricity pylons at the very left. I confess that the composition is improveable if one had moved the car - I just went out (46°C) and tried to compose a photo as good as possible - I was satisfied with the result. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:13, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
        • Very interesting. Well all I can do is repeat my request that folk offer a rationale for this picture like you've done now. Some pictures work simply as straightforward subject shots for WP, say, but others are more complex or have interesting shooting conditions. See Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Stipiturus malachurus - Southwest National Park.jpg for another case where it would be interesting to know the situation and be explicit about the technical challenges. There are feelings about this photo and the landscape that are in your head and didn't translate to the bare picture nom. If it was part of a visual narrative of the area, then it might have worked better (though I'm not sure how this car fits into that story). It would be nice if someone offered such a visual narrative as a FP set, say. Would make a change from assessing sole photographs that are expected to stand alone in judgement. -- Colin (talk) 08:56, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
          • Background information to photographs are interesting, especially in technically challenging cases. Your idea to add narratives to photos is interesting. But I see problems with the language gap. Those people who are more familiar with the English language do have advantages with such nominations. Nonetheless I completely agree that background information to FP noms are valueable and should be added if possible. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:43, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
            • By "narrative" I meant en:Visual narrative, not text (though words in the description are useful). See "The Photographer's Story: The Art of Visual Narrative" by Michael Freeman, for example. -- Colin (talk) 10:34, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose I mostly agree with Colin's perception. My first impresion here was a car and a palm, none of which are predominant but still tends to be in my eyes a (not featurable executed) commercial shot of a Nissan car. The fact that the surface of the sea is hidden by the car, and the elements on the left are also a minus to me. I would also add the the sharpness is just middle of the road (applies to both, the palm and the car). Summary: strange composition that doesn't work to me and is not overweighted by quality, sorry. Btw, I fully agree on the need of adding a description with the nomination. I have always done it and will always do because it adds value to the nomination and we all want to learn something there. Furthermore if there is no information we could miss something (intention of the photographer, cultural or historical value, etc.). Poco2 11:01, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment need a crop at bottom, IMO.--Claus (talk) 16:36, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sky too dark and it really looks better intended for a two-page magazine spread. Daniel Case (talk) 05:25, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support We have far too little of such commercial photos here. --Ralf Roleček 11:28, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:16, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
    • S. DÉNIEL, can you please give a reason for your Contra vote? --Tuxyso (talk) 14:41, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
      • Si vous regardez l'histograme vous verrez que l'exposition n'ait pas bonne. Les couleurs sont ternes. La composition est pauvre et ne met pas en valeur un sujet principale (l'arbre, la voiture ?). L'ensemble est plat. --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 15:13, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
        • Thanks, probably someone can translate it into English or German?! --Tuxyso (talk) 15:58, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
          • @Tuxyso: If you look at the histogram you will see that the exhibition is not good. The colors are dull. The composition is poor and does not value a main topic (the tree, the car?). The whole is flat. --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 15:13, 28 February 2014 (UTC) (The response was translated by —Blurred Lines 17:38, 28 February 2014 (UTC))
          • @Tuxyso: You can actually try Google Translate first, unless they give you a really bad translation then you can ask for someone to translate. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 05:22, 1 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 17:03, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

File:TOBURAILWAY SERIES6050 6151F SECRAPID6R.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Mar 2014 at 07:05:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Tobu 6050 series EMU 6-car formation led by set 6151 on the Tobu Nikko Line on a sectional rapid service for Asakusa
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ohtsuka Makoto - uploaded by Ohtsuka Makoto - nominated by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 07:05, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support a very pleasant angle, interessting object, technical perfect, enough "wow" for me. -- Wladyslaw (talk) 07:05, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it.--ArildV (talk) 11:04, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I really like it, but there is no "WOW". --XRay talk 16:24, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the subject, BUT: 4.7MP out of a 24MP camera (downsampled? or 5 times digital zoom?), ISO 800 in bright daylight? Unsharp foreground, unsharp tail of the train. Burnt out (and brought back to grey) sky on the upper right. Strange looking background. --P e z i (talk) 20:04, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
(1) What's the problem with the downsampling? It's just the decision of the photographer. The minimum requirement is given! Maybe the photographer wants to sell a version of higher resolution and gives us this one. This is his right to do so if he wants.
(2) All important parts of this train are in focus and sharp. For sure neither the tail nor the bottom part is important. So we have perfect focus here.
(3) We can't judge how the lightning situation was in fact. So the ISO 800 may be a good decision. First: for me it does not look like a very shiny day, more like a cloudy one. Second: we have here a moving object and not a fixed. So ISO 800 isn't very wrong to ensure a short exposure time. I don't see an adverse effect of noise in this picture, are you?
(4) I don't see anything strange about this background. Did I miss s.th.? --Wladyslaw (talk) 21:36, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
Btw, offering low-resolution with a CC licence while thinking you one can sell the high-resolution version is no longer wise since CC have warned they may be considered legally the same "work of copyright" and so both under CC. -- Colin (talk) 17:32, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
It was just an assumption and is absolutely not relevant why the photographer did resize the original. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:43, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well-composed, good exposure. No problems with size either. --DAJF (talk) 02:26, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tax, a couple of real good ones like this just popped into QI. Saffron Blaze (talk) 03:37, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I'm really picky about rule-of-thirds, and the picture also isn't sharp enough. Good capture nonetheless. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:32, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow and technically nothing special. -- Colin (talk) 17:32, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kapsuglan (talk) 14:29, 26 February 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 17:02, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Dornas no porto de Aguiño. Ribeira. Galiza R31.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Mar 2014 at 17:42:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Boats in Aguiño, Ribeira, Galicia (Spain)
✓ Done, a bit more of sky, you're right--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 10:40, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • The cyan lines are produced by rocks of the seabed when they are near the surface. A Cyan line (or stain) can also be produced by a brown alga that is very common in these waters and can cover large areas. There are this lines in the RAW file--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 12:43, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • The path of the bridge is one of the lines of rocks. It was rebuilt because the rocks were emerging from the waters--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 13:15, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:3, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 17:19, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arcalino (talk) 12:19, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - saturation of the color red --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:21, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
    @Lmbuga: isto é solucionável? ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 16:00, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
    I'll try to desaturate more. At one time I upload another version, but the red color has been desaturated previously. The red color is very vivid to better see the boats at sea. If the boats were painted in the summer, as usual (the picture was taken on August 9), the color is very vivid. I'll try to desaturate more. At one time I upload another version -Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 23:00, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
    Você terá que fazer antes das 17 horas e 42 minutos do dia 1 de Março, pois é a hora do fechamento da nomeação. ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 23:08, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
    ✓ Done Red colors desaturated. I can desaturate more -Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 23:20, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
    @S. DÉNIEL: Is good for you now? ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 00:19, 1 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 22:15, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places

File:Male Wood Duck (Aix sponsa), Parc du Rouge-Cloître, Brussels.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Mar 2014 at 18:07:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Male Wood Duck (Aix sponsa) at Parc du Rouge-Cloître, Brussels. Photograph taken by digiscoping with Swarovski ATM 80 HD 30 X, Nikon 1V1 + 10-30 mm lens (Adapter DCB)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Frank Vassen - uploaded by Ariefrahman - nominated by Ariefrahman -- Ariefrahman (talk) 18:07, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ariefrahman (talk) 18:07, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 04:26, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Angle and sharpness problems. Head is especially blur. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:39, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Arctic Kangeroo's comment regarding sharpness and I'd add that it is over the acceptable noise thershold (including chromatic noise). For this kind of picture I just expect a crispy head Poco2 10:36, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 17:11, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - composition --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:22, 28 February 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:16, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Porto e o Carreiro de Aguiño coa súa ponte. Ribeira. Galiza R32.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Mar 2014 at 17:31:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Boats in Aguiño, Ribeira, Galicia (Spain)
  • The cyan lines are produced by rocks of the seabed when they are near the surface. A Cyan line (or stain) can also be produced by a brown alga that is very common in these waters and can cover large areas. There are this lines in the RAW file--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 12:45, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • The path of the bridge is one of the lines of rocks. It was rebuilt because the rocks were emerging from the waters--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 13:15, 23 February 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:14, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

File:205kei train in JR Nikko line 02.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Mar 2014 at 04:39:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A JR East 205-600 series 4-car EMU train on the Nikko Line in Japan
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Fortew F - uploaded by Fortew F - nominated by DAJF -- DAJF (talk) 04:39, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- DAJF (talk) 04:39, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Dust spots should be removed. Geocoding would be appreciated. --P e z i (talk) 12:02, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Dust spots removed (2 highlighted plus 2 other faint ones). --DAJF (talk) 14:22, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful image complete with nice snowy mountains. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:40, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 16:55, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Brackenheim (talk) 19:35, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good reflection and compo, but more than a half of a picture is empty.--Jebulon (talk) 20:58, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I quite like this but I am wondering about the colour banding in the sky. Is that an artefact? Saffron Blaze (talk) 22:20, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 06:11, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The quality is not really high and the crop can be improved (agree with Jebulon here) but the scenery is overall FP to me. I know that spot, the temples and natural park of Nikko are amazing Poco2 10:33, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:43, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The composition is intelligent and very good (although a tighter cropping of the sky and water are possible).--ArildV (talk) 10:53, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tamba52 (talk) 16:06, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Chmee2 (talk) 15:39, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 17:12, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I cannot bring it about the heart to vote with oppose because the scenery and the reflections are very nice. But the important train is nearly completely in shadow which looks quite unfortunate. Probably one could try to selectively brighten the train. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:56, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Frame is not filled. --Rutake (talk) 09:27, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Leitoxx 13:48, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 17:18, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 09:08, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places

File:Maly Krashokholmsky bridge 4exp Oloneo.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Mar 2014 at 10:18:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Night HDRI of Small Krasnoholmsky Bridge in Moscow, Russia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Kaluga.2012 - nominated by A.Savin 10:18, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 10:18, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 11:04, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 15:37, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DAJF (talk) 16:02, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Brackenheim (talk) 19:34, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 21:21, 21 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 06:11, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 06:49, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose I like the colors and the quality is good but a centered composition without any extraordinary elements in it makes me decline. I just cannot see anything featurable in that bridge and the lights are also a bit distracting, sorry. Poco2 10:30, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Chmee2 (talk) 15:39, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow, per Poco.--Claus (talk) 16:32, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Quality, light and colors are nice, but the composition is completely disorganized. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:53, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Neither composition nor subject convince me. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 11:18, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol support vote.svg Support the weak is for the saturation, a bit too much for my tastes, but however nice. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:43, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Background is too busy, foreground is too busy, the main object just doesn't stand out. --Rutake (talk) 09:30, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Claus. --Mile (talk) 17:09, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment That seems odd. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 19:21, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 17:17, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 16:16, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Bridges

File:Sarah Bernhardt, par Nadar, 1864.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Mar 2014 at 08:53:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sarah Bernhardt, by Nadar, 1864
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Félix Nadar, uploaded, restored and nominated by Yann (talk) 08:53, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Portrait of French stage actress Sarah Bernhardt (1844-1923), around 1864, by Félix Nadar (1820-1910). This picture is exactly 150 years now.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Yann (talk) 08:53, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support iconic! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:05, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Yes, please. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:32, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Would be a stunning portrait even today. Wonderful light. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:48, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ArildV (talk) 19:43, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Avenue (talk) 22:49, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:18, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment IMO, the restoration should be more carefuly done. Many and many scratches, tears and spots could be removed. and you cannot say around 1864, and exactly 150 years...Clin --Jebulon (talk) 10:48, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 17:02, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:36, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:51, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:04, 1 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 18:34, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Historical

File:Fuchsia 'Land van Beveren'.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Mar 2014 at 06:34:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fuchsia 'Land van Beveren'
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Fuchsia 'Land van Beveren'. Rich flowering hanging fuchsia. created by Famberhorst - uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by -- Famberhorst (talk) 06:34, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 06:34, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose background is disturbing. --Rutake (talk) 19:59, 26 February 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 16:45, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Saint-Émilion and Vineyards.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Mar 2014 at 06:18:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Saint-Émilion and Vineyards
True. I have no corrections profile for this lens but I can do it manually. Would that do it for you? --TigrouMeow (talk) 23:46, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The distortion originates in the angle of the camera (horizon not centered vertically) and isn't a fault of the lens. So no lens profile would fix it. I personally don't find it too annoying because it's not a strictly architectural shot. However, I do find the composition to be somewhat lacking in wow or a clear structure in the image. There is also some overexposure on the sunlit walls. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 20:13, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Rutake/Julian -- Colin (talk) 21:39, 2 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 16:44, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Woody Guthrie 2.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Mar 2014 at 09:36:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Al Aumuller/New York World-Telegram and the Sun - uploaded by Urban, edited by Durova - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 09:36, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:36, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- I like it. Illustrative for artist and era. Kleuske (talk) 11:34, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 16:44, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Beach in Tropea - Calabria - Italy - July 25th 2013 - 01-cropped.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Mar 2014 at 22:47:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Lagoon Nebula.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Mar 2014 at 22:40:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:St Wilfrid's RC Church.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Mar 2014 at 16:28:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St Wilfrid's Chruch
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Mdbeckwith - uploaded by Mdbeckwith - nominated by Mdbeckwith -- Mdbeckwith (talk) 16:28, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mdbeckwith (talk) 16:28, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Would, in my opinion, benefit from perspective correction, less HDR editing, more sharpness and better categorization. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 17:03, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but overprocessed to my eyes, not very sharp and contaminated with random black dots on the benches. Not FP quality to me. --DXR (talk) 18:28, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with the previous comment. --Rutake (talk) 19:56, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose fine perspective but too much HDR --Ralf Roleček 11:20, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per DXR. —Blurred Lines 16:59, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose random hot & dead pixels, needs perspective straightening, creepy hdr exposure—Love, Kelvinsong talk 04:08, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looks not natural. Additional noise. Sorry. --XRay talk 10:54, 2 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:42, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Cathedral of Albi - Nave and Organ - 7029.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2014 at 07:21:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nave of the Cathedral of Albi and its organ
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by PierreSelim - uploaded by PierreSelim - nominated by PierreSelim -- PierreSelim (talk) 07:21, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Nave of the Cathedral of Saint Cecilia in Albi, with its organ. Below the organ we can see a fresco displaying the Last judgement.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- PierreSelim (talk) 07:21, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 08:10, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:06, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 15:25, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 16:57, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 17:33, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 17:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DXR (talk) 19:22, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not too bad. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 21:07, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice subject and execution Poco2 21:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support excellent work. Nikhil (talk) 02:10, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:39, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 11:58, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Superbe ! Et pas seulement parce que ma fille aînée s'appelle Cécile ! --Jebulon (talk) 12:53, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Claude Truong-Ngoc (talk) 15:20, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:49, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Motive is intersting, quality is very good. But why have you choosen such a tight left/right crop? --Tuxyso (talk) 16:57, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
    • Most of the pixels lost are due to correction of perspective distortion. --PierreSelim (talk) 17:54, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
      • Thanks for the information. Currently I leave my vote to Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral, but I think you have got enough supporters :) Nonetheless a great photo. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:04, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
        • Thank you for your review (you know I consider FPC as a tool to improve, so all advices are welcome). --PierreSelim (talk) 23:21, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 17:35, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 23:47, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:08, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 12:21, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:19, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 22:03, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --mathias K 05:47, 3 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 15:29, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors

File:Pygocentrus nattereri Palais de la Porte Dorée.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2014 at 12:40:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded & nominated by Citron -- Citron (talk) 12:40, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Citron (talk) 12:40, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sharpness issues, evident on the entire piranha, and especially on some of the spots near the tail. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 14:54, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Arctic Kangaroo. —Blurred Lines 16:56, 27 February 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 15:30, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Steirapollen, 2010 September.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2014 at 08:42:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ximonic - uploaded by Ximonic - nominated by Sjokolade -- Sjokolade (talk) 08:42, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Sjokolade (talk) 08:42, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 09:14, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 11:01, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it very much! Halavar (talk) 17:20, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice photo, I like colors. --Paralacre (talk) 19:20, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral very nice, but imo a bit too centered --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:49, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral This is one of my ”early” entries in dslr photography. To be honest, i'm not the biggest fan of the composition in this picture anymore. There are some things I would have done other way if it was now. I still appreciate the nomination and, most of all, hope that even these pictures get useful for Wikipedia etc. Thanks! :) --Ximonic (talk) 06:34, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Composition might be average, but the colors are beautiful. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:49, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice colors, composition is fine. Yann (talk) 18:03, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:26, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 21:14, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 07:30, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Strongly over-saturated. --Rutake (talk) 09:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Rutake. Kruusamägi (talk) 21:08, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 17:12, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:28, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:03, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 08:32, 4 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 3 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 15:27, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural

File:Charvet Place Vendôme third floor 08.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2014 at 06:00:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentJe ne comprends pas pourquoi cette photo a été présentée. Il y en a d’autres dans la série qui sont bien plus intéressantes. Une volonté de se dénigrer mon travail ? --Claude Truong-Ngoc (talk) 20:42, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As Donald, nothing special. --Karelj (talk) 17:44, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Paris 16 (talk) 20:49, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Church of St. Laurence, Seale front.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2014 at 12:02:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St Laurence's Church in Seale, Surrey.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Lewis Hulbert -- Lewis Hulbert (talk) 12:02, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lewis Hulbert (talk) 12:02, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
    • @S. DÉNIEL, It's a courtesy to give reasons for a decline. Probably the photographer has spent a lot of effort into the photo and wants to know what's wrong with it. --Tuxyso (talk) 16:40, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 09:31, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

Image:James "Midge" Ure of Ultravox 2012 at the E-Werk Cologne.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2014 at 16:15:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Midge Ure live
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by MHPhoto - uploaded by MHPhoto - nominated by MHPhoto -- MHPhoto (talk) 16:15, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MHPhoto (talk) 16:15, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment To give some feedback: The resolution is pretty low but that's not too bad in a concert scenario, I think. I like the composition and general quality, but the photo seems to have a strong tint. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 16:53, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Julian H. —Blurred Lines 17:09, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:29, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent composition. Great concert shot taken under difficult conditions. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:21, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Frank --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:16, 4 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:07, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Purekkari neemel.jpg (delist), not delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2014 at 13:36:35
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Picture is flipped, does not represent reality, reduced educational value. (Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist -- Urmas Haljaste (talk) 13:36, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep No reason to delist. Yann (talk) 13:47, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep --G Furtado (talk) 13:49, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist because "No reason to delist" must be a joke - if landscape pictures are allowed to be flipped and biased any possible way, then what comes next? Maybe a flipped version of this picture as a POTY? Besides, I find this whole show with mass-nominating and then mass-delisting of own pictures kind of community time wasting, for which the account "Urmas83" imo deserves a fat block. Enough is enough, really. --A.Savin 14:06, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Urmas, please have some pride in your photography. Anyways, it's very interesting to see how the waves look like mist when exposure is increased to a few seconds under strong wind conditions. Like Yann, I find there's absolutely no reason to delist. Urmas is gone. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 08:59, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question What is flipping anyway? I still can't get it after reading the Wikipedia article. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 14:15, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Flippind is the inversion of the left and the right. FP have to be the most exact reflection of the reality --Christian Ferrer 14:23, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
I will change my vote to "keep" if you flip it back --Christian Ferrer 18:57, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I prefer to wait without pronouncing me --Christian Ferrer 17:30, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
To be precise, a flipped image is the same as a horizontal mirror image. May be OK e.g. for certain objects or animals, but never ever for landscapes, cityscapes, buildings,... except of course for special educational purposes which yet isn't the case here. --A.Savin 14:33, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist I hope that you will not nominated the unflipped picture later on, if you are planning to do that, it should be a replace and delist and not just a delist Poco2 14:43, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Nothing against the pictures otherwise but I do agree about the flipping. Photographs like these are likely to be used in Wikipedia and That's where the educational value of the picture is important. A flipped landscape doesn't represent the reality and so the educational value is kind of lost because it's misleading for someone who tries to study the places by the photographs for example. --Ximonic (talk) 14:50, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist per Savin.--Claus (talk) 16:29, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Just flip it back. I consider that an uncontroversial edit that should not affect FP status. Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:50, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Tomer T (talk) 18:26, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep --Alchemist-hp (talk) 19:12, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I assume from these edits ([1], [2], [3]) that Urmas83 is now in a pressure and has a difficulty to understand the points. Urmas83, please read the policies and guidelines, especially COM:SCOPE and COM:IG and discuss on the FPC:Talk if you have any doubts. Note that your contributions are irrevocable and any other user can and create an unflipped image from it as the license you granted allows "to adapt". Please stay calm to constructive criticisms that will be good for you in long time. Jee 02:53, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
    Yes, any other user can unflip them but can you be sure the images really are flipped? Even if you tried to locate the places you probably would not be able to recognize the views in nature. This shows how absurd the discussion really is. The sequence of trees or stones doesn't matter. It is not a deception. There are no heritage protection object in these pictures. The flip does not change the nature, the atmosphere nor the quality of the site. I don't know about you but I'm not a google street-view photographer and I'm not environmental copyist. Since my work doesn't fit yours standard, I will not contribute anymore. It must be a relief to many of you. Wish you all the best.
    I didn't say any of your images is flipped. I only made a reference of your previous FP, one user asked whether they are flipped and you answered "yes". We have a policy COM:AGF, so we are committed to believe you unless it can be proved otherwise. You can clearly see what I said later. COM:SCOPE demands realistic pictures for architectures and landscapes as they can't be flipped in real life. I am not bothered about animals or objects that can be turned. Plants can be turned easily; but that also not a big problem. All I see is some pointy attempts from your side, which are very premature IMHO. Your works are wonderful; stay calm and come back when you feel comfortable. Jee 10:43, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep We don't even know if the image is actually flipped, or just the uploader venting his frustration. --King of ♠ 09:58, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep With King: Seems to me that this is a "political" delist nom. Should be kept until proof is given that the image is really flipped. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:06, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment No need for delist. Artistically the picture works either way though it is different. So either we believe it is flipped in which case someone should just flip it back, or we think nominator is lying. -- Colin (talk) 12:31, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Suggest a speedy closing ("kept") and moving to log as the user already showed some discomfort. I think further discussion will do more harm to him. Jee 12:37, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Flip is uncontroversial to the subject. Add a retouched template as suggested by Colin. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:45, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep --Pudelek (talk) 13:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep per Saffron Blaze. Kruusamägi (talk) 21:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Currently in finals at POTY. Defeaturing it now, and over this issue, would be embarassing. Daniel Case (talk) 05:20, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg KeepBlurred Lines 17:10, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep --P e z i (talk) 22:58, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Result: 5 delist, 13 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. --A.Savin 15:32, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Kakerdaja raba talvine maastik.jpg (delist), not delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2014 at 13:10:32
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Why you flipped those pictures? Here we need "realistic pictures" as per our scope, especially for landscapes, architectures and other static objects. Flipping an animal or object will not hurt that much as they can also turn themselves. ;) Jee 13:33, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
I like the rising diagonals from left to right. They add some tension to the image and make them pleasant somehow. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 13:43, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
What is flipping anyway? I still can't get it after reading the Wikipedia article. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 14:18, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep No reason to delist. Yann (talk) 13:41, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep --G Furtado (talk) 13:54, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist same reason as above, flipping landscape/building pictures is a no-go --A.Savin 14:09, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Urmas is gone anyway. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 14:17, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist FP have to be the most exact reflection of the reality --Christian Ferrer 14:19, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
I will change my vote to "keep" if you flip it back --Christian Ferrer 18:57, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I prefer to wait without pronouncing me --Christian Ferrer 17:30, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist I don't undestand though what is the motivation to flip a picture and so deceive the viewer Poco2 14:42, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist per Savin.--Claus (talk) 16:29, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Tomer T (talk) 18:26, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep --Alchemist-hp (talk) 19:13, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I assume from these edits ([4], [5], [6]) that Urmas83 is now in a pressure and has a difficulty to understand the points. Urmas83, please read the policies and guidelines, especially COM:SCOPE and COM:IG and discuss on the FPC:Talk if you have any doubts. Note that your contributions are irrevocable and any other user can and create an unflipped image from it as the license you granted allows "to adapt". Please stay calm to constructive criticisms that will be good for you in long time. Jee 02:53, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
    Yes, any other user can unflip them but can you be sure the images really are flipped? Even if you tried to locate the places you probably would not be able to recognize the views in nature. This shows how absurd the discussion really is. The sequence of trees or stones doesn't matter. It is not a deception. There are no heritage protection object in these pictures. The flip does not change the nature, the atmosphere nor the quality of the site. I don't know about you but I'm not a google street-view photographer and I'm not environmental copyist. Since my work doesn't fit yours standard, I will not contribute anymore. It must be a relief to many of you. Wish you all the best.
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep We don't even know if the image is actually flipped, or just the uploader venting his frustration. --King of ♠ 09:58, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep With King: Seems to me that this is a "political" delist nom. Should be kept until proof is given that the image is really flipped. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:06, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment No need for delist. Artistically the picture works either way. So either we believe it is flipped in which case someone should flip it back, or we think nominator is lying. -- Colin (talk) 12:29, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Suggest a speedy closing ("kept") and moving to log as the user already showed some discomfort. I think further discussion will do more harm to him. Jee 12:37, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Flip is uncontroversial to the subject. Add a retouched template as suggested by Colin. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:46, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep - Image works both ways. "Retouched" template may be all that's needed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:36, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep per Saffron Blaze. Kruusamägi (talk) 21:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Per everyone else. Daniel Case (talk) 05:23, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg KeepBlurred Lines 17:11, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep --P e z i (talk) 22:59, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Result: 4 delist, 13 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. --A.Savin 15:31, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Pont de Bir-Hakeim and view on the 16th Arrondissement of Paris 140124 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2014 at 19:20:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pont de Bir-Hakeim
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me, -- DXR (talk) 19:20, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Although this bridge is fairly well known, and imo one of Paris' nicest bridges, few images are around that manage to show its character well at night. Especially the metal construction at the bottom often gets lost in images that capture the entire bridge since it is very dark. The image presented here is not an HDR, but has been reworked in LR to an extent that I would consider appropriate to its actual appearance. The color of the sky is true to the reality of the evening, the light line above is a metro train crossing the bridge. -- DXR (talk) 19:20, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 20:02, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Brilliant bit of work. Saffron Blaze (talk) 20:04, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Mega Symbol support vote.svg Support Woaaeiuoiaeaeoiow Superb! ;D ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 20:16, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great! --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 21:02, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice, still I'd do some denosing in the darker areas below the bridge Poco2 21:49, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks a lot for the nice reviews! I have tried to address Poco's comment and done a bit of selective denoising --DXR (talk) 22:35, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good --Rjcastillo (talk) 22:51, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Excellent, except the blurry water at right, which is a bit disturbing, in comparison of the rest of the water. Is it improvable ? -Jebulon (talk) 23:13, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Well, it is a 13 second exposure and the river is flowing, so no, I guess, sorry. I have no clue why it would be different for the different parts of the river, though, but it is consistent for all images I took there. Not an expert on fluid dynamics, unfortunately ;-) --DXR (talk) 23:24, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Probably due to the retouche you mentionned. Anyway, no matter.--Jebulon (talk) 20:02, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • No, I swear not! I only retouched a mini bit at the very right. It must be due to moving waves. --DXR (talk) 20:21, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:40, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 06:23, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 11:11, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:38, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arcalino (talk) 12:15, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 13:41, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Superbe. --Claude Truong-Ngoc (talk) 15:25, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. You could try to further denoise the sky, but nonetheless FP for me. --Tuxyso (talk) 16:47, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 17:29, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A great one.--Jebulon (talk) 20:00, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 18:05, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:10, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Jebulon! --mathias K 05:45, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really great image! Halavar (talk) 00:29, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 06:37, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment For me it doesn't work, the sky is ugly. This happens with night long exposure when you missed the blue hours. --PierreSelim (talk) 07:50, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The sky is offset by the light on the bridge and buildings. For me, anyway. Daniel Case (talk) 14:36, 4 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 22:12, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Bridges

File:Relief CoA Pius V ceiling Santa Maria in Aracoeli, Rome, Italy.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2014 at 19:18:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

CoA Pius V
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 19:18, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Detail of the sculpted ceiling of the church Santa Maria in Aracoeli, on the Capitole Hill. Here, the relief of the coat of arms of pope Saint Pius V (1504 - 1566 -1572), of the House of Ghislieri. Rome, Italy.-- Jebulon (talk) 19:18, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think, I'd increase contrast a bit Poco2 21:50, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done I think, you are right (as often). I've increased the contrast a little, and desaturated a bit too.--Jebulon (talk) 13:27, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
      • @ Poco2: Thanks for helpful comment. Do you think it works better ?--Jebulon (talk) 18:54, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
        • Symbol support vote.svg Support Indeed :) Poco2 19:00, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:41, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment To be honest I have difficulties with such art nominations. The motive has definitely Wow potential but isn't it the wow coming from the original artist and not from the way is is photographed? For me as a person who is mainly interested in photographic aspects of Commons it is difficult to assess how much work is by Jebulon and how much work is from the original artist. If there was special effort necessary in order to photograph the motive in the way as it is done here I can warmy encourage the photographer to provide these information with together with nomnination. --Tuxyso (talk) 16:54, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
    • Do you enjoy ? Then support is the last word. Do you think a FP needs to be difficult to be taken ? IMO you are basically wrong, but in this case, be sure that it is difficult. To photograph anything inside, without tripod, among tourists, is very hard. Do you think that post-processing work must be hard and must take time ? Again, you are wrong IMO. But be sure that it was hard and took a lot of my time. Anyway, you can compare with other similar works, like (no offense to the photographer) this one... I don't see any difference with a garden perspective photograph or a nice building picture or a wonderful mountain landscape (What is feature-able in Versailles ? The Le Nôtre gardens, or a very good picture of Le Nôtre gardens ? A nice old building is feature-able because of the photographer, or because of the architect ? Idem for anything). I've nominated this picture, simply because it is different, because I think the technical quality is up to the FP standards, and because I find this beau-ti-ful. And, more than any support vote or any FP star (I've got enough), I'm happy to share, from time to time, my vision of beauty with high level other photographers, better photographer than me. But at the end, once FP technical standards checked, let your heart speak. If you hear nothing, then ignore, and assess another picture. Long explanations in nominations has never made a picture better... Have you ever seen that kind of ceilings before ? This is the best relief of the CoA of pope Saint Pius V we have, and remember: this is not a wall, but a ceiling...
    • About pictures of works of art in general, as for me I just abstain for paintings (especially when famous), because I'm never sure of the colors (remember the last "Van Gogh", recently nominated with a very different alternative). But I think all other works of art are welcome here. When I nominate the Pietà of Michelangelo as FP candidate, be sure that I chose a masterpiece, and a ++ very good (IMO) version, very "worked", and deserving at least the nomination. That's an interesting discussion, and I'd be happy to continue it with you, dear Tuxyso. But it is not the place, and the "Babel" problem is still here...--Jebulon (talk) 17:53, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
      • Thank you very much for the circumstantial answer. No need to add anything. --Tuxyso (talk) 17:39, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 17:31, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I honestly believe that the vertical lines on the right side needs perspective correction because they are not straight -Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 23:41, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
    • I have no doubt about your honesty, but as already answered in QIC page, the line is so in real, because it is a 1550 wooden ceiling. Try a correction by yourself, and you will see that straightness is impossible, because it is NOT a deformation due to the lens.--Jebulon (talk) 01:18, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice but a little bit noisy and a very little too much of clarity for my tastes --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:58, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
    • Would you support in case of correction ?--Jebulon (talk) 21:10, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
    • Yes, of course I will, in measure where the correction will be correctly made and will improve the picture or not. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:02, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Ok, thanks, it's better IMO Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:14, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 18:11, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:09, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --mathias K 05:47, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 13:32, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 23:11, 4 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 11:05, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors

File:Island of Prvić (Krk).jpg (delist)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2014 at 08:27:49
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info see the discussion page (Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist -- Rutake (talk) 08:27, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist We can't be even sure who's the author of this photo. Who is Ruta? Who am I? In addition, this image could be flipped. Is it really a photograhp? --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 09:07, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep I verified on google, and this image is not flipped, and as for me Rutake and Urmas are at the moment two different people until proved otherwise in an official procedure --Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:35, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep More never-ending shit. On a side note, this looks highly suspicious like socking. It is sad that such a talented photographer (both Urmas and Rutake) is embroiled in this sort of thing. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 10:15, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request Rutake, please withdraw this nomination and stay away from this topic. This is my last attempt to cool down the situation. Jee 12:41, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep This image just got promoted last week, and someone already wants to delist it? Man, this is a waste of time. —Blurred Lines 14:30, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de San Pedro, Teruel, España, 2014-01-10, DD 10.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2014 at 19:43:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior view of St Peter's church in Teruel, Aragón, Spain. The church, of mudéjar style, was built in the 14th century and was declared World Heritage in 1986. The decoration, performed between 1896-1902, is of neo-mudéjar style.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Interior view of St Peter's church in Teruel, Aragón, Spain. The church, of mudéjar style was built in the 14th century and was declared World Heritage in 1986. The decoration, performed between 1896-1902, is a neo-mudéjar style. All by me, Poco2 19:43, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 19:43, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, at the moment. Strong Wow for me, but I think perspective correction could be improved a bit. --DXR (talk) 20:15, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
    ✓ New version uploaded addressing (I hope) the perspective issues you talked about, along with a better crop and some selective denoising Poco2 21:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
    Yes, now it's very nice. --DXR (talk) 22:55, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Nice work not clipping the highlights with the windows. Saffron Blaze (talk) 22:21, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 23:36, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
    • @User:Lmbuga Did'nt you notice that it is not straight at right because the perspective correction is not perfect (and I'm serious)?--Jebulon (talk) 01:25, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
      • Jebulon, what can be improved in your opinion? I haven't seen anything on the right that I should fix Poco2 08:13, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 23:37, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jebulon (talk) 01:25, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:17, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice. I am wondering if I like the very dark shadow parts of the wooden banks, but that is a good contrast to the nice and brighter interior of the church. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:19, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very special.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:10, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 17:39, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 18:04, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:12, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support—nice comp & impressive size. Regarding the bend on the right I think it's probably that the actual support arch in the church is curved & not the camera bc the tan stripe to the right of it is straight to the ruler.—Love, Kelvinsong talk 04:05, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 09:35, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 10:50, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 13:29, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well done! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:11, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support +1 --mathias K 05:33, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 11:50, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 00:31, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 13:31, 4 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poco2 20:27, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors

File:Uferensemble RWW Stadthalle Schlossbrücke Mülheim 2014.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Mar 2014 at 08:13:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bank buildings at the river Ruhr with Castle Bridge ("Schlossbrücke") and Town Event Hall ("Stadthalle"), Mülheim an der Ruhr
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Bank buildings at the river Ruhr river with Castle Bridge ("Schlossbrücke") and Town Event Hall ("Stadthalle"), Mülheim an der Ruhr
    all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 08:13, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 08:13, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Good technical quality but not entirely convincing composition. The right part of the photo (the bridge) is not very interesting, have you considered a different crop?--ArildV (talk) 12:18, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
    • From an encyclopedic viewpoint the bridge is very important thus cropping out or massively reducing its visual importance is no good idea. From a compositional point I like the crossing of the two bridge structures at the golden-ratio position. I also tried to include some elements from the river bank at the right to give the photo some depth. Have you got a concrete suggestion for a better crop? --Tuxyso (talk) 12:36, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
      • I added a suggestion. I dont think you lose any encyclopaedic value, the bridge is still there and the original image did not show the entire bridge either). IMO more focus on the buildings and a better and stronger composition. I think I'm Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral right now, good QI but lacks something making it worthy FP.--ArildV (talk) 20:35, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It work for me -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:24, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Are there other opinions on the crop? --Tuxyso (talk) 19:56, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The problem I see is not the right crop, that would be acceptable IMO since it is softy hidden by the tree. I can repeat in this candidate my comment from the Mülheim nomination. The quality is top but there is nothing spectacular here. The item drawing the attention is the bridge and it is not really appealing. Sorry to oppose once more, nothing personal, you know that. Poco2 21:22, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
    • No problem Diego, but also give non world travelers a chance :) --Tuxyso (talk) 21:24, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Bank buildings at the river Ruhr with Castle Bridge ("Schlossbrücke") and Town Event Hall ("Stadthalle"), Mülheim an der Ruhr

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info ArildV and others: I made an alternative with a tighter crop at the right. Probably some people prefer this one. Let the crowd decide :) If you ask for the reason for nomination (valid for both cases): I think the light is quite good, level of detail is impressive and composition is interesting, especially the intersecting bridges in combination with the river and old buildings. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:22, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol support vote.svg Support --ArildV (talk) 13:39, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol support vote.svg Support--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 19:57, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol support vote.svg Support I have been coming back to this several times in the last few days and I actually think this is a very good panorama with well-balanced composition and undoubted excellent technical quality. Really, the only issue for me is that the buildings are a bit boring. --DXR (talk) 22:35, 1 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /—Blurred Lines 14:55, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Vasaparken 1944.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Mar 2014 at 12:05:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Figure skating in Vasaparken, Stockholm.

Alternative Restoration version[edit]

Figure skating in Vasaparken, Stockholm.
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I uploaded another version restorated --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 20:19, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Much better. Some more cleaning could be done, see notes. Yann (talk) 08:38, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thank you Wilfredo! --ArildV (talk) 09:04, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Holger.Ellgaard (talk) 08:15, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 17:05, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DimiTalen 16:13, 4 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /—Blurred Lines 14:52, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Virla Bridge, Sète, Hérault 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Mar 2014 at 18:08:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Virla Bridge, Sète, Hérault, France.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Virla Bridge. Sète, Hérault, France. All by Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:07, 24 february 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I adore the division of this photo because of the rounding of the bridge. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:07, 24 february 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. The crop could be more radical imo - a bit too much concrete on the right side. Still, I do like the colors and the calm, almost serene atmosphere. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:48, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose QI but no wow. The sweep of the handrail has potential but it doesn't stand out, being the same colour as the empty road, which dominates the right hand side. The flower boxes are all empty -- how much better this would be if they were full of colourful flowers. The pedestrian on the bridge looks glum, carrying her shopping bag. The road and boats all point towards a subject, which is good, but it is just a streetlamp, which isn't switched on. So the eye isn't rewarded. It is a lovely day, but the scene isn't really making me want to be there. If only we had an attractive couple walking towards the camera, with a riot of flowers in the boxes, and some attractive lighting... -- Colin (talk) 08:09, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
    I will be back, deeply the spring. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:14, 25 february 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:34, 28 February 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:21, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Image:Geneva Panorama from St. Pierre.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2014 at 17:27:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Geneva Panorama from St. Pierre
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by MarsPF2 - uploaded by MarsPF2 - nominated by MarsPF2 -- MarsPF2 (talk) 17:27, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MarsPF2 (talk) 17:27, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Strong oppose The picture is very, very blur. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 17:45, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, MarsPF2, but the image is currently well below the quality level expected from featured pictures. I assume that you are new here: To get a better understanding of the expectations we have you should first nominate some images at Quality Images to get a feeling what is necessary at a somewhat less harsh threshold of requirement. Please make also sure that you read the guidelines carefully before nominating. The image you have nominated here has fairly poor detail and not corrected white borders from the panorama stiching process. Furthermore the composition is not very convincing, showing some part of the tower. --DXR (talk) 17:57, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Image is stuffy when zoomed in, not good. —Blurred Lines 18:26, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for informations! I'm new here! I tried, and now I understand more about the procedure. Surely a less quality image respect with the other images proposed here. Thanks for consideration. Goodbye --MarsPF2 (talk) 21:16, 28 February 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:22, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Cumulus Clouds over Yellow Prairie2.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Mar 2014 at 04:40:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cumulus clouds towering over yellow prairie. At Prairie Wind Overlook, Badlands National Park, South Dakota, USA
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Wingchi Poon - uploaded by Kjetil Ree - nominated by Wingchi Poon -- Wingchi (talk) 04:40, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wingchi (talk) 04:40, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Not seeing any wow. Resolution is quite low. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:33, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Crisco — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colin (talk • contribs) 12:39, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:02, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For me there is definitely a wow (there just isn't a landscape in Estonia where you can't see forest somewhere), but the image resolution and quality just ain't there. Kruusamägi (talk) 10:39, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's pretty standard as it is, but as what Crisco said, not much WOW. Sorry. —Blurred Lines 17:04, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:03, 1 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 06:07, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Kostel svatého Bartoloměje v Pardubicích - vitráž 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Mar 2014 at 12:59:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Stained glass windows in church of Saint Bartholomew, Pardubice (Pardubitz)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 12:59, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 12:59, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 17:10, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kapsuglan (talk) 14:26, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't get why this is here. The stained glass is not a wonder and the picture is just of an average quality... --Selbymay (talk) 16:45, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above. The resolution is quite low and the window really doesn't stand out as far as stained glass windows go, imo. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 16:55, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above. And no sufficient description and categorization (I've had add the "St Peter St Paul" cat myself). We don't know who are represented, who made this work, and when. Lack of EV.--Jebulon (talk) 20:37, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /—Blurred Lines 13:38, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

File:2014-02-19 15-51-35 graffitis-fort-du-salbert.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Mar 2014 at 16:12:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Graffitis in the fort du Salbert, Belfort, France.


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:26, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Fv55 road at Sognefjellet, 2013 June.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Mar 2014 at 19:40:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Ximonic - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 19:40, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 19:40, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Today's favourite. --Rutake (talk) 20:15, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --///EuroCarGT 22:28, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 23:20, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 06:34, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 09:02, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer 11:52, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice. Jianhui67 talkcontribs 13:39, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 17:01, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As soon as I saw it I knew it was one of Ximonic's. --King of ♠ 17:34, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cool! Poco2 21:58, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arcalino (talk) 12:18, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Definitely a very interesting (and seldom) motive. But the composition is really boring. --Tuxyso (talk) 17:06, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose B.p. 14:16, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
    • @Biopics: Could you add a reason(s) for your oppose? It's not very nice for the photographer or nominator to see the oppose vote without any reason stated. Thanks. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 17:25, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
    • Thank you for your concern. Can you add a reason for your support, then I'll reciprocate.  B.p. 20:55, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
      • You apparently (pretending?) don't get it if you say that. It's not very nice for the photographer or nominator to see the oppose vote without any reason stated. I'm sure both the nominator and photographer will be more than happy to see a support vote, whether or not a reason is given. If you oppose, you feel there's room for improvement, and surely the photographer will be curious about that, and it's a courtesy to explain as well. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 13:25, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:05, 1 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 22:26, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places

File:Michelangelo's Pietà Saint Peter's Basilica Vatican City.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Mar 2014 at 18:28:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Pietà, by Michelangelo, Saint Peter's Basilica.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Renomination after rework of this Michelangelo's Pietà, one of the marvels on the human genius IMO, and one of the great masterpieces of all times. This work has his own article in many wikipedias.I know that we already have a FP of the same subject, but it is now a bit old (2008), and a bit small. The nominated version has double size. It seems to have a sufficient quality (better than the already feaured version IMO - chromatic noise etc-). Those who know the place know also how it is difficult to take such a photograph, without tripod nor flash, and through a glass...-- Jebulon (talk) 18:28, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Not really easy for me right now. I have never witnessed a delist and replace during my short time here, but wouldn't that be the right place for doing one with the FP you have mentioned? Both images show the same subject with approx. 30° difference in viewing angle while having a very comparable crop. That seems pretty similar to me. --DXR (talk) 19:08, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
    • I asked myself the same question, but 1)We already have at least 3 FP of the Neuschwanstein castle taken from the same place (the bridge), 2) I'm not a fan of delisting old FP, and 3) as you noticed, my candidate is different, because not taken from the front. And there is no way to have another crop, due to the nature of the composition of the sculpture. Thoughts ? Supports ? Clin --Jebulon (talk) 21:06, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:13, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support D&Rs make more sense on en:WP. I think it is wrong to force a contributor to make D&Rs when offering candidates to this project. BTW, a well executed image. Saffron Blaze (talk) 21:47, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Okay, given that two FPs of one subject appears to be accepted, I can well support as the quality is certainly good. However, may I suggest cropping a tiny bit to remove the right yellow part of the wall? Not a big deal, but I find it a bit distracting. --DXR (talk) 22:27, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support tbh I didn't actually see the sliver of yellow wall until DXR pointed it out but it is actually annoying. But not really at all a dealbreakerr—Love, Kelvinsong talk 03:58, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 13:35, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 17:32, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I personally prefer the viewing angle of the current fp, but with it´s better quality this one is still fp-worthy. --mathias K 05:23, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 11:48, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Classic, but very good:) Halavar (talk) 00:34, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 13:29, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Food for the mind in the lent. Jee 06:20, 6 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 22:27, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects

File:Altstädtisches Rathaus nachts (MK).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Mar 2014 at 23:50:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Altstädtisches Rathaus in Brandenburg/Havel (Germany)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Altstädtische Rathaus ("Old Townhall") in Brandenburg an der Havel (Germany) at night. c/u/n by me. -- mathias K 23:50, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- mathias K 23:50, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Perspective distortion. Or is the building just leaning?--Rutake (talk) 20:01, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I´ve uploaded a new, perspective corrected version. --mathias K 09:24, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support FP to me Poco2 21:56, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:37, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:41, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:05, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 10:56, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 13:34, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:13, 5 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 07:05, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications

File:Capri BW 2013-05-14 15-13-38 2 DxO.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Mar 2014 at 11:48:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Capri, Faraglioni


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 14:06, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Собор Воскресения Христова 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Mar 2014 at 09:31:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church of the Saviour on the Blood in Saint Petersburg, Russia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by AndreyWi - nominated by A.Savin 09:31, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 09:31, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support No wow. --Mile (talk) 12:33, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support On this tablet this is perfect. Wonderful composition. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:27, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The church is nice, the boat is nice, but the crop is too tight and the tree is hiding the right side of the church. Not outstanding. --Rutake (talk) 19:55, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great! Halavar (talk) 23:24, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 08:05, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 11:07, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 11:21, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer 11:52, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

*Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Great picture, but imo the railing is rather distracting. Perhaps someone wants to remove it? (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 14:50, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 17:00, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 21:55, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:38, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arcalino (talk) 12:17, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 17:42, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I dislike the crop. --Yikrazuul (talk) 20:42, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good subject but poor crop and those wires ruin it. -- Colin (talk) 21:56, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above, sorry. --Ivar (talk) 07:47, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too tight crop. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 09:10, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I do not mind the railings as they close off the canal bottom left. Regarding the wires, one could have taken a second photo with the camera some 4-5cm vertically shifted and then suitably merged the two photos. On balance ok as wires are reality. -- KlausFoehl (talk) 16:10, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Crop. --Karelj (talk) 20:45, 5 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 14:05, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:Catedral de Puebla, México, 2013-10-11, DD 17.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Mar 2014 at 20:51:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

In the foreground the  baroque style St Michael fountain, located in the Main Square of Puebla, dates from 1777. In the background the spectacular Cathedral, build in 1649 and of Herrerian style, Puebla, Mexico.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info In the foreground the baroque style St Michael fountain, located in the Main Square of Puebla, dates from 1777. In the background the spectacular Cathedral, build in 1649 and of Herrerian style, Puebla, Mexico. All by me, Poco2 20:51, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 20:51, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support impressive colors and excellent composition - "ghosts" not really disturbing --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:26, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 23:25, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DXR (talk) 12:57, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 16:58, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:35, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I am not really convinced. The composition is imho a bit disorganized. I would suggest a tighter crop at the top (see note). IMHO the crop at the left is unfortunate because the socket of the fountain is cropped. The leafs at the top left should be copied out. A QI nightshot, but an FP? --Tuxyso (talk) 17:03, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
    Hopefully you like the last version better, I adapted the crop on the left and top. Please, let me know what you think. Poco2 19:29, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
    It's definitely an improvement, but I am not fully convinced of the composition and perspective (looks somehow compressed due to perspective correction?) --Tuxyso (talk) 17:47, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:07, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Grey highlight clipping and generally very chaotic. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 12:20, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Julian and Tuxyso. -- Colin (talk) 21:59, 2 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 22:53, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:Black Phoebe at Las Gallinas Wildlife Ponds.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Mar 2014 at 22:13:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Black Phoebe (Sayornis nigricans) at Las Gallinas Wildlife Ponds near San Rafael, Marin County, California


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 06:54, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Birds

File:Kostel svatého Bartoloměje v Pardubicích - vitráž.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Mar 2014 at 22:28:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Stained glass windows in church of Saint Bartholomew, Pardubice (Pardubitz)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 22:28, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 22:28, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 10:55, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think cropping some of the negative space at the top and adding a bit at the bottom would improve the compositional balance. Jonathunder (talk) 00:25, 4 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 06:55, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Endzeit LARP.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2014 at 11:22:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Live Role Player in a post-apocalyptic scenario
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by RalfHuels - uploaded by RalfHuels - nominated by RalfHuels -- RalfHuels (talk) 11:22, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- RalfHuels (talk) 11:22, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great! Very nice and impressive work. It would be nice to provide some background information how the photo was created. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:06, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The foreground is lit with off-camera flash with a CTB gel. Custom white balance is set to the gel color to create the complementary tint to the sky and background. And the interior of the shed is lit with a mini softbox with a green cover. Should this go in the image description? --RalfHuels (talk) 12:16, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
    • BTW I had a bit of a struggle whether this would be seen as an image manipulation under the guidelines. As the manipulation was done with lighting and in camera and showing the reality of the background location is clearly not the main purpose of the image, I chose not to flag the image as retouched, even though the colors are not what a human would have perceived at the scene. If consensus is otherwise, I'll add the template. --RalfHuels (talk) 12:38, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- I know the lighting/PP will not be to everyone's taste but I admire the effort and the result. Saffron Blaze (talk) 22:50, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks. PP consists of standard Raw conversion, rotation by 1°, adjustment of exposure by half a stop downwards and a slight raising of the black level. RalfHuels (talk) 20:03, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:08, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Saffron -- Colin (talk) 09:56, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 14:37, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

File:The Long Lonely Road.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2014 at 07:05:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Long Lonely Road.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info - For context cf. this CC blog entry; link in annotation didn't work: –Be..anyone (talk) 07:05, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Resolution, but now I see much noise and it is very unsharp. --Yikrazuul (talk) 08:36, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info - My bad, not the fault of the photographer: Flickr has a better resolution, I uploaded it about a day after @DXR's and @Yikrazuul's comments. –Be..anyone (talk) 05:14, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Given the higher resolution version I have removed the FPX. --DXR (talk) 06:51, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Harsh colors. DimiTalen 16:07, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Serious quality issues: Massive Oversharpening, remarkable sensor dust, overdone colors. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:49, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Strong oppose Per above. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 16:04, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A long empty road is a common and good theme but this one isn't technically up to standard. -- Colin (talk) 10:45, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 0 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 14:38, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

File:A sheep with a couple of lambs in Breidsæterdalen, 2013 June.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2014 at 18:59:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ximonic - uploaded by Ximonic - nominated by Blurred Lines -- —Blurred Lines 18:59, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- —Blurred Lines 18:59, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg weak pro Only a small "Wow". --XRay talk 10:52, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DimiTalen 16:12, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 00:48, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Good capture and quality, but the composition and lighting is not convicing, Poco2 21:28, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice but not strong enough to be FP. -- Colin (talk) 10:19, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think you accidentally used the wrong template. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 10:21, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:07, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Gustav IIIs maskeraddräkt - Livrustkammaren - 24373.tif, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2014 at 14:50:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The masquerade dress worn by Gustav III of Sweden during his assassination 1792.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Livrustkammaren / Göran Schmidt - uploaded by LSHuploadBot - nominated by Lokal_Profil -- Lokal_Profil 14:50, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The masquerade dress worn by Gustav III of Sweden during his assassination in 1792.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lokal_Profil 14:50, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ArildV (talk) 15:54, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 18:59, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very high HV, and technicaly good quality. FP to me.--Jebulon (talk) 23:22, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 17:34, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:09, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 13:19, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 21:55, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 10:05, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 22:06, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects

File:Portrait de madame de Verninac by David Louvre RF1942-16 n3.ogg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2014 at 20:06:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Coyau after a painting by Jacques-Louis David - uploaded and nominated by Coyau. Animation of the Portrait of Madame de Verninac by Jacques-Louis David. -- Coyau (talk) 20:06, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coyau (talk) 20:06, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question What's the benefit of this video compared to the painting itself? --Martin Kraft (talk) 09:06, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Why a video? -- -donald- (talk) 09:26, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Animated parallax are quite commun and successfull ([7], [8], [9], etc.). The point of this is the video. --Coyau (talk) 15:39, 5 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:08, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Vic-la-Gardiole, Hérault 14.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2014 at 17:39:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vic-la-Gardiole, Hérault, France.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Christian Ferrer - uploaded by Christian Ferrer - nominated by Blurred Lines -- —Blurred Lines 17:39, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- —Blurred Lines 17:39, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose 1) Not enough wow. 2) The main object as stated in the image desccription is the pine forest, but that occupies a minority of the image, so I don't see the full picture of the "pine forest". 3) Urbanisation in the background. Makes the picture unnatural, when talking about "forests". (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 18:09, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
    • @Arctic Kangaroo: Well, Christian said below that it changed the description to make it a better point for the picture. So, are you staying with your vote, or changing it? —Blurred Lines 19:38, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 09:23, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for the nomination, I improved the description. The place is protected by the Conservatoire du littoral. This pine forest have the particularity to to be one of the closest of the coast in the southern France. In this picture you see also two important things : the omnipresent silhouette in the region of the Mount Saint-Clair and the vegetable carpet of Salicornia europaea which have the particularity to to grow on salty ground. --Christian Ferrer 19:13, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the way the bridge runs very much and point 3 mentioned by AK (in the oppose vote) actually makes the image more valuable to me. --DXR (talk) 19:34, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Caecilius Mauß (talk) 20:35, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 21:52, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 06:23, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 08:16, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 12:05, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arcalino (talk) 12:16, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 14:29, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:41, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tuxyso (talk) 14:44, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 17:32, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Strong clockwise rotation. No description. --Kikos (talk) 20:29, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Kikos. That bridge should have started in the corner. I think this is correctable though. Saffron Blaze (talk) 22:24, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Just out of interest, I have examined the image in LR and with lines etc. and I do not find any convincing evidence for "strong tilts" when looking at verticals (there might be a minimal one, but a straight oppose based only on that is pretty harsh, imo). Surely the coastline is not reliable as indicator and I see a lot of pretty vertical lines. --DXR (talk) 00:21, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • I am convinced on your argument that this isn't titled. Must be an illusion created by the landscape. Also, I tried a couple of different crops and could not improve on this composition. What I would have liked would have required a higher perspective. Removing the oppose. Saffron Blaze (talk) 01:06, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks DXR, indeed I've tried to put the verticals straight. And if there is a tilt it is not obvious IMO, and I don't see it. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:10, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Given DXR's comment I opened the image in an editor and at full resolution it was very apparent there is no tilt with every vertical object perfectly perpendicular to the horizon. This is why I removed the oppose. I ask that Kikos consider doing the same. Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:48, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:09, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose  B.p. 20:57, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --mathias K 05:47, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 06:37, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DimiTalen 16:12, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The bottom half is good with the clean wooden path, regular patterns, lovely still reflection, but then the eye is carried up to the top and things peter out. The centre has a few trees, a hazy hill and then further over some kind of oil refinery. The scrub land and trees which occupy so much of the image don't in themselves make a strong enough subject -- perhaps the bog has flowering plants another time of the year. Possibly a better photo could have concentrated only on the path and its reflection closer up. Or have a group or couple walking on the path. -- Colin (talk) 10:18, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 22:07, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places

File:Pulpit Rock Preikestolen Norway.jpeg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2014 at 16:03:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Preikestolen (Pulpit Rock) Norway.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by -- Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:03, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:03, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 16:10, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, its a amazing place but I dont think the composition do justice to Preikestolen. I think we have compositions that capture the dramatic landscape better (for example 1, 2 and 3.--ArildV (talk) 16:19, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Those are very nice indeed. Do you think this version would stand up better or this? Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:38, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Imo both are better. The first one is a more dramatic version of this image and the second picture gives a good overview . Assuming that both of them have the same high quality in higher resolution, I believe that both have a good chances. Both gives (imo) a better understanding for the landscape and height difference.--ArildV (talk) 19:47, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Arild. --Ivar (talk) 19:28, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Saffron Blaze (talk) 19:51, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Münster, Liudgerhaus und Diözesanbibliothek -- 2014 -- 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2014 at 09:35:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Münster (Westphalia), Liudgerhaus and Dözesanbibliothek (Überwasserkirche in the background)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XRay - uploaded by XRay - nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 09:35, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 09:35, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Could be really good but there are some flaws. The people aren't posed helpfully and the white sign is unfortunate -- all the leading lines go down to them so they need to work. The crop at the top is a bit tight and the building on the right is leaning a little on its far edge. There's a bit of CA round the old building. -- Colin (talk) 12:20, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose X-Ray, I have to agree with Colin on this one. Lots of good ideas in here but the execution leaves something to be desired. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:32, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination I think you're right. I'll try to take another photo without the disturbing elements (and nominate the new one).--XRay talk 16:00, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Edificio principal, Jardín Botánico, Múnich, Alemania, 2013-09-08, DD 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Mar 2014 at 20:51:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pond of the Schmuckhof (Jewel Courtyard) with the main building in the background, Botanical Garden, Munich, Germany. Although the Botanical Garden in Munich as institution exists since 1809 it moved to the current location exactly 100 years ago.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Pond of the Schmuckhof (Jewel Courtyard) with the main building in the background, Botanical Garden, Munich, Germany. Although the Botanical Garden in Munich as institution exists since 1809 it moved to the current location exactly 100 years ago. All by me, Poco2 20:51, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 20:51, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose QI but not FP. The overcast sky and random visitors spoil it. Not sure about the crop either (the label in pond nearby is distracting). -- Colin (talk) 12:12, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As per Colin. While the world is not always a sunny place, drab skies rarely make for a stunning picture. That said this was a very interesting composition and it would be equally interesting to see this re-done under better lighting conditions. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:53, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
    That's easy Saffron Blaze: sunny, snowy, heavily cloudy,...Poco2 16:07, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Great response :-) That first one is deservedly FP and I think it illustrates the point I was trying to make. I think the perspective of this image with that light would have been stunning. It would also be very cool to get the four seasons all taken from the exact same spot! Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:15, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Well, that's it, I guess Poco2 16:26, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Sant Maurici lake, Aigüestortes i Estany de Sant Maurici National Park, Spain - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Mar 2014 at 19:54:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 19:54, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 19:54, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The photo is truly stunning, but unfortunately there's a lot of blurring and distortion at the edges... DimiTalen 21:51, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- It is a striking image (lots of wow) but the technical issues hardly qualify as one of our finest works. Saffron Blaze (talk) 23:00, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Really nice view, but sadly per Saffron. --mathias K 06:10, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:24, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 19:17, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Comment. Sorry, I noticed this a little too late. The distortion is unfortunately due to the extremely wide angle lens used - 14mm (full frame). The distortion is unavoidable but I accept that it does make it a little flawed for a FPC. Diliff (talk) 13:22, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Templo Wat Arun, Bangkok, Tailandia, 2013-08-22, DD 17.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2014 at 20:29:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Khmer-style Prang (spire) of the Wat Arun Temple, Bangkok, Thailand. The temple itself exists since the 17th century, but the prangs, decorated with rows of demons and monkeys, were built during the reign of King Rama II (1809-1824).
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Khmer-style Prang (spire) of the Wat Arun Temple, Bangkok, Thailand. The temple itself exists since the 17th century, but the prangs, decorated with rows of demons and monkeys, were built during the reign of King Rama II (1809-1824). All by me, Poco2 20:29, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 20:29, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Yeah, thats the place where I took this this, just the other direction. ;-) I like the view and the given quality, even the distortion with this large FOV is managed very well. I would really like to support this one, but I don´t like the two long tail boats driving exactly "into" the prang. Diego, don`t you have a version captured just a few seconds earlier or later? That would be great! --mathias K 05:30, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
    Hi Mathias, I got your point and uploaded a new version without those 2 boats. Please, let me know what do you think Poco2 19:36, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Good work! Now, Symbol support vote.svg Support. --mathias K 05:46, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but it's not a good work. There are signs of cloning (this is obviously not an easy task) and among the boats you have cloned out one element of the temple. Overall quality is ok, but not outstanding (bottom part of the temple is not sharp) and the light is not amiable. --Ivar (talk) 06:41, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
    • Ok, ✓ New version uploaded, I gave it a new try, better work now? Poco2 21:59, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment better cloning quality, but you still cloned out one golden element of the temple. --Ivar (talk) 08:01, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
        • Ok, Ivar, now I saw what you were talking about, the golden element is back there Poco2 09:26, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ivar -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:36, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting subject, and good ev for the subject, but seems more composed to get everything in for an encyclopaedic image than to achieve something artistic. Quite distracting backgrounds. -- Colin (talk) 11:44, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Ok, that's it folks, Poco2 16:32, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Lawson Cypress seed cones.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2014 at 14:14:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lawson Cypress seed cones (Chamaecyparis lawsoniana)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- MrPanyGoff 14:14, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MrPanyGoff 14:14, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow, sorry --DXR (talk) 14:42, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Could have been better. --DimiTalen 08:39, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --MrPanyGoff 21:58, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Castello di Amorosa.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2014 at 16:03:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Exterior of Castello di Amorosa, a winery castle in Napa Valley, California.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Quality and Valued. Created, uploaded, and nominated by DimiTalen. --DimiTalen 16:03, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DimiTalen 16:03, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 00:45, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The picture is really perfekt for QI and VI! But this is also the perfect example for my personal "dilemma" here on fpc! I see many, many nominations of pictures like this one here, perfect QI´s and maybe VI´s. But I ask myself, Is this really one of the best pictures commons has to offer?? I think no. It´s not really the wow-thing that I´m missing (I don´t like: no WOW!), but that little special what makes the difference between QI and FP is what I miss very often. --mathias K 17:17, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (weak): The light is very nice, composition convincing but the detail quality is only average (I guess due to D70 sensor). Nonetheless you made a very good photo with regard to the given equipment. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:05, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I am surprised this passed QI. It is quite soft. Saffron Blaze (talk) 04:09, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Relatively bland composition in my opinion, a little more context would be good and the quality is good but not outstanding. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 14:56, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Mathias and Julian, sorry. --DXR (talk) 15:34, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Changed my comment to an opposed, as Mathias put into good words my other concerns with this image. Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:41, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination. Thank you very much for your feedback! DimiTalen 08:10, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Dülmen, Feldweg -- 2014 -- 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2014 at 05:38:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dirt road in Dülmen (Germany) during sunrise
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XRay - uploaded by XRay - nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 05:38, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 05:38, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:10, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. Composition is not ideal but I like the colors and theme. --King of ♠ 06:36, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice! --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:10, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 20:40, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Again, I fail to see anything special here. Nice evening sky, but that's it. --A.Savin 15:40, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for A.Savin --Pava (talk) 18:56, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice try for something different but the pothole in the path doesn't make the image attractive enough. -- Colin (talk) 10:29, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 06:27, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Erithacus rubecula with cocked head.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2014 at 00:21:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Erithacus rubecula with an eye on me. A common bird, but a nice pose, I think.
Would you mind adding comments with your rather large oppose spree? Lewis Hulbert (talk) 14:53, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition. Lewis Hulbert (talk) 14:54, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Baresi, thank you for contributing so many great bird photos to Commons. :D (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:20, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great photo! Also very surprised that the template takes French assessments... --DXR (talk) 15:57, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 17:28, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice technique and composition. Great shot, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:04, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Back not is in focus. ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 13:38, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Can't expect the entire bird to be in focus—Love, Kelvinsong talk 18:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 18:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:10, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 13:19, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very well done! Exif says you use a 60mm lens, how do you get so close to get this picture? Good job! --mathias K 05:44, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thanks. Yeah, tricky to get this close - even garden birds are easily spooked. I used a remote shutter, camouflage, and hours of trial and error :) --Baresi franco (talk) 18:26, 4 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 06:26, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Birds

File:Koch – Mayor of the City of New York.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2014 at 05:27:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ed Koch
In memory of Ed Koch (December 12, 1924 — February 1, 2013)
ARTstor, Happy birthday to Mayor Ed Koch!
Dmitry Borshch, Catalog of American Portraits (CAP), National Portrait Gallery, Smithsonian Institution
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- DmitryBorshch (talk) 05:27, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
    • For the sake of transparency, you shouldn't support your own images.--Jetstreamer (talk) 19:51, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
      • @Jetstreamer How much more transparent can he be with the big support next to his name? Voting for one's image not is just a matter of personal taste here at FPC and no one is concerned about any conflict of interest. You would know that if you had taken the time to review a few other files under nomination or even the guidelines. Saffron Blaze (talk) 02:30, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
        • What is not forbidden is allowed? Say whatever you want. I wouldn't vote for my own images.--Jetstreamer (talk) 14:19, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
          • Jetstreamer Supporting your own images is automatic on English Wikipedia, where this was submitted for consideration as an FP a few weeks ago. It was unsuccessful because there was no good place to put it, and EnWiki's FP process requires that FPs have prominent usage in one or more articles. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:46, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well, honestly I can't say much about the artistic qualities of this portrait - I'm no expert at all on contemporary drawings. But I certainly do appreciate that prominent artists voluntarily provide their work under a free license, thus supporting this project significantly. Featuring such a fine example would further promote "our cause". --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:56, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Martin Falbisoner. -- Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:49, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- because it is so different from what usually gets featured and as per Martin Falbisoner, promoting "the cause" Lotje (talk) 07:54, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Godhulii 1985 (talk) 10:26, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 10:27, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Martin. Jee 10:41, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 06:24, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic media

Pictogram voting info.svg Info FP star removed for now, as per https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons_talk:Featured_picture_candidates&oldid=123212392#Invalid_vote --A.Savin 16:16, 5 May 2014 (UTC)

File:Landschaftspark Duisburg Nord March 2014 3.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2014 at 05:10:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Impression of Landschaftspark Duisburg-Nord at blue hour. Illumination of blast furnace.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Impression of Landschaftspark Duisburg-Nord at blue hour. Illumination of blast furnace. All by -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:10, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:10, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Qui tacet dissentire videtur, I suppose. ;-) But you're right. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:00, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
    • Funny. In French we have a short sentence, which says exactly the contrary: "Qui ne dit mot, consent". --Jebulon (talk) 20:37, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
      •  ;-) Don't be confused Jebulon. Your version is the correct (and classic) one, also in Latin. I just hoped to be funny and made up this pun... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:26, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
    • Yeah ! I did not know this one and fall in the trap ! Excellent ! Thanks ! I think speaking Latin should be a mandatory here in "Commons"...--Jebulon (talk) 09:44, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
    • because quidquid Latine dictum sit altum videtur, don't you think so, Martin Falbisoner ? --Jebulon (talk) 09:47, 7 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 06:28, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Ganymede diagram.svg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Mar 2014 at 03:54:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Diagram of Jupiter's moon Ganymede.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Diagram of Jupiter's moon Ganymede. All by Kelvinsong—Love, Kelvinsong talk 03:54, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support—Love, Kelvinsong talk 03:54, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment What is ice-six and how does that relate to tetragonal crystals? Why is the normal ice annotated as 1h? Is groves a scientific term? Shouldn't ganymede be Ganymede given it is a proper name? Saffron Blaze (talk) 04:32, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
There's literally like 15 kinds of ice in the universe, including Ice six & Ice one-h. Ice six for whatever reason has tetragonal crystals, Ice 1h is the snowflake-kind we all know and love (the h stands for hexagonal crystals). Take a look at the w:Ice article. I didn't note "hexagonal crystals" cause everyone knows normal ice is hexagonal. Idk if grooves is a scientific term but that's what the wikipedia Ganymede article uses. && I usually don't capitalize headings, it's stylistic.—Love, Kelvinsong talk 05:10, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Interesting stuff. In reading that I would suggest you clean up how you present the ice information. In one you use the official ice designation first yet in the other it is bracketed. I get you are assuming people know normal ice is hexagonal but I am certain you are mistaken. I would suggest naming the layers after their shape (hexagonal and tetragonal) and bracketing the official name (Ice 1h and Ice VI) for consitency. Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:28, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done—Love, Kelvinsong talk 18:01, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) Why has everyone suddenly been on a capitals crusade lately… I've never capitalized a title on any of my pictures before. Headings don't have to follow the same rules that body text has to. Even the Wikimedia grants page drops the capitals. && I should also note that the Wikivoyage logo is set in all lowercase too.—Love, Kelvinsong talk 15:55, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
This is why: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Capital_letters#Celestial_bodies Saffron Blaze (talk) 15:58, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
@ Saffron Note: Wikipedia and Commons are unrelated. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 16:11, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Wrong. Perhaps you should read what is considered in scope. Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:22, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
@Kelvinsong: Initially I thought something was wrong without capitals. But when I saw all your other graphics afterwards I decided to revert my decision. NO CAPS is better in this situation. Clin (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 16:11, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Wong again. This image should be suitable for use on en:WP as it is in English. The MOS indicates capitals for celestial bodies as a proper name. This convention is not limited to Wikipedia. Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:22, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done This isn't worth fighting over. I capitalized the g. Been trying to move away from that Windows 8 style anyway.—Love, Kelvinsong talk 18:09, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
@Kelvinsong: Hmm...why is the text unbolded. I'm afraid I will change my vote if the issue is not fixed soon. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 11:39, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Why?¿ Larger text is generally supposed to take a lighter fontweight & we are rapidly moving into the iOS 7 age where bold text is so last year—Love, Kelvinsong talk 00:42, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Comparing it to your other graphics of the Sun, Earth, Moon, etc, the bold text is nicer. And well, I don't really bother whether it's the iOS 7 age or not, as long as Macs don't rule the world (and Windows does). I'm changing the vote to oppose, but you can (of course) choose whether it should remain unbolded or not. Cheers. ;) (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 07:00, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Display type is almost always thinner and more delicate than body type, but in the intrest of avoiding conflict I bolded the Ganymede text one level to 25. && What's wrong with Apple? They're far ahead of Windows when it comes to design. (but ofc Ubuntu beats them all bc you can customize it to whatever you likee)—Love, Kelvinsong talk 18:08, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Ah...better now. I'm not sure what's Ubuntu, but I have nothing against Apple, except the damn Macs and iPods. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 08:30, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'd be a monumental ass if I didn't support now :-) Interesting image. I was drawn to immediately and it made me want to learn more. Saffron Blaze (talk) 18:13, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanksss!!—Love, Kelvinsong talk 19:50, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
@Kelvinsong: Me too...astronomy is great stuff. I have been interested in it for a long time. :) (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 11:40, 3 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:08, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic media/Computer-generated

File:Krim 2014 de.svg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2014 at 07:53:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

EN: Political german map of Crimea. Shows important towns, roads, airports and (military) harbours. DE: Deutsche politische Landkarte der Halbinsel Krim. Zeigt wichtige Städte, Straßen, Flughäfen und (Militär-)Häfen
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Furfur, Martin Kraft (based on works of Urutseg & PANONIAN) - uploaded by Furfur, Martin Kraft - nominated by Excolis -- Excolis (talk) 07:53, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Excolis (talk) 07:53, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bad cartography, Daleke with 1031 inhabitants does not belong onto this map. --Schwarzorange (talk) 12:43, 4 March 2014 (UTC) Mistake corrected. --Schwarzorange (talk) 19:48, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose—extremely inefficient path quality—is this a bitmap trace? Other than that this is certainly a decent quality and useful image but not quite detailed or complex enough for FP.—Love, Kelvinsong talk 18:37, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:09, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Janine Flock - Team Austria Winter Olympics 2014 a.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2014 at 19:34:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Janine Flock
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tsui - uploaded by Tsui - nominated by kasir -- Kasir (talk) 19:34, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kasir (talk) 19:34, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alborzagros (talk) 07:55, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unquestionable a high quality shot but no FP for me. The light is relateively harsh, according to the centered point reflection in the eyes I guess it was a centered direct on-camera flash. There are a lot of hightlights on the skin (imho not favorable for an FP portrayal), e.g. the chin shadow is very harsh and unfortunate. A typical newspaper shot (Janine Flock in front of an disturbing ad wall) but nothing outstanding. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:14, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Tuxyso. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 13:28, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Tuxyso -- Colin (talk) 10:31, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:32, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

File:LucerneCLWyssI.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2014 at 17:44:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of Lucerne


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:31, 9 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Duisburger Innenhafen Five Boats Abend 2014.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2014 at 09:38:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nightly view of Duisburg Inner Harbour with office building "Five Boats" and marina
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me
    Another Duisburg nomination :) -- Tuxyso (talk) 09:38, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 09:38, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:55, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support Wow and scene nice, technical quality could be just a bit better, but still FP imo. --DXR (talk) 10:06, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the review and support. What do you mean by "technical quality"? Do you mean "image quality" or compositional aspects? Note that this is a single shot (no HDR) - developed from one RAW file. Unfortunately I do not own a full frame camera or a camera with higher resolution :) --Tuxyso (talk) 10:15, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
      • Not talking about size, just have the feeling that the sharpness on both sides' buildings is just a bit low, but as I said not a huge issue. --DXR (talk) 10:34, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wow for Duisburg here! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:42, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I´m thinking the same as DXR. The composition with the nice reflection and colours looks pretty great. But the overall image quality could be better. Looks a little noisy and not 100% sharp. But as DXR said, it´s not a huge issue. ;-) --mathias K 10:47, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment DXR, Leviathan1983: I've worked on sharpness and noise and uploaded a new version. Please let me know if you think that this is an improvement. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:30, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Not really, sorry. It wasn't that sort of unsharpness that would be solved by sharpening, so I'm not changing from weak. --DXR (talk) 14:43, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Hmm, that´s strange. Dit you purge your cache? Cause now I´m home and looking at both versions in LR, and for my taste this was a big improvement for the picture. The noise is way better and the sharpness looks better to. Good job! --mathias K 16:23, 5 March 2014 (UTC) @:Tuxyso Aber als Hausaufgabe kannst du dir dieses Motiv, mit genau der Komp als high-res-belichtungsfusionspano ins Heft schreiben! Mein pro haste schon... ;-)
@mathias: Die Hausaufgabe nehme ich gerne an :) Weit ist der Innenhafen von meiner Home Base zum Glück nicht entfernt. Wobei ich die richtige "Hardware" (Nodal Ninja) für ein solches Pano sogar dabei hatte. Allerdings hätte der Umbau vom Kugelkopf zum Nodalpunkt-Adapter wohl solange gedauert, dass das schöne Licht dahin gewesen wäre. Ich war auch so ganz zufrieden mit dem Resultat. Klar, D800-Qualität ist es natürlich nicht... ---Tuxyso (talk) 16:40, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • @:Tuxyso Na dann bin ich mal gespannt wie´s wird... Das jetzige Resultat is aber definitiv schon mal zufriedenstellend! Grüße, mathias K 16:59, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Tuxyso, ich möchte nicht überkleinlich sein und ein Weak support ist ja immer noch vor allem ein Support, aber ich finde die Schärfe der rechten Häuserzeile für ein Bild vom Stativ einfach ein bisschen zu gering, vor allem am zweiten von links, und ich persönlich habe lieber ein wenig mehr Rauschen als eine doch relativ starke Weichzeichnung. Die Atmosphäre usw. ist natürlich super, und das ist auch das, was am Ende am meisten zählt. Ich hoffe, das nimmt mir hier keiner übel ;-). (Welches Objektiv war das denn, wenn man fragen darf?)--DXR (talk) 22:00, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
ich meine das af-s 10-24 bei 24mm., da ist es nicht besonders stark. Kann leider nicht nachschauen, da ich einige Tage unterwegs bin.--Tuxyso (talk) 18:45, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Kein Stress! Ja, das deckt sich ungefähr mit meiner Erfahrung mit dem Objektiv, danke für die Info! --DXR (talk) 21:10, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 14:23, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 15:52, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 01:03, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 08:33, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DimiTalen 08:40, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support—Buildings lack sharpness against the sky but it's not serious enough to detract a lott—Love, Kelvinsong talk 00:20, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 14:55, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good job! Still, there is room for improvement; the right side is leaning out Poco2 21:25, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
    • It's subtle, but you're right. Currently I cannot correct it (currently on a journey), but after the nomination the correction should be not big deal. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:37, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 04:30, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 11:27, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great one! Halavar (talk) 11:56, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- It is only when you open this to full res to you really get a chance to appreciate it. My background for the day. Saffron Blaze (talk) 16:11, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 04:31, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Joydeep Talk 09:57, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:56, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Quite dark and unassuming/uninteresting motif. WLMBP (talk) 19:45, 9 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 21:30, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes

File:Frontignan, Hérault 10.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Mar 2014 at 18:05:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Château de Six Terres
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The "Château de Six Terres" (wine-producing farm, 1880) and its adjacent vineyards in Frontignan, in background a part of the harbour of Sète and the Mediterranean Sea. Hérault, France. All by Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:05, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:05, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:12, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose What exactly on this picture is now the part of interest? --Yikrazuul (talk) 08:37, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
    The whole photo? or maybe I'm not rather objective concerning my photos, am I? Clin -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:03, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 21:51, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DimiTalen 16:08, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not particularly eye-catching, composition is too flat. --King of ♠ 04:54, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but per King of Hearts. Although the light is very, very nice! --mathias K 05:09, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose landscape that does not say anything, you do not understand the significance of this photo (and all others similar) --Pava (talk) 18:54, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The long focal length, together with the flat topology, makes everything in the photo equally important. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 21:08, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
    Julian H., Yes, good eyes! and it is stressed by my edition, the will to put the background equally with the foreground, matter of tastes! Thanks. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 21:33, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Mathias K -- Colin (talk) 10:34, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:08, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Saint-Émilion, Aquitaine.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Mar 2014 at 15:08:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St-Émilion in France.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by JordyMeow - uploaded by JordyMeow - nominated by JordyMeow -- Jordy Meow (talk) 15:08, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jordy Meow (talk) 15:08, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:12, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There isn't by any chance some room on the right for a crop placing the church according to the golden ratio or rule of thirds? — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 13:31, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
    • I made some attempts and could not improve the crop. After some hestitation I think the crop is good as it is. --Tuxyso (talk) 18:15, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:01, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment After a bit of hesitation (regarding composition) I guess that this one can become FP. At the moment I am neutral, because a lot of details on the bright fassades are not yet visible (see note). The bright areas are not burnt out but could be brought out much better if you (selectively) reduce the highlights of the photo. If you make a test and reduce overall brightness of -1 EV you see how many details are still there. --Tuxyso (talk) 18:12, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Both sides are leaning out (it needs perspective correction). The composition is also tricky, it looks a bit cluttered Poco2 20:56, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 00:32, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 13:30, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:17, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for now. The perspective distortion and the highlights (already mentioned by Poco & Tuxyso) need to be corrected. Also the overall sharpness could be better. Composition is very nice. --mathias K 05:05, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the image is totally distorted --Pava (talk) 18:55, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Poco and opposers. I don't understand the composition. To take a picture from a high point is not enough, I'm afraid.--Jebulon (talk) 20:55, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per other --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:30, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Jebulon -- Colin (talk) 10:32, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:08, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

File:Whitehall Court Mars 2014.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2014 at 21:19:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Whitehall Court in London is one contiguous building but consists of two separate constructions built in the 1880s. The right part occupied by the National Liberal Club was designed by Alfred Waterhouse, the major part (including the Royal Horseguards Hotel) was designed by Archer & Green. Well-known residents have included George Bernard Shaw, H. G. Wells, Sarah Caudwell, and Stafford Cripps. Panorama with high level of detail to capture all of the interesting features of the building.
  • Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 21:19, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 21:19, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice quality and light! Maybe the highlights on the right side of the building can be reduced at bit more, but anyhow a good picture! --mathias K 05:21, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:12, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DimiTalen 08:37, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBlurred Lines 13:32, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 18:13, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:18, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support Great quality, nice subject but distracting ships in the foreground. They don't really help in the composition (esp. the one with the big chimney) Poco2 21:16, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
    • Thank you for your review and support. It was impossible to avoid the ship. The good thing is that the ship is notable (see en:PS_Tattershall_Castle), and a permanent part of the urban landscape.--ArildV (talk) 21:47, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 00:47, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Agree the ships are distracting (but unavoidable I guess). The building's horizontals aren't horizontal. I wonder if any tweaks with Lightroom's horizontal perspective adjustment might fix this without upsetting the verticals -- sometimes I find you have to tweak several values iteratively to get the result. -- Colin (talk) 11:51, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 11:58, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 04:33, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Joydeep Talk 09:57, 9 March 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 22:09, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications

File:Phos senticosus 01.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Mar 2014 at 07:50:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Shell of a Common Pacific Phos


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 16:53, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Bones, shells and fossils

File:Texas Park Road 4 CCC Map 1.png, not featured[edit]

Voting period