Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/September 2006

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


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


Contents

Image:Eiffeltornet.JPG - not featured[edit]

Eiffeltornet.JPG

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Moralist - uploaded by Moralist - nominated by Moralist
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Moralist 20:06, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support great photo..no matter of the quite low resolution --AngMoKio 00:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - low res, not very special, too much sky - MPF 02:16, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — too much sky and point of view is not informative. Indon 02:49, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - bad composition - too much sky, as previously told, and weird perspective. Pko 09:26, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the perspective but nothing else. Technical quality and composition are bad. Roger McLassus 10:19, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't even like the perspective. --Digon3 12:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Confusing angle. --Lhademmor 14:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. I like the perspective (it is different, and I have seen enough "standard" photos of the Eiffel tower for a lifetime), but it is too low res and there is too much bleached-out sky for me to support it. --Fastfission 19:45, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose where are the clouds? --Queryzo 12:39, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral -- totally agree with Fastfission! -- Boereck 09:48, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
2 support, 8 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 05:50, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Eilean donan castle2.JPG - not featured[edit]

:: Eilean donan castle3.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Moralist - uploaded by Moralist - nominated by Moralist
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Moralist 19:59, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Inclined to support, despite rather low res, as the pic is so nice - MPF 02:14, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too low res for FP, and not everybody knows Britain (Scotland) well enough to situate this castle, so some more info would be welcome. Otherwise nice and unusual view of the castle. -- Lycaon 06:36, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Now I have got more geographical info, and also some other info about the picture.Moralist 18:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
      • This castle probably is the most visited castle by tourists, apart from the castle in Edinburgh. Tbc 19:49, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice point of view, but the technical quality is too low for FP status and the picture is leaning to the left. Roger McLassus 10:22, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree with Lycaon --Digon3 12:56, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support At first I thought it was a painting, somewhat overromanticised, but still nice. Only in full view did I see that it is a photograph. Nice! The twigs at the top left could be removed. And the colour of the sky is somewhat overdone, but if it supposed to emphasise the painting-notion it is spot-on. Something similar goes for the green. Oh, and it is tilted. That might emphasise the old-ness (it's about to fall apart) but somehow doesn't work. For the rest, I love it. DirkvdM 17:24, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The composition is very 19th-century, but I like a creative anachronism every now and then. Ack MPF. QuartierLatin1968 19:19, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose leaning to left --Queryzo 12:40, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- this pic says "castle" for me - the lean is a bit disturbing, you should fix that :-) -- Boereck 09:45, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I have uploaded a new image, that don't lean. If I tried to get it more straight it leaned the other way, so it is as straight as I could get it.Moralist 16:24, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
5 support, 4 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 05:48, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Cat.jpg - not featured[edit]

Sleeping white tabby cat yawning.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Traroth (I think) - uploaded by Traroth - nominated by Neo2000
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Neo2000 11:17, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Its a cat. Not only is it just a cat, but its legs are not in the picture. And its just making the same expression that any other cat can make. Maybe if you had the full cat in there I would vote differently. --Digon3 14:18, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose just another roadkill ;-) -- Lycaon 16:03, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to Lycaon - MPF 02:12, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unfortunately cats killed by traffic are anything but unusual - and the quality of this picture is not outstanding either. Roger McLassus 10:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Is it actully roadkill??? Doesn't look like it. It looks like its just being lazy and yawning --Digon3 12:25, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - pr. everyone else. Funny picture (provided it's not a roadkill), but not featured picture. --Lhademmor 14:54, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Is it actully roadkill??? --Digon3 16:58, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Digon3. --Javierme 22:08, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeOne more cat--Hi-tacks 16:34, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Picture like many others. Erina 22:00, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Verbas 12:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree with Digon3 Tbc 19:50, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not good quality picture and the subject is poor. Declic 18:30, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 11 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 21:03, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Cape Disappointment1.jpg[edit]

Cape Disappointment1.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by (Digon3) - uploaded by Digon3 - nominated by Sunshade1
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support another good picture by digon, like this photo because of the sky, nice contrast --Sunshade1 15:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose boring picture Lycaon 07:56, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose rather drab. Which Cape Disappointment? - I presume from the Picea sitchensis at the right, the one at the mouth of the Columbia River, but the pic really ought to say - MPF 02:10, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In addition to being boring this picture is considerably leaning to the right. Roger McLassus 10:14, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This photo was intended to be just informational. I didn't take this picture for beauty, just to show a lighthouse. It should not be featured. --Digon3 12:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:Innsbrucklarge.jpg - featured[edit]

Innsbruck by Night.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Know_Nothing - uploaded by Know_Nothing - nominated by Dagonator
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cool Night Shoot
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour 07:28, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Balanced picture, very nice, but is it valuable? --Digon3 13:24, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--AngMoKio 13:44, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XN 16:30, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - depends on how it is viewed. As a thumbnail it doesn't look special. To see how nice it is (the streets, the mountain ridge) you have to view it at a low resolution (ie big). So this is sort of a conditional support, but there is no template for that. :) DirkvdM 17:51, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
    In this case you should support the picture, since only full resolution counts. Roger McLassus 21:45, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't get what you mean to say. I use the word 'resolution' in the sense of 'pixels per cm' (or 'dpi' or whatever), which I beleive is the original and correct sense. A bit confusing this ambiguous terminology. Anyway, what I meant is that that the picture only works when viewed big, not in the size that is normal for Wikipedia (and most other websites). Full-screen it is beautiful, though. DirkvdM 09:51, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
The term "full resolution" means that every pixel of the screen corresponds to exactly one pixel of the picture. You can judge the value of a picture only when seeing it this way. Even the best picture can look bad when compressed to a thumbnail. The suitability of a photograph for Wikipedia is not of primary importance in the Commons, and even the featured picture discussions in the Wikipedia (the English or German one) never refers to the quality of thumbnails, since it always only takes one mouse-click to get the whole picture. Roger McLassus 10:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
This is not a thumbnail. It's about the size pictures will mostly be shown on the Internet. DirkvdM 04:33, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very cool in full resolution -- Lerdsuwa 16:48, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - sorry, streetlight pics don't do anything for me - MPF 02:06, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice, very nice night shot! --Sam67fr 15:05, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice pic--Hi-tacks 16:35, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice. --Erina 22:02, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's a quite nice pic, because the best side of innsbruck. --umgc_Yoda 16:51, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
10 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured Roger McLassus 20:45, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Evening at Dodwell-Rixon Pass.jpg - not featured[edit]

Evening at Dodwell-Rixon Pass.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Nathan La Porte - uploaded by Nlaporte - nominated by Nlaporte
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nlaporte 06:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice panorama, but not that interesting. Maybe if the sun reflected off the snow(making it orange glow)? --Digon3 13:28, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - fairly nice, but the sky is just a bit too cramped. I suppose the Sun made it difficult to avoid that but was at the same time needed for the contrasts in the snow, but knowing that doesn't help. DirkvdM 17:47, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The sky is cropped too niggardly, and the photographer forgot the white balance before taking the picture. Roger McLassus 21:55, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like panoramas and that one is very nice --Queryzo 12:43, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — I like panoramas too, but not this one. White balance is not properly set. Indon 14:27, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
2 support, 4 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 20:44, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Wfm area51 map en.png - not featured[edit]

Wfm area51 map en.png

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by User:Finlay McWalter - uploaded by User:Finlay McWalter - nominated by Gnangarra
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The map was nominated and promoted as Commons:Quality Images, This map is exceptional and deserves to be FP --Gnangarra 00:57, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose it doesn't cover that big of an area. All it shows is 3 military bases. Not interesting to me. --15:34, 25 August 2006 (UTC) by Sunshade1 - Roger McLassus 22:05, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - it's a map. Very useful, but so is a car (see below). DirkvdM 17:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This map is very well done. I cannot see any reason for not featuring it. Roger McLassus 22:05, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose All it shows is 3 military bases, well done, but not that big an area. Oppose unless someone can convince me otherwise --Digon3 01:20, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support To DirkvdM: We've had maps (and diagrams) as featured pictures before. Truth is, FP should probably include a lot more useful, informative, and well-crafted maps like this, and a lot fewer insects and sunsets. To Sunshade1: It shows a lot more than 3 military bases! I can see you've never drawn a map for Wikipedia before. We've got county and state boundaries, topographic features, roads, cities and towns, a locator map, a detailed legend, a scale... The map is very easy to read and nicely laid out. And as for interest – well, it would be of interest if only for Area 51 alone. This is a major arena of US federal government activity. The only thing I don't see on here is a compass rose; otherwise this is a Cadillac-class map. QuartierLatin1968 02:02, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
comment Something I didnt mention earlier because I didnt know at the time of nomination is its Featured on en.Wikipedia. The reasoning behind nominating this map compared to many others is this one has such a significantly detailed legend/key. The description on the image page explains why certain details are there and other information is omitted. Gnangarra 07:06, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
If it is a good example of how a map should be made, which can be used by others as a template to make more maps, then I would agree. But the legend isn't very detailed at all. Most )commercial) maps show many more features. The reason is there aren't that many features in that area (despite the size). A map of a place that has many differnt landscapes in a limited area, would make more sense, such as is the case for many areas in New Zealand, for example. DirkvdM 10:02, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Just so I understand you right, you don't believe that any map of this region could be FP quality, because "there aren't that many features in that area"? QuartierLatin1968 00:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
But this isnt a map of topographical features its a map showing military facilities, and associated civillian area. I'm sure NZ doesnt have such an expanse of military facilities. Even if it does they arent where near as notiable as the Mythical area 51. Gnangarra 10:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't know how that area is mythical (does anyone?) and the map doesn't clarify that either, so that doesn't count. I admit I don't have any experience in mapmaking, so I'm not sure if I should judge maps. Then again, is it only meant for the incrowd or as a pat on the back for the effort? What I meant to say was that one reason a map could qualify as special is that it shows many aspects of map making. But the area is too boring to qualify for that. The presence of a military area is not that special and size doesn't matter. However, it does have Death Valley on it. One of the few areas in the world that are below sea level. But the map doesn't reveal that. The height is indicated, but not quantified in the legend. So the map shows two special features but doesnt reveal that. Big oops. Bad map. DirkvdM 17:04, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
I just did a survey on the ref desk and it seems the area is quite well known outside the US. DirkvdM 06:55, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Legend letter size is quite small. Legend could be added as text outside the image. --Javierme 15:07, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's Area 51, US top secret millitary area for those who doesn't know it. -- Lerdsuwa
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - no contours, altitudes, etc. - MPF 02:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - It's a very nice map, very well done. Very useful for articles on this region. It would be nice if the SVG was available, though I know that the background bitmap wouldn't travel well with it. --Fastfission 19:49, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral -- It would be useful if the alleged flying saucers were shown;) MartinD 11:40, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Good design, but again SVG would be the suited format. The shaded relief map could be embedded as a bitmap into the SVG, all other elements are probably vectorbased anyway. This is commons, think about translations people! --Dschwen 13:07, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not so bad, but should be SVG, this way it's badly editable. --Leclerc 15:04, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- I think it is an informative piece of material! -- Boereck 09:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support not SVG - no problem Aotearoa 20:19, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
7 support, 7 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 20:43, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Flower jtca002.jpg - not featured[edit]

Flower jtca002.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by (Tomas Castelazo) - uploaded by tomascastelazo - nominated by Tomascastelazo
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo 02:14, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--TPM 00:58, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no name "flower" --Luc Viatour 07:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral agree, no name for flower, if it did I would vote for it to be featured --Digon3 13:22, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--AngMoKio 13:46, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is a very interesting photo, but no name, and it needs to be cropped a little closer to the flower --Sunshade1 15:26, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment
    The tao that can be described
    is not the eternal Tao.
    The name that can be spoken
    is not the eternal Name.
    So, then if no name, no picture? No flower? No beauty? Maybe we should change this to "Feature Name Candidates" :o) --Tomascastelazo 17:38, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
It needs a name so that it can be identified and use properly in a article. However, oppose just on the basis that it has no name is a little harsh, so I'm changing mine to neutral. --Digon3 18:43, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no name -- Lycaon 23:52, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - there is no info at all, not even where the photo was taken. DirkvdM 10:08, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Solving the lack of information pointed by DirkvdM would make the pic more useful. --Javierme 15:05, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - it's a Passiflora; should be readily identifiable to species, I'll give it a go tomorrow (location would help, please) - MPF 02:03, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment MPF: it was taken at the Guadalupe Valley, Baja California, Mexico, in a garden... it does not look like a native species. --Tomascastelazo 22:17, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good pic.--Erina 22:03, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice pic. Needs a name. However I have a hunch: Passiflora picturata. Its either that or another w:Passion flower. Don't say I didn't do nothing for you :). Please confirm flower name and also categorise and add all details of location/date etc. -- Tomhab 12:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very nice structure --Queryzo 12:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose Not even a species, but just one of many hybrids. Passiflora palmeri is endemic in Baja California. If you can arrange an image of that species I would vote support. Hans B. 22:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Tbc 14:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC) Hans B. is an authority on passion flowers. His vote should be considered seriously.
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment all non-anonymous votes are considered seriously. Lycaon 15:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
    • I know, that's not what I meant. I wanted to say, in Dutch, dat zijn stem meer zou mogen doorwegen. Tbc 20:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
7 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 20:42, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Lycaena virgaureae.JPG - featured[edit]

Lycaena virgaureae.JPG

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by (IMAGEAUTHOR) - uploaded by Algirdas - nominated by Algirdas
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Algirdas 22:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour 07:31, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful butterfly, I love it. --Atlantas 09:01, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Has a name for it, beautiful picture, good colours/close-up. --Digon3 13:31, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportLycaon 13:39, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--AngMoKio 13:47, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice, but not such a great res (1300x900). -- Tomhab 22:49, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - very nice butterfly! --Hugo.arg 07:20, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - MPF 01:59, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Indeed a nice picture, and good and correct name. --Lhademmor 15:13, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dirgela 15:59, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Vp loreta 16:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful picture. Kvitas 17:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice butterfly, very nice Verbas 12:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice image Tbc 21:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nemo5576 06:54, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
15 support, 1 oppose → featured Roger McLassus 20:41, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Grand Canyon South Rim Sunset.jpeg - not featured[edit]

Grand Canyon South Rim Sunset.jpeg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by (Digon3) - uploaded by Digon3 - nominated by Sunshade1
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice colours, beautiful picture of the Grand Canyon --Sunshade1 19:18, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice picture! Moralist 14:49, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support captured the Grand Canyon well --Teh Dvd 16:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I disagree. Unlike the unforgettable impression of the real Great Canyon this picture is rather boring. Furthermore, there is too much sky and the lower left corner is too dark. Roger McLassus 20:56, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Would it be better if I cropped it and got rid of the dark corner and some of the sky? --Digon3 01:04, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lycaon 08:02, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - tend to agree with Roger McLassus, particularly re the sky; also a bit hazy - MPF 01:58, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nice picture, I like the tree in the left very much, it makes the picture less boring, and the light on it is great. Also nice clouds. Moralist 10:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - we've got many pictures of GC, and I can't see why this is special. --Lhademmor 15:14, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Background is too dark--Hi-tacks 19:57, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — Lack of composition, lack of quality of light, the sky is dull, harsh shadow, not a special picture of GC (that means not qualified as FP). Indon 14:15, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
4 support, 6 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 20:39, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Bryce Canyon Hoodoos.jpg - featured[edit]

Bryce Canyon Hoodoos.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by (Digon3) - uploaded by Digon3 - nominated by Sunshade1
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very unique, great colours/angle, amazing pic. --Sunshade1 15:31, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mjem 15:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support Very interesting, amazing picture --Teh Dvd 16:43, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - combines nicely with the Winchester cathedral flags below. Nature's cathedral, so to say. :) DirkvdM 17:39, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Romary 21:21, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good diagonal, good shadow area in foreground left, throws view to main subject, good texture. --Tomascastelazo 00:42, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support- nice Andreas.Didion 06:42, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lerdsuwa 16:54, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - MPF 01:56, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too high color saturation and apart of that not a special composition. The trees disturb. --AngMoKio 14:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I did not modify this picture. What you see is what I had seen.--Digon3 17:03, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nice. --Lhademmor 15:15, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- I think you have not taken full advantage of the great motives you can shoot at Bryce Canyon. I have taken nicer pictures back in the day with my analog camera - it rained that day... - Boereck 09:15, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- I wasn't there but have seen much more interesting pictures from that place. Perhaps I'm missing something to focus my eye in the foreground. Andreas Tille 09:07, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose composition (or rather hardly any composition) norro 21:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
10 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → featured Roger McLassus 20:38, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Winchester cathedral flags.jpg - featured[edit]

Winchester cathedral flags.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Tomhab - nominated by Tomhab
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomhab 18:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mjem 15:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Leclerc 13:34, 25 August 2006 (UTC) Good composition, good technical quality (res, focus...)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - has a very 'massive' feel to it and I like the contrast between the grey and the red. DirkvdM 17:37, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Converging lines due to camera position, curvature of lens too evident. Poor technique in general. --Tomascastelazo 00:26, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
What curvature? I dont see any curvature(they look straight). --Digon3 01:14, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
There is an ever so slight curvature, but that only adds to the effect. To me the main criteria here are beauty and educational value and the curvature doens't hurt either. Many people are too focused on technicalities. Take the rule of thirds. You may find that many beautiful pictures follow this rule, but that doens't mean one can reverse that. If one day I find that most girls I like are blondes, then that doensn't mean that I should reject all brunettes from then on. :) Beauty is instinctive and true art is often even based on breaking the rules in stead of following them. DirkvdM 10:16, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
The curvature is most notable if you photograph big building from close distance. Or if you photograph ... pretty much anything with short focal length (very high FOV)
For me, if the image have high resolution, the important areas are sharp and it is not overexposed or underexposed - then the technical quality is perfect. --Leclerc 16:22, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pluke 09:37, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Dirk, yeah, sure, there seems to be a lot of double standards around here... but one thing is for sure, a general lack of knowledge in distinguishing the elements of photography. Personal taste is no substitute for informed critisism. I have no problem with either one, but they are two different things --Tomascastelazo 16:51, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
Of course. The question is just which one counts most. DirkvdM 04:29, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lerdsuwa 16:56, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - would support if the blue person edited out - MPF 01:54, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - agree with MPF. Get rid of mr. Blue and I'll support
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - good when downscaled, I'm not that impressed when viewving 1:1. --Wikimol 22:35, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral feels powerful, but agree with MPF --Jollyroger 21:01, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
6 support, 2 oppose, 4 neutral → featured Roger McLassus 20:37, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:ColosseumAtEvening.jpg - not featured[edit]

ColosseumAtEvening.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Andreas Tille
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Edit the people out and this would be a great picture, but the people ruin it for me, sorry --Digon3 13:45, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - it's tilted for one. I like sharp light/dark contrasts, but this one doesn't have anything special. Just a ruin. DirkvdM 17:34, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I disagree, I think the wedding adds context, no longer just a cold technical photo of an over photographed building. -- Pluke 09:39, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo 00:46, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Could benefit from judicious application of unsharp masking, to improve local contrast. --MarkSweep 01:48, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to Digon3. Specially that big piece of white litter. - MPF 01:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support the picture has a nice atmosphere and the photo itself is of a good quality. Well those people...dont know if they really fit but they also dont spoil the pic. --AngMoKio 14:54, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Comment: I guess you will most probably see much more people in front of this building most of the time than after this heavy rain. So I regard the image less crowded than normally and I personally like the wedding people. Normally I tend to get rid of people on my photos but in this situation I regard the people as a special feature. The only problem I have with these people is that they become quite small when using the 20mm lens and are at this distance. Andreas Tille 07:05, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - agree with Digon. Even though the main focus is the Colloseum, the people can disturb the view/focus. --Lhademmor 15:18, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- it would be a great pic but that shadow right on the colosseum spoils it -- Boereck 21:28, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the wedding fits well in the picture Paulatz 15:40, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, i don't like italian clichès. Quite blurry on side of the building, wedding is too small --Jollyroger 21:02, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
5 support, 6 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 20:36, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Burgwald 025.jpg - not featured[edit]

Burgwald 025.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by User:Nikanos - nominated by Andreas Tille (found this image on [1] and wonder how others here would rate this image)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice swampy scenery in forest, good resolution, sharp image--Leclerc 16:24, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Shry tales 17:44, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good resolution, sharp image, very pretty and interesting photo. --Digon3 19:36, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Romary 06:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mjem 15:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--AngMoKio 13:50, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - being very green makes it somewhat striking, but I don't see anything else in it. DirkvdM 17:31, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Stunning, striking, and very focused. Most of all, very green :). --Brandt Luke Zorntalk to me 06:34, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - beautifully restful after all those cars! - MPF 01:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - nice nature pic. --Lhademmor 15:19, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very well done, very nice looking, very well composed. --Fastfission 19:50, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- IMHO: pretty low quality and - since I grew up in the counryside - nothing special -- Boereck 21:26, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Despite of good technical quality, this photo has no particularly special point of interest to show. I believe this is not an FP material, due to no valuable information to share. Indon 23:03, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A simple forest, nothing special Verbas 12:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support @verbas: then try taking a photo in a forrest. you'll see, it is not that easy :) --Queryzo 12:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Exactly this is what I read in John Shaws "Landscape Photography" and IMHO this picture is a very good example that it is true. But what makes it featured then. Where can I find the good old rules of composition like Golden ratio etc. The leaning tree in the foreground is distracting in my eyes. So except that I feel the good smell of fresh air I can not make anything out of this picture. Andreas Tille 20:02, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose simple any forest, nothing Special - Andreas.Didion 20:23, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose something missing, can't put my finger on it... Lycaon 06:00, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose composition, overexposure norro 21:06, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
11 support, 7 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 20:34, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:SAAB9000.jpg - not featured[edit]

SAAB9000.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Liftarn - uploaded by Liftarn - nominated by Liftarn
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wikipedia has no picture of the SAAB 9000 with the old front. I also like that there is little distractions from the subject (the car). I also like how it turned out with the sky and the wet tarmac. // Liftarn 11:02, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad composition,Colors, nothing special --Luc Viatour 11:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing Special--Joel McLendon
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Its just a close-up of a car, Nothing special --Digon3 19:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Normal Car Picture. Nothing Special--Know Nothing 08:20, 25 August 2006
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose DirkvdM 17:21, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is the best of the several pictures you have nominated. --Brandt Luke Zorntalk to me 06:37, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing Special. Romary 11:49, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - the sky is too bright. Other than that, this pic is nice. --Lhademmor 15:22, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nothing special --Queryzo 12:48, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
2 support, 7 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 20:33, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:1995-SAAB900T-front.jpg - not featured[edit]

1995-SAAB900T-front.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Liftarn - uploaded by Liftarn - nominated by Liftarn
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fixing tha lack of car pictures. I like this because it has very little clutter around and behind the car. // Liftarn 10:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad composition,Colors, nothing special --Luc Viatour 11:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Joel McLendon
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good composition, no clutter in background, light background and dark car make good contrast. Though the edge of road in bottom right corner is a little bit disruptive, so cropping it away might help the picture --Leclerc 16:35, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Its just a normal car, bad colours. --Digon3 19:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Just a car, Nothing Special.--Know Nothing 08:18, 25 August 2006
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - even worse than the previous one. DirkvdM 17:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to Digon3 - MPF 01:45, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - nothing special --Queryzo 12:49, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
2 support, 7 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 20:32, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Tulipa fosteriana.jpg - not featured[edit]

Tulipa fosteriana.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by (Uğur Başak) - uploaded by Ugur Basak - nominated by Ugur Basak
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, first picture nomination. --Ugur Basak 23:52, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Mjem 15:06, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

*Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice colours, sharp, flower named --Sunshade1 20:10, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral not bad, but what's inside? pfctdayelise (translate?) 11:30, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral a good shot. But nothing special --AngMoKio 13:55, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree, nothing special --Sunshade1 15:27, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Good pic of a named species, but would like to see leaves as well - MPF 01:43, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nice first picture nomination! --Lhademmor 15:24, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Chosovi 12:53, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - there isnt much spectacular in it --Queryzo 12:50, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Queryzo --Luc Viatour 04:54, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- for no particular reason other than my feeling -- Boereck 09:03, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Queryzo norro 21:04, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
4 support, 5 oppose, 3 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 20:31, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Uvsun trace big.jpg - not featured[edit]

Uvsun trace big.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by (TRACE, NASA) - uploaded by olegivvit - nominated by Olegivvit
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Olegivvit 09:35, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice photo, not very good qulity, but still nice in smaller verision. Moralist 11:58, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Gordo 18:20, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Paulatz 09:10, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Shry tales 17:41, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Wrong contrasting of colors, if bit changed would be really good foto. --Atlantas 09:04, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MarkSweep 01:50, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Likeitsmyjob 04:56, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose low quality at full resolution. Poor patchwork. -- Lycaon 06:49, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Boereck 21:20, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Chosovi 12:48, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support Looks great for me. --Erina 22:08, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral — There are better ones. [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] and there are higher-quality TIFFs of each. — Omegatron 01:01, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Leclerc 15:01, 29 August 2006 (UTC) Blocky, too visible that it is composed of more shots. And Omegatron is right, there are better ones, like this one he mentioned: [8]
    The photo you like is only in one color, the photo given here is in tree colors.
    This one is three colors, and higher quality. — Omegatron 12:36, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
    Well, since it's from NASA, it should be PD ... maybe vote this one away, put the new one here and start voting again. 2100x2100 is good enough and it's sharp. --Leclerc 15:23, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
    I guess not. Copyright notice. They might re-license one or two images though, if we asked. — Omegatron 18:14, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
    Oh, I see ... Well, if they'll relicense [9] unser some acceptable license, it'll be great. do you think there are any chances? --Leclerc 19:00, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
    Well, someone can certainly ask. — Omegatron 16:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Strange but interesting picture. Saproj 21:57, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
9 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 20:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:DirkvdM cienfuegos palacio de valle.jpg - not featured[edit]

DirkvdM cienfuegos palacio de valle.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by DirkvdM
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DirkvdM 06:03, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose low res (why not upload the highest resolution, as it's clearly existing?), very grainy. -- Lycaon 11:23, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
It is grainy because it is a night shot. For that same reason a bigger image size will not help. DirkvdM 13:37, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose its too small, grainy(i don't care that its a night shot), and the moon(or whatever that is) ruins the picture for me, sorry --Digon3 13:50, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
What makes you doubt it's the moon? DirkvdM 17:13, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
It is very bright for the moon --Digon3 18:24, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
It's a long exposure. :) Look at the reflection on the water. And obviously it isn't the Sun. Anyway, I know, I took the photo. :) Actually, it's supposed to be part of the beauty of the photo - a moonlit roof terrace. But if that isn't obvious enough, maybe I should have put a couple in love at one of the tables to underline that. :) DirkvdM 20:21, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Its also very small only 837x1126, needs around 2000x1000. I still dont like the moon in this photo, sorry --Digon3 01:00, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Boereck 21:20, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - strange lightning --Queryzo 12:51, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - would have been much nicer if the moon was recognizable --Thenickdude 06:13, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
I get that point now and it's a good lesson (don't assume the viewer sees what you know), but how could you make the moon recognisable? Without heavy zoom it's just a dot. If the reflection would have been more visible that would certainly have helped, I suppose. DirkvdM 18:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps combine multiple exposures so that the moon is a bright disk instead of a big flare..? Not sure :). --Thenickdude 05:35, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Like I said, without zoom the moon is nothing more than a dot. A common mistake. Anyway, I'm not going back to Cuba just to get this right. :) DirkvdM 18:51, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
1 support, 5 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 20:29, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Eastern Swallowtail.jpg - not featured[edit]

Eastern Swallowtail.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by AnjelaWhite
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AnjelaWhite 18:20, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Beautiful butterfly, althought it is a quite boring background. Also the flower isn't very nice. Moralist 12:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice close up of a butterfly, but nothing else. --Digon3 01:24, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good view from an angle one doesn't often see - MPF 01:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nice butterfly --Lhademmor 15:25, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- It seems butteflies are the new sunsets (no offense)! -- Boereck 21:19, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - very common context (Buddleja), i'm neutral about the angle Tbc 21:20, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - contrast? --Queryzo 12:52, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
3 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 20:28, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Great katsura of wachi01s3000.jpg - not featured[edit]

Great katsura of wachi01s3000.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by 663highland - uploaded by 663highland - nominated by 663highland
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Self nomination. The tree of Katsura (C. japonicum) for age-of-a-tree 1000 years "great Katsura of Wachi" in Torokawataira, Kami, Hyogo, Japan--663highland 13:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Doesn't quite stand out. /Dcastor 15:36, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - MPF 23:21, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose far too boring Paulatz 09:11, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose doesn't stand out, not cropped right, something one would find in any forest, so nothing special --Digon3 19:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - Great resolution but not very special image. --Lhademmor 15:26, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Boereck 21:18, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
2 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 20:27, 9 September 2006 (UTC) 

Image:Olympic Stadium Munich.JPG - not featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by (mavca) - uploaded by mavca - nominated by www.mavca.de
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --www.mavca.de 12:42, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose foreground too messy -- Lycaon 22:24, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It just isn't that striking a picture. The whole thing feels off-center as well, both because the camera seems to have been tilted but also because the angle of the stadium is tilted (the overall effect is that I feel like I will fall over!). A large part of the photograph is just a series of standard stadium lights which is a bit dull. Though the sunset would potentially be nice, the way it shadows all of the foreground imagery detracts from the photograph as a whole. I like the canvas effect, but it is not well highlighted by the rest of the picture. --Fastfission 00:27, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to Lycaon & Fastfission - MPF 23:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - agree with Fastfission --Digon3 16:56, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose - too dark to see anything. --Lhademmor 15:27, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Boereck 21:18, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the colors is nice, but it seems a random shot Paulatz
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose If only the stage wasn't there norro 21:03, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
1 support, 8 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 20:26, 9 September 2006 (UTC) 

Image:Yarra opposite rod laver arena - melbourne.jpg - not featured[edit]

Yarra opposite rod laver arena - melbourne.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Uploaded and nominated by Fir0002 (self nom)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Fir0002 www 08:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support Long time-photo, althought it is sharp. Really good photo!Moralist 11:53, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose technically irreproachable, in HDR, but the subject is not very interesting --Luc Viatour 11:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good sharp night photo. I don't know the bridge in question, so I won't judge its importance --Leclerc 16:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good lighting, sharp, unique. --Digon3 20:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - sorry, streetlight pics don't do anything for me - MPF 01:40, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Great exposure (blended?) and sharpness. --Dschwen 15:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support -- great picture. Very fine details, great execution, well-chosen scene - very nice! (the only thing that bugs me a bit is the car that goes over the bridge and is suddenly cut off because of (I suppose) the next picture being stitched in...) -- Boereck 21:15, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I just don't like it. --Erina 22:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lycaon 21:20, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support sharp and nice Paulatz 15:27, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Despite the artificial look, it's creative and visually interesting. I like the opposing parabola of the shore. I do agree the subject matter is weak. Masonbarge 13:32, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support / tsca @ 10:29, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Declic 16:55, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special. Boring. Saproj 22:02, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looks strange an unnatural to me Andreas Tille 05:08, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
10 support, 6 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 20:25, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Tulum.JPG - not featured[edit]

Tulum.JPG

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, and nominated by Reywas92
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Harsh light, framing could be better (part of the stairs is cut) CyrilB 12:04, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Stairs are cut, half of the small tower on right tends to be disruptive too. Bad composition. --Leclerc 16:28, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not balanced, bad cropping or shot, a photo of the whole building would be better. --Digon3 20:29, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Queryzo 12:53, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
0 support, 4 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 20:23, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Agasthiyamalai range and Tirunelveli rainshadow.jpg - featured[edit]

Agasthiyamalai range and Tirunelveli rainshadow.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by (Planemad) - uploaded by Planemad - nominated by Planemad
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Self nomination. Image shows the arid landscape of a rainshadow region with a backdrop of rainclouds over the mountain range of the western ghats in South India --Planemad 11:47, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- colors -- YolanC 13:06, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - very informative, as well as a nice pic - MPF 23:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - jolie image - Cerise 10:2, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral- Good picture, very informative, but lacking something. --Digon3 20:32, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Romary 11:51, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lycaon 06:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose informative, but lacking something to become a featured picture -- Gorgo 15:11, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support Strongly Symbol support vote.svg Support - very pretty picture indeed. --Lhademmor 15:28, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Please use the normal voting symbols. Otherwise errors in counting may happen more easily. Roger McLassus 15:46, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- I am a big sucker for color but this one - I can't even really say why - does not do it for me, sorry! -- Boereck 21:13, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Konstable 01:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I simply like it Paulatz 15:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
9 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured Roger McLassus 20:21, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Information Architecture Concept - not featured[edit]

Roadzen.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by User:Zana_Dark — uploaded by Žena Dhark…·°º•ø®@» — nominated by Žena Dhark…·°º•ø®@»
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Any other possible uses? User:Zana_Dark 02:09, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeToo me, it looks weird. I don't know is it composition, or colors, but it's kinda ugly...Erina 08:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree, it is simply ugly. Roger McLassus 09:32, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to Erina and Roger McLassus - MPF 17:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose What is it? DirkvdM 19:17, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The image in upper left corner disturb. --Jacopo86 15:45, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- I take it that it is supposed to illustrate some technical process, but if so, it fails to do so. At least, for me. MartinD 09:46, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Collages in general have to be expecially brilliant to become featured. Neutrality 18:09, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Neutrality. TheBernFiles 15:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 8 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 20:52, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Independencia RMoreaux.jpg - Original nomination[edit]

Independencia RMoreaux.jpg
  • Very bad colours, kind of yellowish. Not exact description page and not also in English. --ALE! ¿…? 10:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
this picture is not featured, so what exactly do you want? ;) -- Gorgo 20:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Cancelled (invalid object) Roger McLassus 21:11, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Opened Qur'an.jpg - not featured[edit]

Opened Qur'an.jpg

0 support, 0 oppose (withdrawn) → not featured Roger McLassus 20:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Magnolia eix.jpg - not featured[edit]

300px

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by zen (flickr) — uploaded by Imartin6 — nominated by Erina
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support I know it's another flower macro, and low-res... But it looks so awesome (and has much value IMO) that, it really should be a featured pic. It's just cool and by cool I mean absolutely sweet! (only lacks black pajamas... ;DDD ) Erina 15:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, it's 500x373 px in size (*way* too small for a featured picture), the foreground is out of focus and the rest of the leaves are cut out of the picture. --85.197.228.236 16:39, 5 September 2006 (UTC) – please log in to vote Lycaon 17:31, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose problem with license (no commercial use allowed), and way to tiny Lycaon 17:42, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too small; and if license is non-commercial, it will have to be deleted anyway - MPF 22:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — yes it too small. Otherwise I'll change into {{{love}}}. Indon 08:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't care about size and licence. It's a nice photo. DirkvdM 18:16, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: Voting aborted. License was not ok, images was deleted. Lycaon 23:23, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
2 support, 3 oppose (aborted because of license) → not featured Roger McLassus 20:49, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Rain-drops-on-leaf.jpg - not featured[edit]

Rain-drops-on-leaf.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Adamantios — uploaded by Adamantios — nominated by Adamantios
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Adamantios 15:56, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I don't find anything special. Raindrops ! -Andreas.Didion 19:22, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special. Just waterdrops on not-so-nice leafs, distractive background ... I think this one is under-average in category of "water drops on leafs" photos. And so I think it does not belong into FP --Leclerc 19:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose--Hi-tacks 20:01, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - background - MPF 22:22, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for the background --Jacopo86 15:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Background. Neutrality 18:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per the above. TheBernFiles 15:56, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 7 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 20:53, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Caer.jpg - not featured[edit]

Caer.jpg Caerphilly castle enhanced.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jod-let — uploaded by Jod-let — nominated by --Jod-let 13:42, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — the image is too dark and not sharp. 145.88.209.33 14:13, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Sorry, it is required for you to be logged in in order to vote. Freedom to share 17:30, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sharpness is okay, but the castle is too dark anyway. Roger McLassus 17:25, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark. Freedom to share 17:30, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Andreas.Didion 18:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The castle is broken! :-) anyway, too dark --Jollyroger 20:40, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Blame the English for that! - MPF
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to Freedom to share - MPF 22:08, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment- I uploaded a light-corrected version -- Fabien1309 11:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 0 support, 5 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 20:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Suomijoje.jpg - not featured[edit]

Suomijoje.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Verbas — uploaded by Verbas — nominated by Verbas
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Verbas 12:45, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose — It's very blur. It's even a useless picture. Indon 14:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very strong motion blur, too long exposition time to hold camera in bare hands probably. Nope, the quality of the picture is very bad. --Leclerc 15:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bad picture with no description. Darkone 18:12, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In fact it is a submarine that can be seen on an island in front of Helsinki. Sorry I have no time to give a link. The idea is nice, but the pic is not of good quality.--Hi-tacks 12:20, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose definitly --Queryzo 12:28, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose Blurry, low contrast. Erina 09:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose - its a joke ! for a Featured pictures ! - Andreas.Didion 19:17, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Salmo 00:07, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Vesikko is the only finnish submarine left from the five used in the World War II. --Hi-tacks 16:52, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 8 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 20:55, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Frozen Lake.jpg - not featured[edit]

Frozen Smith Mountain Lake.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Leena — uploaded by KenWalker — nominated by KenWalker >> I liked the pic but I see what you mean about the resolution and the licence restriction is indeed a show stopper so I withdraw the nomination (will check more closely next time!) KenWalker 18:33, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Could almost be B&W. Nicely exposed.KenWalker 03:38, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice picture, but Low res --Luc Viatour 05:40, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose very low res, please read Guidelines for nominators before nominating. Lycaon 08:53, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose 650×487? No. --Leclerc 15:12, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Wrong license! I have updated the image page (and too small anyway). --startaq 15:56, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice photo despite the problems. Masonbarge 13:08, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 20:56, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Bagpiper 06WDBY 011.jpg - not featured[edit]

Bagpiper 06WDBY 011.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by JFPerry — uploaded by JFPerry — nominated by JFPerry
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support JFPerry 21:49, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose overexposed, cut, definitely not FP. Lycaon 08:49, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — The person is not sharp and there's a harsh shadow in her face. Yes, it's definitely not FP material. Indon 14:03, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose- any Person or any Bagpipe - Andreas.Didion 15:12, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 3 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 20:57, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Petrovaradin and Danube.jpg - not featured[edit]

Petrovaradin and Danube.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tone— uploaded by Tone — nominated by Tone
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, I think I got a good composition, looking for comments. Tone 19:14, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't find anything special (no real subject and no originality in the composition), and the colours are a bit dull. good Quality shot, thought CyrilB 21:40, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, ack CyrilB. --Wikimol 22:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - nice HolidayPic Andreas.Didion 22:22, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — nothing special about it. Indon 14:07, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nothing special about it Tbc 19:45, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose why you loaded it up? --Queryzo 12:32, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- per Queryzo -- Boereck 10:04, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 7 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 20:58, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Capucines rouge et jaunes.jpg - not featured[edit]

Fleurs de grande Capucine

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by J-Luc - uploaded by J-Luc
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose colors are really nice, but it lacks of originality to be featured, IMO. However this is a very good Commons:Quality images candidates CyrilB 21:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral colors are nice and the presence of two flowers is relatively original too :) --Wikimol 22:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose it is a nice picture, pretty subject, but there are many pictures of flowers KenWalker 00:33, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 0 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 20:59, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Mantid Sp.Jpg - not featured[edit]

Mantid Sp.Jpg

  • A Mantid nymph(Species unknown) that lived on a pear tree. It was taken in as a pet but later released to its original home.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Halved sandwich - uploaded by Halved sandwich - nominated by Halved sandwich
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halved sandwich 00:31, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose colors and resolution --Luc Viatour 15:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no name, low resolution -- Lycaon 20:59, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The background is a bit too present, and the colours are a bit dull CyrilB 21:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Wikimol 22:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - contrast? --Queryzo 12:33, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Boereck 08:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 6 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 20:59, 9 September 2006 (UTC) 

Image:Vespa animale.jpg - not featured[edit]

Vespa animale.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Sir mark246
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Sir mark246 00:20, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Subject too small and badly lit. --Dschwen 13:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose If it is wasp, we have better ones. If it is flower, we have better ones too. No english description in image --Leclerc 15:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not exceptional --Luc Viatour 15:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Leclerc that the subject is not really chosen, making the image unsatisfying for both CyrilB 21:55, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose if the animal wouldn't be in the shadow... --Queryzo 12:34, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Boereck 08:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 6 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 21:00, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:California wine grapes 2.jpg - not featured[edit]

California wine grapes 2.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Thomas Oldcastle - uploaded by oldcastle - nominated by Oldcastle
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Oldcastle 23:18, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I would disagree with the photographer's choice of depth of field. Furthermore, I do not see anything about the image that would make it especially valuable or even interesting. Some overexposure or blown out highlights are also visible at full resolution. Freedom to share 19:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — Overexposed areas are unacceptable. Indon 14:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose If you do a picture that has been done a thousand times and you can take all the time you need for it, it has to be perfect, and this isn't. DirkvdM 18:33, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - have to agree with DirkvdM, tho' I do like the effect of the sun shining through the grapes - MPF 22:49, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- ditto to Freedom to share -- Boereck 08:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 5 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 21:01, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Cabernet wine barrels.jpg - not featured[edit]

Cabernet wine barrels.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Thomas Oldcastle - uploaded by Oldcastle - nominated by Oldcastle
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Oldcastle 22:41, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Doesn't thrill me. --Dschwen 13:02, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quite uninteresting section of barrels. --Leclerc 15:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose leclerc is completely right --Queryzo 12:35, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose With a wooden cap instead of the plastic one, support. Non now, sorry --Jollyroger 20:50, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ditto to Jollyroger--Hi-tacks 16:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- not really that thrilling a motive -- Boereck 08:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 6 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 21:02, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Information Architecture Concept - not featured[edit]

Roadzen.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by User:Zana_Dark — uploaded by Žena Dhark…·°º•ø®@» — nominated by Žena Dhark…·°º•ø®@»
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Any other possible uses? User:Zana_Dark 02:09, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeToo me, it looks weird. I don't know is it composition, or colors, but it's kinda ugly...Erina 08:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree, it is simply ugly. Roger McLassus 09:32, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to Erina and Roger McLassus - MPF 17:24, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose What is it? DirkvdM 19:17, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The image in upper left corner disturb. --Jacopo86 15:45, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- I take it that it is supposed to illustrate some technical process, but if so, it fails to do so. At least, for me. MartinD 09:46, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Collages in general have to be expecially brilliant to become featured. Neutrality 18:09, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Neutrality. TheBernFiles 15:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 8 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 20:52, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Francesco Hayez 008.jpg - featured[edit]

Francesco Hayez 008.jpg Edit: Corrected levels

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Painting by Francesco Hayezcreated, published by The Yorck Project: 10.000 Meisterwerke der Malerei - uploaded by File Upload Bot (Eloquence) - nominated by ----Javierme 15:15, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Besides its artistical and historical value, it illustrates finely the romantic concept of kiss. I used it for the Spanish Wikiquote kiss entry (q:es:beso).--Javierme 15:15, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not very attractive - MPF 02:15, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree --Digon3 12:38, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I think it looks rather nice. And a fine illustration of the subject --Lhademmor 14:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support — Love the intens, love the composition, love the subtle color differences. Indon 16:00, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour 08:51, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Gordo 10:12, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lycaon 09:00, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jollyroger 20:57, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Pluke 00:50, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
7 support, 3 oppose → featured Roger McLassus 05:46, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Ant head closeup.jpg - not featured[edit]

Ant head closeup.jpg

    • Retracting my nomination: I overlooked the low resolution, sorry. TheBernFiles 19:23, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ss181292 18:56, 9 September 2006 (UTC) - great photo, but way to low resolution (see Guidelines for nominators above).
1 oppose (withdrawn) → not featured Roger McLassus 19:34, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Crimson sunset.jpg - not featured[edit]

Crimson sunset.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by (Fir0002) - uploaded by Fir0002 - nominated by Sunshade1
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is an amazing pic, very colourful, I like the contrast between colour and ground --Sunshade1 23:49, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — Not an informative picture. It's just a sunset sky image. Indon 10:41, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ----Hi-tacks 16:31, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the different between the colors, espacially that it is orange in the lower left corner and gets more purple. Moralist 16:43, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no sunsets -- Tomhab 12:19, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice colors, but I don't like the composition, plus it is rather ordinary for a sunset. --Dschwen 13:00, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose because the right half of the skyline is missing - MPF 18:19, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose just a sunset --Queryzo 12:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- wanna see my folder of sunsets? nope? that is probably how I feel about yours ;-) -- Boereck 10:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
2 support, 7 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 09:44, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Dvdiconcover.png - not featured[edit]

Dvdiconcover.png

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by user:Fallout boy - uploaded by user:Fallout boy - nominated by Javierme
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Pros: It's witty, and a lovely example of how you can make a nice work CC out of PD material. Cons: It would need a translation for projects in language other than English, and is almost only internally useful for Wikimedia projects.--Javierme 22:06, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Wait... Is it protesting against this: [10] 172.206.127.151 14:51, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
    • No, it was just a little icon used for copyright tags. There are a bunch of them at Category:Wikimedia_icons, many of them try to be humorous (since they are usually very tiny anyway you can't see what they say usually unless you click on them). The goal was to avoid having to use trademarked and copyrighted logos in the tags and still be able to tell a DVD tag apart from a movie poster tag, for example. --Fastfission 00:21, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Wrong fileformat. SVG would also help with the translation and it is obviously vectorbased to begin with. --Dschwen 22:16, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing really interesting --Leclerc 15:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Leclerc. —dima/s-ko/ 00:09, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. This is a vector image exported to PNG. Please upload the original. — Erin (talk) (FAQ) 12:58, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- I don't get it -- Boereck 08:48, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
It's used in the templates for copyrighted film ilustrations in the wikipedias that use them, like in en:Image:Enemy at the Gates DVD.jpg. The main pun is that it represent the poster/cover of fictional Free Wiki film, with a design that reminds the one of American Free Willy movie. Vector version is Image:Dvdiconcover.svg. Should I start a new nomination for the svg?
1 support, 5 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 09:43, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:India roadway map.svg - featured[edit]

India roadway map.svg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Planemad
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The map includes every national highway in India and uses the color scheme defined the wikiproject maps --Planemad 19:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. It is a very nice map (I can't speak at all for accuracy since I don't know a thing about Indian roadways). My only negative feeling is that it is very, very busy—there are lots of very small cities indicated which are not on any of the roadways. I would support if it was trimmed to something closer to the minimum information needed to understand the roadway system—at the moment it is so full of information that it is hard to get a sense of what is meant by the big picture, and most of the information is too small to ever been seen unless it was hugely blown up. Also, on the legend, some of the text (the "Disputed" parts) do not seem to be rendering well with Mediawiki's SVG renderer. I find that spacing things out a little better helps with that. --Fastfission 19:43, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- big work, seems accurate.  Pabix  08:49, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Indeed, it's a lot of work. But I agree with the comment above. If small cities are not included, then it would be great. About the accuracy, I not an expert either. Indon 10:44, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
Author comment The map has been created in such a way that, from the thumbnail, state capitals and major cities can be located. By opening the largest raster version [11], major towns and tourist places can be located. And only by zooming into the vector version, can small towns by located. The places that you see that are not on the road network are places of tourist intrest only. Regarding accuracy, the map can be cross checked with, w:List of National Highways in India, Maps of India website(outdated) or Survey of India map explorer. This map is the only complete national highway map available on the net --Planemad 11:00, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MartinD 11:39, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Nice work! --Dschwen 13:35, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice and high quality map --Leclerc 15:07, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Well, but maybe the road legend (which color is which road) could be put in the file too ... either on the right of the legend, or in southeast or northwest corner of them map. This would improve the map even further bit. Since if you print just the file without it's description, the road legen is not there ... --Leclerc 15:32, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The quality is very good. I'm not happy with the way the map-maker has chosen to indicate the status of Kashmir (for example, it would be as true to call the Pakistani-controlled area "(disputed) Indian territory" as it is to say so for the Indian-controlled area), but this thorny political issue should not stand in the way of a good map being featured. QuartierLatin1968 19:15, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I needed that for work! --Jollyroger 20:55, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support / tsca @ 10:06, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
9 support, 0 oppose → featured Roger McLassus 09:42, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Boyd's Forest Dragon - (Hypsilurus boydii).jpg - not featured[edit]

Boyd's Forest Dragon - (Hypsilurus boydii).jpg Boyd's Forest Dragon - (Hypsilurus boydii) 2.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by (Sam67fr) - uploaded by Sam67fr - nominated by Sam67fr
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I was very lucky to see the little green guy in the forest --Sam67fr 17:29, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: I improved the colors a bit and tried to make that little guy a bit more visible in front of the background. --AngMoKio 19:19, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - isn't the photo upside-down or on its side? The sun doesn't usually shine on the underside of branches (or is this the proof we've all been waiting for, that things in Australia really are upside-down?? :-)) MPF 18:09, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Comments Oops! I checked my original files and, yes, the photo should be upside down... Sorry! --Sam67fr 21:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
Change my vote to Symbol support vote.svg Support now it is at the right angle. Prefer the original, as it is a superb example of natural camouflage. - MPF 16:01, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- this image makes me feel like I need glasses - I still refuse that fact, so: sorry! -- Boereck 10:00, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
2 support, 1 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 09:40, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Wasp pho.jpg - not featured[edit]

Vespula germanica 2.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Per Harald Olsen (en:User:Perhols) - uploaded by Lhademmor - nominated by Lhademmor
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I really think this is a nice, and unusual, picture --Lhademmor 14:46, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Nice macro, though cropping upper part would make the picture better. Indon 15:55, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no name, unnatural background and low resolution Lycaon 16:06, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree --Digon3 17:06, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportUnusual--Hi-tacks 19:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Unnatural background wouldn't be a disavantadge in a species which usually visits artificial environments. Please provide region the pic was taken at, and biological information on this kind of wasp. --Javierme 21:43, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportNice and unusual, though region and some biological information about the wasp species would be nice to have. --Leclerc 16:09, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice picture, where you almost can get the expression of Wasps as not evil.Moralist 16:39, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Unnatural setting, uninteresting composition. Rex 22:10, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Lycaon --Luc Viatour 15:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - wasp identification is primarily done with the face pattern, which is very well shown here, enabling easy identification as Dolichovespula sylvestris, a common species in Norway (where the photographer is based). - MPF 17:56, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sweet and informative --Jollyroger 20:56, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose background --che 04:29, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- ditto to Lycaon -- Boereck 08:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I've reuploaded the picture as Image:Wasp (Dolichovespula sylvestris).jpg to show the name of the wasp. --Lhademmor 06:12, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
7 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 09:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:USA grand canyon pano1 AZ.jpg - not featured[edit]

USA grand canyon pano1 AZ.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Dschwen
Seeing the two other GC nominations further down the page, I thought let's throw a different (mood picture type) photo to the wolves ;-). Please elaborate!
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — The only part that I like is the golden sunlight at the rock on the left. Overexpose on the right part. Indon 15:57, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Well, it is photographed straight into the sun through a light haze, so yes, it is overexposed. But my eyes were equally overexposed (translate: blinded) when witnessing this scene. --Dschwen 16:19, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
      • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose So obviously neither your eyes nor your camera were sufficiently well equipped to create a good image of this sunrise-scenery. Roger McLassus 18:57, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
      • There are many tricks to overcome overexposed problem. One of them is to use ND-grad filters. Overexposed like this is just unacceptable. Indon 10:47, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It could have been a nice pic, but sorry, there's too much sun :/ --Hi-tacks 19:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Overall I like it. However, I would have placed the horizon a little higher, catch some more foreground. Horizon in the middle of pictures tend to cut the image in half. --Tomascastelazo 22:24, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I really like this picture, just darken the sun a little bit and this would be a great photo --Sunshade1 23:52, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral a bit blurred, and low detail, but nice Paulatz 15:51, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support !Sorry!, but i think its any Photo from any Planet from StarWars-Andreas.Didion 20:10, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support Maybe it's the experience I have with such scenes, but it gives me the wonderful feel of fresh new day, a bit nippy, but I will soon be warmed by the briliant Sun. :) DirkvdM 19:07, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- sorry, I don't feel it. of the tens of thousands of pictures taken of the GC a day there are probably a lot that are better than this one. -- Boereck 09:59, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
3 support, 4 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 09:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Goats in Eketorp Slott.jpg - not featured[edit]

Gute sheep in Eketorp Slott.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Exclamation - uploaded by Exclamation - nominated by Moralist
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Moralist 11:18, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Its not very interesting, just a wall and some goats --Digon3 12:36, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There is nearly no colour-contrast between the goats and the wall. And the whole subject is not very impressive anyway. Roger McLassus 15:13, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with the above comment. If the title does not say about goat, I only see this is only a wall image. Indon 15:58, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose where are the goats? I only see sheep ;-) Lycaon 16:04, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - yes, definitely sheep - MPF 17:45, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like the composition. Unbalanced. Erina 18:33, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support You mean that you don't like the competition? This image is stunning! Admit it or not! Exclamation 16:49, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral -- colors are great (!!!), composition is original; yet I could not find a point of focus so the sharpness is probably wasted on the wall where I cannot even tell the specific location. I think it would have been better to put the focus on the goats. but then again, would that have taken away from the original idea of having the wall as the main element of attraction? hmm, I am unsure. maybe I will reconsider later! for now I will go with neutral. -- Boereck 09:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
2 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 09:36, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Amanita caesarea.JPG - featured[edit]

Amanita caesarea.JPG

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Archenzo - uploaded by Archenzo - nominated by Halved sandwich
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halved sandwich 23:14, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportOmegatron 00:53, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportJ-Luc 07:32, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very very nice! -- Tomhab 12:17, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Romary 15:46, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose yellowness, sharpness Darkone 16:06, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Supportusuual, interesting, good colours, could be useful KenWalker 00:35, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - MPF 18:28, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yerllowness? That's the mushroom color! it is not white... --Jollyroger 20:49, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tarawneh 00:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
9 support, 1 oppose → featured Roger McLassus 07:00, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Empis livida (aka).jpg - featured[edit]

Empis livida (aka).jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by User:Aka - nominated by — Omegatron
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg SupportOmegatron 18:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Erina 18:28, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Chosovi 18:58, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support — The best macro shot I've seen. Looks like a professional stock photo. This is definitely FP image. Indon 20:02, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Rex 22:03, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour 03:57, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support Congratulation. --Gloumouth1 06:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dschwen 12:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support One of the best insect photos I've seen ... --Leclerc 14:07, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AngMoKio 19:52, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support we want more !! Lycaon 21:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Here are some: User:Aka/Images/Animals There are so many and they are so good it almost makes me think this user is a fake.  :-) — Omegatron 21:44, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
      • I think not a FAKE, but here any Photo from the WikiMeeting [12] Andreas.Didion 22:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support - SUPER Andreas.Didion 22:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - what else? --XN 22:40, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • strong Symbol support vote.svg Support  Pabix  12:33, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I thought it was computermade at first. The only thing that disturbs is that the mosquito isn't in it's natural environment. Moralist 14:31, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment If you put the insect on white paper, use a good camera and maybe touch the file with photoshop/gimp/whatever afterwards to make the white paper really white ... you'll get probably something like this. I just wonder how to make the insect stay in one spot on the paper, if it is some species that can fly. I've read of one method that you put the insect in the fridge, let it cool down and after you put it out after some time, they won't move much for a while till they warm up again ... though I've never tried that --Leclerc 15:06, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
    The animal sat at my white-painted balcony balustrade for a few seconds. I never would harm an animal just to make a better photo. -- aka 15:20, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
    Of course, if you have luck for the insect to stay in one place for long enough to make a shot, you don't need to freeze or glue the poor creature --Leclerc 16:01, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
    Thank you for the technical data (Camera, Lens, Flash,…) , that helps me to better, do you are model for me : -) --Luc Viatour 04:39, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support O_O!! Beautiful, thought it was a 3D model --Jollyroger 20:52, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nemo5576 06:51, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support--Jacopo86 13:45, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Salmo 00:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support If this is indeed a live animal, not stunned or anything, it's a matter of immense luck, but you also have to make the luck work and the result is stunning. DirkvdM 19:11, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support / tsca @ 10:04, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tarawneh 00:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
22 support, 0 oppose → featured Roger McLassus 06:59, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Actun Tunichil Muknal.jpg - not featured[edit]

Actun Tunichil Muknal.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Peter Andersen - uploaded by Peter Andersen - nominated by Peter Andersen
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Peter Andersen 11:29, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lhademmor 15:25, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting subject and quite good composition, but too blurry and overexposed light Roger McLassus 19:23, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — The picture is not focus. Indon 19:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, see Roger McLassus. Rex 22:04, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose see Roger McLassus Tbc 19:46, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sharpness --Queryzo 12:36, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment looks like very difficult lightning in this one. Might need HDR to really pull it off. Scoo 20:11, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
2 support, 5 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 06:58, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

summer field - featured[edit]

summer field

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Luc Viatour - uploaded by Luc Viatour - nominated by Luc Viatour 08:38, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour 08:38, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support -- Colors, angle, composition, everything is perfect  Pabix  08:51, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support — It's a beautiful picture. I like the color a lot. Indon 10:39, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Barcex 11:46, 28 August 2006 (UTC) Nice!
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg SupportLycaon 12:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Chosovi 12:46, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support Really nice picture, nice color, an intelligent form of blue on the heaven. Also the picture is almost too good.Moralist 16:47, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Rex 22:05, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dschwen 12:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral looks like an analog shot (colors, sharpness (all a little bit) / yes I see the exif), heavy editing in ps (or?), take a look in the corner low left Darkone 18:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Edit the exif? NOT! The colors it is the end of afternoon (and contrast on hard). The left corner is problem of depth of field. --Luc Viatour 05:16, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Brilliant! Staggering! --Gordo 09:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support (even if at top resolution it shows a bit of artifacts) Paulatz 15:52, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - plants in foreground include Papaver rhoeas (red) and Centaurea cyanus (blue) - MPF 18:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - very nice, Luc. Tbc 19:47, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jod-let 13:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jollyroger 20:54, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great color! --Jacopo86 13:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Call me what you like, but there is a visible white band on the bottom left corner (is this really a DOF problem?), it gives me the impression it's heavily edited and there is noise and artifacts.A good picture for sure, but not FP worthy. Adamantios 18:25, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
white band on the bottom left corner is a bad crops after correction of the horizon --Luc Viatour 05:04, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Beautiful color, but I don't the composition -- strong diagonal between the fields leads my eye to totally boring cropped trees instead of the wonderful golden top field, where I should be looking. --che 04:27, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral IMHO heavy editing of an image is no reason to be not featured. So just finish the editing and remove the white line at left bottom and once you are at it replace the half tree by some sky. If I just put mit thumb on this tree the image looks (even) better. Andreas Tille 06:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Beautiful landscape shot, but is it a picture of the flowers? a picture of the fields? Neither one dominates, it does not illustrate as to either landscape or agricultural practice.--Tomascastelazo 17:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It clearly illustrates both: the rare, rich plant communities that used to be found bordering grain fields! Lycaon 18:49, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support even used a cropped version of it for my wallpaper. --Konstable 12:19, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support looks like a paintings ! Ceridwen 22:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
18 support, 3 oppose, 2 neutral → featured Roger McLassus 06:56, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Flame tree mali.jpg - featured[edit]

Flame tree mali.jpg Flame tree cropped.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Robin Taylor — uploaded by KenWalker — nominated by KenWalker
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the shapes, the range of colours and the red accent of the tree, found it quite striking when I came across it. KenWalker 21:39, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The tree is a Flamboyant Tree (Delonix regia), cultivated pantropically. Lycaon 08:56, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I really like it. Good composition and colors.  Pabix  12:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Noooooo!!! Not second one, please. First is really better!  Pabix  09:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral — Yes, the color and composition are very nice, but what is so special of this picture to be an FP. Indon 14:06, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It looks like a photo from an agency like corbis or sth. Very good. --Queryzo 12:31, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support aa amazing picture --Jollyroger 20:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support Great! Erina 09:42, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support really nice. --Tone 14:03, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's a nice photo, but not all that special. DirkvdM 19:15, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - and a note: 23:16, 3 September 2006 (UTC) the license was cc-by, in case of changes. Wikimol 23:16, 3 September 2006 (UTC) original only, to be clear. Oppose edit.--Wikimol 20:24, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support original one, edit is badly cut. Lycaon 09:22, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support the original --Tarawneh 00:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The collinearity of the tree's prominent branch with the hut's roof is a severe compositional flaw. Furthermore, the roof is overexposed. Roger McLassus 17:52, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support beautiful tree Ceridwen 22:35, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose original Super Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose edit. Agree with Roger, plus edit is butchering the composition even more. --Dschwen 19:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
10 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → featured Roger McLassus 10:01, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Image: Caterpillar face.jpg - not featured[edit]

Caterpillar face.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tom Murphy VII — uploaded by Tom Murphy VII — nominated by Erina
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Big, very detailed, really interesting and looks great. Erina 09:47, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Konstable 13:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose DOF is too shallow, as having the body sharp would improve the pic alot. This way, only the quite small area of face is sharp. --Leclerc 15:14, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral good colors, interesting subject (at last a closeup that show that small animals are not all nice!), but the smooth face of the caterpilar and the small DOF makes it difficult for my eyes to focus on this image CyrilB 21:46, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support exceptional view, though in additon a little cropping and herbal background may help the picture generally. --XN 22:37, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Echo XN's comments about editing, but I like the image, sharp detail of unusual nature.KenWalker 00:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Normally I'ld oppose because of the low resolution (see Guidelines for nominators), and the missing name, but this is a very nice closeup. Lycaon 09:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great closeup --Jollyroger 20:47, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose cropping, lighting norro 21:19, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Olei 23:20, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- while I have no real problems with short DOF the border between sharpness and blur is that harsh that it looks very unnatural and I expect a postprocessing that adds artifical unsharpness. So it looks very strange in my eyes. Andreas Tille 11:24, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
5 support, 4 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 09:59, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Pieniny-map2.png - not featured[edit]

Pieniny-map2.png

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Aotearoa — uploaded by Aotearoa — nominated by Aotearoa
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Aotearoa 17:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nothing special, should be svg. Lycaon 18:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose because it's not .svg. --Erina 22:18, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above. TheBernFiles 15:37, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Which software was used to create this map? Fileformat should be SVG. The relief shading could still be embedded as a bitmap. --Dschwen 16:43, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 4 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 10:40, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:MingXiaoling CanYuan.jpg - not featured[edit]

MingXiaoling CanYuan.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by (farm) -uploaded by Farm - nominated by Farm 12:44, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral would have preferred uniform light and better angle.  Pabix  14:34, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Bad lighting, composition and angle. What is it? Looking at it in full size stopped me from adding a strongly to my oppose, but the angle makes it very confusing and hard to see the terrace setup. Also the wall is cut. You should either have taken a step back and/or gotten to a higher vantage point. The House in the back is to shadowy. --Dschwen 14:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't see anything special about the photo and the guy should have been edited out. And what is it anyway? DirkvdM 18:13, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, tourist snapshot. TheBernFiles 15:37, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 0 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 10:41, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Map of Quebec.png - not featured[edit]

Map of Quebec.png

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by John Fowles — uploaded by Leslie — nominated by Mortadelo2005
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mortadelo2005 23:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. A little on the small side, and don't get me started about the fileformat. --Dschwen 23:23, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. I cannot support non-SVG map when the resolution is so low.  Pabix  13:54, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Aotearoa 20:12, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose png format Tbc 22:50, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
2 support, 3 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 09:27, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Baja coast 3.jpg - not featured[edit]

Baja coast 3.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tomas Castelazo — uploaded by User:tomascastelazo — nominated by Tomascastelazo
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomascastelazo 21:03, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Black & White photograph--Hi-tacks 12:22, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I see no reason for abandonig colours. Furthermore the picture is too dark and the time of exposure too long. So the moving water looks quite unnatural. Roger McLassus 18:05, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to Roger McLassus, particularly re the long exposure. - MPF 22:06, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose B&W Erina 09:38, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think that cropping out about 1000 lines from the bottom would do it good. --Adamantios 20:53, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ss181292 19:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC) - I agree with Roger McLassus
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment One does not have to like all phototgraphs, that is ok. I welcome criticism, I accept it, but when people opine about photography, they too open up to criticism of their criticism. In this particular case it is obvious, given the reasons you express, that you do not possess the distinctions necessary to distinguish crafstmanship of photography. Read up a bit about judging photography, just like milk, it does the body (and mind) good. --Tomascastelazo 15:47, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment OK, but AFAIK the main purpose of Commons is information, not art. (Ergo: B&W photos=bad. Maybe it is a work of art, I don't know.) Maybe you should post this photo on DeviantArt, or something like that. :) --Erina 11:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Erina, the comment is not about this photograph, but about the criticism I read about and the disqualifications of photographs on the basis that they are b&w (and other bogus reasons). My point is that if people are going to judge, to do so based on informed criteria and to state the reasons so the photographer can thus improve his techniques/motives. To criticize the critics is not very popular around here, but IMO, a lot of good, informative, technically good pictures get disqualified due to incompetence and thus deprive this effort of better participation. A critic has the duty to educate her/himself in the discipline she/he criticizes. At the same time, lots of "pretty" pictures get selected that have absolutelty no value due to the same shortcomings. The criteria is very inconsistent. Anyone with a basic knowledge of photography (and I am not talking about just any camera owner, as if owning a camera makes a photographer) would laugh at this forum. I believe that Wikipedia is a noble effort and my contributions are focused in bringing a little understanding of the medium. Problem is that I feel that people around here just do not like blunt talk. I quote Mark Twain: One mustn't criticize other people on grounds where he can't stand perpendicular himself. - A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court --Tomascastelazo 12:42, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
2 support, 5 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 09:26, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Fortepian - mechanizm angielski.svg - featured[edit]

Fortepian - mechanizm angielski.svg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Orem — uploaded by Orem — nominated by odder
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support odder 19:45, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nux (talk) 01:02, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A wonderful mechanism that really needs an illustration. Very useful. An explanation would be nice, though (and in English, if possible). An animation would be even better. DirkvdM 09:29, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support  Pabix  09:56, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support beautiful, but translate and animate! --Jollyroger 20:41, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support / tsca @ 10:02, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support please translate Lycaon 10:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lestat 21:22, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ziga 21:00, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ss181292 19:05, 7 September 2006 (UTC) - very good piece of SVG
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --WarX 15:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
11 support, 0 oppose → featured Roger McLassus 09:25, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Fortepian - mechanizm wiedeński.svg - featured[edit]

Fortepian - mechanizm wiedeński.svg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Orem — uploaded by Orem — nominated by odder.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support odder 19:42, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Szczepan1990 19:52, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nux (talk) 01:01, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support  Pabix  09:56, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support / tsca @ 10:02, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lestat 21:23, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ziga 21:01, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ss181292 19:05, 7 September 2006 (UTC) - very good piece of SVG
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --WarX 15:09, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
9 support, 0 oppose → featured Roger McLassus 09:24, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Sveti Nikola.jpg - not featured[edit]

Sveti Nikola.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tone — uploaded by Tone — nominated by Tone
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, I wonder if it would be better to cut the upper and lower part. Tone 18:26, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I think cropping would definitely be in order. Also, the colours look a bit dim to me. (I understand, however, the icon might have been in shadow.) QuartierLatin1968 19:07, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice --Jollyroger 20:42, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - nice pic, but needs more info for context - where is the monastery, what size (10 cm? 1 m? 3 m? - it could be anything!) and position (plate? wall? floor?) is the mural? - MPF 22:03, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
I added the info on the image's site. Is it ok or would you like any more details? Regards. --Tone 22:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
That's ideal, thanks! Changed vote to support - MPF 23:05, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Janeznovak 06:07, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Eleassar my talk 11:57, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice light, but it isn't the photo that I like, it's the painting. It's no compesition at all, just a painting.Moralist 16:29, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
    • So what? I think the painting (BTW it's rather some kind of mosaic, not a painting) makes the photo valuable enough. Symbol support vote.svg Support --Erina 16:06, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Terrible. Underexposed. --Olei 23:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Should be cropped on top and bottom. Lighting and colours are not impressive. Given how easy it is to take a photo of such an object, it could be much better. By the way - it is not a painting but a mosaic. Roger McLassus 10:36, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Boereck 09:10, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
5 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 09:23, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Venice 056.jpg - not featured[edit]

Rio e Ponte dei Scudi Venezia.jpg Venice 056 cropped.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jikael — uploaded by Jikael — nominated by Jikael - (initialized by Pabix :))
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — Yes, it's a beautiful canal in Venice. If there is a gondola in the canal, then I would support it. Indon 14:00, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral a nice photo - but i think it is a too high color saturation which makes it kitschy. But that could get changed. --AngMoKio 15:58, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good enough as it is, no gondola needed to spoil the view. --Leclerc 16:24, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I don't think a gondola is necessary, either - MPF 17:10, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice colours, nice play of dark and light. And no gondola (now that would make it kitschy). Plus details like the reflection and the door (and I even like the washing line). Only the composition could have been a bit better, but that's nitpicking DirkvdM 18:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour 04:30, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose Not a representative pic of Venice and ditto to Indon the gondolas are missing and I agree it is high color saturated (look at the blue-white-red flag), I have been there two weeks ago and I took 150 pics, I can upload some examples of representative pics if necessary. Moroever, the highest size of the pic is ugly, check by yourself.--Hi-tacks 12:11, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
That's not blue white red. That's the Peace flag, and color semms quite ok for being sunlit. --Jollyroger 20:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info It's the end of a small Canal in Venice where there are never gondolas. This pic show the not commercial face of venice (the local life style)with you to appreciate the relevance of it..--Jikael 15:17, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Venice is great... But this is not a great picture, IMO. --Jod-let 13:34, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. I am absolutely opposed to those who think that a gondola is necessary. Gondolas are tourist traps. But this photo needs a bit less saturation and more sharpness.  Pabix  13:57, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
    • To be honest, if this is a voting for an artistic photography contest, then I will rate it above average. Not high because of too much saturation. However, there is non-technical guideline in this voting process, that the picture should be informative. Gondolas make this picture more information. Another element is people, if you want to show local llife style as Jikael mentioned. What so special about an empty canal in Venice? Indon 14:21, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
      No. On Commons, we don't judge on encyclopedic value. This is not Wikipedia. If you want to judge information, go to the equivalent page on Wikipedia! There are featured pictures candidates on en: too. An image can be featured here and not there, and vice-versa Pabix  16:05, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
      Some people here judge mainly by technical quality, some by encyclopaedic value, some by artistic impression, some by something else maybe ... I think this mean that the encyclopedic value is judged by some people as important factor and it can affect voting results if "encyclopaedic value" is low. --Leclerc 18:54, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. No details, it's blurry grainy and blown-out. --Dschwen 16:09, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support no gondolas, please. That's a sad clichè --Jollyroger 20:43, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The saturation looks pushed which,to me, is wrong for the subject matter. It's not pretty, it's not special in any way, and it doesn't capture backwater Venice all that well. The gondola discussion is a red herring. Masonbarge 13:22, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This image makes me wonder where the people are, where the gondolas are and what would be found in the windows and doors, variety of colours appeal. Very interesting. Prefer the cropped version. KenWalker 06:49, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Question Why do several people hate the colours here, but most love the colours in the Summer Field photo below (15 down)? To me that one looks a bit fake (though I stil like it). DirkvdM 19:40, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Supportno gondolas, please. That's a sad clichè --Jacopo86 15:55, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great picture! Neutrality 18:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lycaon 05:54, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I have been in Venice last week and I definitely do not believe the colours. Roger McLassus 17:43, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like colors Ceridwen 22:35, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
9 support, 7 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 09:21, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Wellington.JPG - not featured[edit]

Wellington.JPG

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by User:Kiwimandy — uploaded by Kiwimandy — nominated by Kiwimandy
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kiwimandy 20:47, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportQuite informative picture, with a nice view. Moralist 09:16, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Foggy. Neutrality 18:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose quite foggy and not that special -- Gorgo 22:55, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment We already have a Wellington pic featured, which is of a higher standard. Snowwayout 03:16, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yes, foggy and not special. Indon 12:59, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, a mere snapshot. TheBernFiles 15:57, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Boereck 09:11, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
2 support, 5 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 06:27, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Koln bell.jpg not featured[edit]

Koln bell.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jollyroger — uploaded by Jollyroger — nominated by Jollyroger
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jollyroger 20:31, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - the glowing overexposed area is a bit disturbing. I think this would be great case for HDR. --Wikimol 20:41, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
it was meant to but the other shots were ruined by a group of chinese tourists. I proposed that because I feel the morning sun glow adds a mit of magic to the composition. Any suggestion for improving is welcome --Jollyroger 21:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Helios89 23:45, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fabexplosive 07:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree wiki Wikimol and no sense of scale - important if its the biggest swinging bell in the world -- Tomhab 09:27, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Overexposed. Erina 09:36, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose— composition the subject is to hidden, central flared light through the window. There are sufficient size references within the image. Gnangarra 10:28, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I'm very surprised to learn it's so big, which is not conveyed at all. William Avery 11:41, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too bright in the central area and too dark everywhere else --Leclerc 18:03, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Tell me, what is Special on the Bell ? - Andreas.Didion 19:57, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
biggest of the world and nice light and composition? --Jollyroger 14:48, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I love the geometry, but for that reason it really should not be tilted. Now that can be remedied, but the overexposure would be more difficult. It has good potential but only just doensn't reach it. DirkvdM 19:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
tilted? It is not tilted
slightly tilted to the left. Look at the center piece or at the floor hole. It can be fixed without much loss, I think. Eden2004 13:43, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutralgreat composition but the window is overexposed. --Jacopo86 15:50, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor lighting, luminosity out of range; poor composition, besides the exposure problem, subject is too centered, and it is almost like a mirror image if viewed in halfs, left half is a reflection light of right half. Although symmetry works sometimes, not here, lacks proportion and scale; Poor technique in general. --Tomascastelazo 16:57, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Neutrality 18:17, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, distracting light among other things. TheBernFiles 15:58, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Boereck 09:11, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
3 support, 10 oppose, 3 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 06:27, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Mountaineers in High Tatry mountains winter.jpg - not featured[edit]

Mountaineers in High Tatry mountains winter.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info self-nom. There are so many insects and flowers, but only a few people, so I decided to throw in some. Wikimol 19:55, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Pluke 00:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Szumyk 08:37, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice -- Tomhab 09:28, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support— nice composition, but would like to know height and gradient at site of photo. Gnangarra 10:32, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, some more details would be welcome, indeed. --Tone 14:02, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great picture. --AngMoKio 13:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - technically an excellent photo, but it doesn't grab me as special. Can't see the peoples' faces, and the very dark blue of the shadow at the top of the pic are my main dislikes - MPF 17:43, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I see nothing special in it. DirkvdM 19:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Neutrality 18:17, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lycaon 18:44, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Color contrast (back) is nice. --Ziga 20:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with DirkvdM. --Olei 23:04, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. I like the composition and subject, but the shadow is bothersome. TheBernFiles 15:59, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The colour of the snow shows a flaw in the white balance. The trampled snow in the foreground is admittedly difficult zu avoid but disturbing nevertheless. In addition to all ciritical arguments already brought forward by myself and others, this picture simply fails to attract me. Roger McLassus 20:06, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I was not convinced by the reasons given for oppose
    • The white balance is correct, the snow in direct sunlight is pure gray with better than 1% accuracy, the shadows are blue, which is the natural colour of shadows in the mountains. If you see some visible unnatural color cast, the problem is IMHO not in the image.
    • The attractivity/unattractivity is very subjective criteria.
    • The requested info: gradient is hard to give if not measured by inclinometer, as humans suck in estimating gradient and I don't suppose I'm an exception. I'd guess 45-50˚. The height difference from the bottom of the slope in shadow is about 500m, altitude may be ~2500m. --Wikimol 22:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Boereck 09:11, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
9 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 06:26, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Detailaufnahme Weizenfeld.jpg - featured[edit]

Detailaufnahme Weizenfeld.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Queryzo
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Andreas.Didion 18:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Olegivvit 09:20, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support Best photo of species... Colors are wonderful and photo shows all variations of blooms. Žena Dhark…·°º•ø®@» 02:30, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Roger McLassus 09:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice photo, but above all it shows various stages of bloom, which gives it great educational value. DirkvdM 19:29, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo 17:00, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support really nice photo Kiwimandy 17:04, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ziga 20:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. TheBernFiles 16:00, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
9 support, 0 oppose → featured Roger McLassus 06:24, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:XN Sympetrum sanguineum w prey 658.jpg - featured[edit]

Sympetrum sanguineum male with preySympetrum sanguineum male with prey Sympetrum sanguineum male with prey animation

    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XN - uploaded by XN - nominated by XN 15:06, 31 August 2006 (UTC)]]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XN 15:06, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Awesome! --Jollyroger 20:39, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nemo5576 06:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent Photo Žena Dhark…·°º•ø®@» 17:49, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Life is wonderful. Nice picture. Salmo 00:02, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Colours, noise in version 1, both far worse in version 2. We have much nicer images on commons of this animal (see: here) Lycaon 05:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. Declic 02:41, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Agree --Lmbuga gl, pt, es: contacta comigo 14:42, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Sympetrum sanguineum male with prey
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm surprised about these edits and the additional animation, which isn't a nomination? I'm not sure. These edits aren't my cup of tea very much. But this template is getting funny colorfull... so see my edit on the right. --XN 13:08, 2 September 2006 (UTC)


8 support, 1 oppose → featured Roger McLassus 06:23, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Sympetrum sanguineum.jpg

Image:Buchenwald-J-Rouard-06.jpg - not featured[edit]

Buchenwald-J-Rouard-06.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jule Rouard — uploaded by Lviatour — nominated by Fastfission
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Original photograph from the liberation of Buchenwald, taken by User:Lviatour's father-in-law, released GFDL/CC-BY-SA. Stark, dark, sad, immediate—a scene of horror without being distasteful. The photo is scratched, but I think that only adds to its feeling of authenticity, its gritty realism. I think it's a really beautiful, haunting picture, and I think it's being available under a free license on Commons is truly amazing. --Fastfission 19:35, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Technically, poor composition, sujbect is cropped at wrong places. Informative value poor, does not reflect time-place without explanation. There are a lot of images from the camps that do not need words. --Tomascastelazo 16:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment IMHO this is an excelent composition. The "subject" is only a "representative" and 1) does not need to be shown entirely 2) has already lost his dignity and this composition means respecting this human being. This picture is carying a great mood of sadness. It's a snapshot of horror, brutality and inhumanness. I think this is the really subject. For this great composition:
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XN 19:01, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I have to go with XN here. The composition is beautiful, IMO. I think the fact that it is not shown in its entirety makes it even more artistic and provocative. --Fastfission 23:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Tell me why any "Featured pictures" Photo. Whats Special ? - Andreas.Didion 19:25, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • I've gone into detail up above about what I think was special about it. --Fastfission 23:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • I think the beauty of this is that it's not just another photo of stacked bodies, but is much more intimate, though not so intimate as to be uncomfortable. --Fastfission 23:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Not uncomfortable ? I don't know what you need... Rama 10:06, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very moving and tasteful. Rama 10:06, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. I appreciate the historical and emotional value of this photograph, but there are many better pictures, from a technical point of view, at Category:KZ Buchenwald. TheBernFiles 15:52, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I suppose this is only a part of the original picture, since I can hardly imagine that the photographer wanted to create an image showing just half a body plus another person's shoes, which makes a very bad composition. Furthermore, as stated above, the information value is rather poor and cannot be improved by using the euphemism "tasteful". Shocking facts deserve shocking pictures that can say "more than a thousand words" - not cropped ones that lack important parts (like the face) in the name of tastefulness. By the way, cutting off the toes is a compositional flaw unrelated to taste. Roger McLassus 17:15, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
4 support, 5@ oppose, 1@ neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 10:10, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Wray Gunn-Porto - Palácio de Cristal-Noites Ritual Rock 2005-02-foto de JPCasainho.jpg - not featured[edit]

Raquel Ralha from Wray Gunn

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Casainho - uploaded by Fabien1309 - nominated by Fabien1309
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Fabien1309 11:22, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Border, copyright notice at bottom, resolution too low. --startaq 15:13, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose B/W, border, not much info, uncategorized, weird perspective... I'm starting to think that self-nominations should be prohibited. Erina
    • Must be logged in to vote. --KenWalker 16:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
    • This isn't a self-nomination, technically. He just uploaded it; he didn't create it. --Fastfission 19:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
    • I guess I forgot to login. Corrected. (comment above) Erina 17:57, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Low res. Please read Guidelines for nominators before nominating. Lycaon 16:14, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Low res, logo at bottom.--KenWalker 16:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose grotty pic, no redeeming features - MPF 17:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose If it was higher res and didn't have the white border I think I'd be inclined to support it. --Fastfission 19:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Pluke 20:43, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lestat 21:19, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Neutrality 18:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support well sorry but I like it :) Rama 10:07, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose due to resolution, text on image, although i like the photo too. TheBernFiles 15:53, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The flaws of this picture are already well documented here, but I cannot find even one single point in favour of it. Roger McLassus 17:22, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
2 support, 11 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 10:08, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Sanctuary.jpg - featured[edit]

Yellow Day Lilly

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by John D. - uploaded by KenWalker - nominated by KenWalker 07:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I know it is another flower, but it seems to me to be a lovely picture. --KenWalker 07:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No species name. -- Erina 08:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC) Anyway I'm still Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. Too much flowers in FP, but this one is good. Too hard to decide. --Erina 20:39, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yellow Day Lily is Hemerocallis lilioasphodelus. This should be added to the info (I'll do that right away). Lycaon 16:16, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice photo --AngMoKio 13:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice photo, with nice colors. Moralist 09:13, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice --Tomascastelazo 16:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lestat 21:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love the composition! --Thenickdude 06:48, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Neutrality 18:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tarawneh 00:25, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but name is not descriptive --Jollyroger 15:07, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice composition but noisy. If you would reduce the noice (try neatimage) it would be gorgeous! --Olei 22:55, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. TheBernFiles 15:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support forgot to vote Lycaon 17:44, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
11 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured Roger McLassus 09:52, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Loligo vulgaris.jpg, featured[edit]

Lologo vulgaris

result: 16 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 14:24, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Chapelle Notre Dame du Chene 5.JPG - not featured[edit]

Chapelle Notre Dame du Chene 5.JPG Chapelle Notre Dame zanad.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by User:Denis.helfer Denis Helfer — uploaded by User:Denis.helfer Denis Helfer — nominated by Erina
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Erina 09:48, 1 September 2006 (UTC) Good perspective, good colors, and it just looks great.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice. --Tone 14:01, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - see without shadow. Žena Dhark…·°º•ø®@» 17:43, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Wow! Looks even better, IMO. Erina 08:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support the original one. The edited look a bit weird in closeup of the area where the shadow was --Leclerc 17:59, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support original. Ditto to Leclerc on edited version - MPF 17:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not a very special building and no special composition or anything. And the edit is done really bad. DirkvdM 19:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose original and very strongly oppose edited. Great photo, straightfoward picture, not feature-quality. Neutrality 18:14, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Makes the building look like a pyramid. --che 04:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ss181292 19:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC) - I agree with che.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, really no distinctive qualities. TheBernFiles 15:57, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Boereck 09:12, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Queryzo 14:14, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
5 support, 7 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 07:12, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Crocodylus acutus 04.jpg - not featured[edit]

Crocodylus acutus 04.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tomas Castelazo — uploaded by Tomascastelazo — nominated by Tomascastelazo
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomascastelazo 23:35, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Crocodylus acutus, taken at swamp of La Manzanilla, Jalisco, Mexico. This baby must have measured at least 2 meters (6 ft plus). Maybe this should replace picture below?--Tomascastelazo 23:35, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral — a typical croc photo Gnangarra 01:53, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral not bad, but suffering from the same as below, so not FP. Lycaon 06:05, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Neutrality 17:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — yes it's a typical croc photo and it's not sharp either. 145.88.209.33 10:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC) (sorry it was me not logged in) Indon 10:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose very poor contrast, croc cropped, very flat composition. Hope he didn't bite you! --Jollyroger 15:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 2 oppose, 3 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 05:54, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Crocodylus acutus 03.jpg - not featured[edit]

Crocodylus acutus 03.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tomas Castelazo — uploaded by Tomascastelazo — nominated by Tomascastelazo
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomascastelazo 17:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Picture taken at a swamp in La Manzanilla, Jalisco, Mexico. Thanks to the conservation efforts of the local people, the population of crocodyles has seen a great recovery. --Tomascastelazo 17:20, 3September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Tail cut, bad DOF (snout not sharp). Missed opportunity, could have been a hit... Lycaon 17:32, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yeah, well, it´s called a close up, and close ups are often cropped... and besides, these things are alive... they tend to bite... unlike dead, fishmarket stationary objects :0) --Tomascastelazo 20:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Crop it even more, there are enough pixels. --Wikimol 23:01, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — I like the features others are critical of. Gnangarra 02:09, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Neutrality 17:58, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose crop, colors, no sharp --Luc Viatour 04:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bad breath, too fat, doesn't looks smart even for a crocodile :-) (out of joke, same as before) --Jollyroger 15:03, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose lightning is poor--Queryzo 14:17, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
2 support, 4 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 05:36, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Kazakh shepard with dogs and horse.jpg - not featured[edit]

Kazakh shepard with dogs and horse.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Carole a — uploaded by Airunp — nominated by Aslak
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Aslak 07:10, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great composition, subject. But let down by the shadow and low res. Snowwayout 10:25, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ack Snowwayout. Please read Guidelines for nominators before nominating. Lycaon 10:42, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose low res, shadow -- Gorgo 16:12, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Despite low res, and being that guideliness are informal. Informative and in the absence of like images, valuable.--Tomascastelazo 16:37, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Low-res. Where does the shadow come from? Rex 18:16, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — I agree with Tomas, when it comes to photographs sometimes the guidelines(rules) should be ignored. The shadow would come from the vehicle the photographer was driving, doubt that there are many natural features that could cast the shadow. Gnangarra 02:19, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- ditto to Gorgo; why should the guidelines be ignored if the shadow spoils the pic? -- Boereck 12:53, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice photo, interesting subjects; but the low-resolution and shadows prevent it from reaching feature quality. Neutrality 17:59, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose due to shadow, per above. TheBernFiles 15:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose shadow --Queryzo 14:16, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
3 support, 8 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 05:35, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:00440.jpg - not featured[edit]

Botanical Garden of Curitiba.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jhowcs — uploaded by Jhowcs — nominated by João Felipe C.S
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support João Felipe C.S 02:34, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jhowcs 14:32, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Rüdiger Wölk 14:40, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Strange perspective. Appears to be leaning to the left. Rex 18:25, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Perspective. Lestat 21:16, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — perspective, gardens like these are one place where the symetry can be exploited to enhance the image Gnangarra 01:48, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Neutrality 18:00, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ss181292 19:04, 7 September 2006 (UTC) - for completely uninformative file name.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, strange angle. TheBernFiles 15:48, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. The filename, sigh... --Dschwen 21:49, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose schief --Queryzo 14:16, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
2 support, 9 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 05:34, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Four Southern Hemisphere Tropical Cyclones (2003).jpg - not featured[edit]

Four Southern Hemisphere Tropical Cyclones (2003).jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jeff Schmaltz, MODIS Rapid Response Team, NASA/GSFC — uploaded by Hurricanehink — nominated by Nilfanion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nilfanion 23:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Sorry for the waste of time here (was half-asleep at the time :P ). A comment on the poor connections of the panorama - thats because of the significant time gaps between the satellite passes (and the consequent motion of the clouds).
  • Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose - This is a panorama made with five pics, but they are very poorly connected. I cannot support this image.  Pabix  07:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — Ditto Pabix. Indon 11:41, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above. TheBernFiles 15:35, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Boereck 09:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 0 support, 4 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 11:38, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Horse snout.jpg - not featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Doug Stremel on flickr.com — uploaded by TheBernFiles — nominated by TheBernFiles
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (well, for the comic appeal, I think...) TheBernFiles 15:20, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose Ss181292 18:49, 9 September 2006 (UTC) - absolutely no value
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose comic appeal, but not a lot else - MPF 22:23, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Tbc 22:45, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Andreas.Didion 06:08, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose It would look good on Onion or something like that, not on Wiki, IMO. --Erina 08:05, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This picture does, indeed, look funny, but this is not sufficient for FP-quality. The resolution is low, the background unappealing, and there seems to be a tilt to the left. Roger McLassus 10:21, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, but mainly because of size. Nice variety for commons, if you think about it as a free media archive. I'm sure some people will find this picture useful. --Dschwen 16:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for me even a comic appeal is a legitimate one, but background is distracting and resolution could be higher norro 15:22, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Giant nose? Maybe it's funny, but I think it is not worth being FP --Leclerc 01:55, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 9 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 07:08, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Lake St Peter.jpg - not featured[edit]

Lake St Peter.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Rick Harris — uploaded by Mortadelo2005 — nominated by Mortadelo2005
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mortadelo2005 16:49, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment. Nice motif, but unfortunately noisy, oversharpened, oversaturated, has color fringing (left side in the trees), and is a little on the small side. --Dschwen 17:23, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great picture but bad quality. --Teme 19:04, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice picture but low res and bad quality --Luc Viatour 06:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturated. --Erina 07:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose oversaturated! (Can we have a new icon for "oppose because of oversaturation"?) Apart of that a nice composition. --AngMoKio 07:45, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
    • How do you like that: Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg? ;) --Erina 08:19, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice photo but low quality and oversatured. sorry. --Jacopo86 11:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - ditto to Dschwen. It would look better with about 15% cropped off the left edge to remove the worst colour artefacts. - MPF 18:19, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ditto to Jacopo86--Hi-tacks 08:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 7 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 07:17, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Beas river and mountains as seen from Van Vihar, Manali.jpg - not featured[edit]

Beas river in Manali, India

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Kprateek88 - uploaded by Kprateek88 - nominated by Kprateek88 18:06, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kprateek88 18:06, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nothing special colors --Luc Viatour 06:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose What's so special? River too bright, evertything else too dark, random composition. --Erina 07:39, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A run-of-the-mill picture without anything outstanding. Partly too dark, but the water is overexposed. Roger McLassus 08:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ditto to Erina --Jacopo86 11:53, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - not very good lighting, but otherwise a good habitat pic of an area of the world we don't have many photos of. Some nice close-ups of the trees of the area would be really useful. - MPF 18:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Average river photo. FP images should be better than average. --Leclerc 02:25, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 07:19, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Alcea rosea threeflowers.jpg - not featured[edit]

Alcea rosea threeflowers.jpg Alcea rosea threeflowers-sunlight.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by K!roman — uploaded by K!roman — nominated by K!roman
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support K!roman 17:04, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose DOF (the flower is partially blurred), shadow, something weird with the background (You did some edge detection on this pic, didn't you?) --Erina 11:02, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
    I tried for improving this photograph contrast, colors, and uploaded a better. K!roman 14:33, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Lighting is unappealing to me (subject in shadow). --Dschwen 16:22, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
    The right one is indeed better, but to me it still isn't quite an FP, sorry :-( --Dschwen 06:47, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 2 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 07:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Rudolph I of Germany - stained glass window.jpg - not featured[edit]

Rudolph I of Germany - stained glass window.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Michal Maňas — uploaded by Snek01 — nominated by Snek01
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Snek01 23:29, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Subject is cut, and a window like this should be shot straight on. The exposure could be better (less blown), maybe exposure blended to show detail in the frame as well. --Dschwen 16:27, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As above. --Adamantios 18:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 2 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 07:10, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Cassilis historical area.jpg - not featured[edit]

Cassilis Historical Area
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Uploaded and nominated by Fir0002 (self nom)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Fir0002 www 11:15, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - workmanlike, but unexciting panorama shot. TheBernFiles 15:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I love the composition, the colours and the lighting. But especially in the upper left corner you can see stitching artefacts (twigs). Perhaps you can work on that, Fir0002? norro 20:01, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Technically good picture of a bunch of junk! Nomination of the other picture with the cars would have sufficed. --Dschwen 16:37, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above Arad 02:27, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 07:04, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Canada goose flight cropped and NR.jpg - featured[edit]

Canada goose flight cropped and NR.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Alan D. Wilson — uploaded by Diliff — nominated by Atamari
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Atamari 23:38, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Problem licence to see coment of the user Wikimol --Luc Viatour 09:07, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Gordo 09:21, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Absolutely beautiful! --Tomascastelazo 13:44, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great! --Erina 15:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support despite small size - MPF 15:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great! --Tone 20:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tarawneh 00:25, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacopo86 09:32, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ziga 20:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wongsamuel 04:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WHOHAAA! --Jollyroger 14:59, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nuvola emblem-favorite.svgNuvola emblem-favorite.svgNuvola emblem-favorite.svg El ComandanteSkull and crossbones.svgHasta ∞ 17:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support — Love the bokeh. Indon 10:51, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - There is not only lab picture ! :-) Declic 12:59, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - the copyright info is strange. The original is copyrighted by Alan D. Wilson, www.naturespicsonline.com, under cc-by-sa-2.5. The edit by Diliff was marked as self-published (is it suitable in case of minor edits?), dual-licensed under gfdl, and the website name disappeared from the authorship info. --Wikimol 11:07, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As in many other cases before, my opinion differs from the community's mainstream. The coincidence of the bird's upper boundary with the line of apparent horizon is a considerable compositional flaw. In addition to this the lower parts of the right wing are somewhat blurred. Roger McLassus 19:37, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. About the license, just drop Diliff a note, I'm sure that's a non-issue. The composition is ok, the flaw Roger pointed out is not grave at all (IMO). The apparent horizon is not a line, it is significantly blurred, and doesn't make the subject stand out less at all. The shot is good enough and with a subject like this, I suppose you don't really have the luxury of composition... --Dschwen 21:47, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Agree small size but great --Lmbuga gl, pt, es: contacta comigo 00:56, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral small size balanced by rarity and technical merits. Lycaon 05:58, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
16 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured Roger McLassus 07:36, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:TaErSi2.jpg - not featured[edit]

TaErSi2.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by (farm) -uploaded by Farm - nominated by Farm 05:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice, but not much info, and quite low-res (below 1000px _is_ low-res for a FP, IMO). BTW you did something very weird to this page, I don't know how to correct it (and move the nomination to the top of page...). Can anyone help??? --Erina 18:26, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • thank you, now the res is 1752*1168. --Farm 15:42, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • And now it looks much better! Symbol support vote.svg Support --Erina 15:53, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment fixed nomination Lycaon 18:50, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - tilted, and the blue rag (even if it is supposed to be there) is distracting. - MPF 21:46, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, has that tourist snapshot quality, no striking subject. TheBernFiles 15:45, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Queryzo 14:18, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
1 support, 3 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 07:35, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Kozolec.jpg - not featured[edit]

Kozolec.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tone — uploaded by Tone — nominated by Tone
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tone 13:48, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Shry tales 17:38, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good photo, Tone! But not quite featured quality. Neutrality 17:54, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - Nice to have some more info. I presume they are hay-drying racks? - MPF 22:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, these are used to dry hay. Sadly, this traditional construction is used less and less due to mechanization. I linked the English WP article, here. Or is there anything else you would like to know? --Tone 11:30, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks; I assumed Kozolec was a place, not the name of the item! Adding "Xxxxx, Gorenjska region, Slovenia" would help (as not too many people are familiar with where Gorenjska region is) - MPF 15:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — Would be better if the point of interest is more visible. Some part of the sky is overexposed. Indon 08:49, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ziga 20:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Indon. TheBernFiles 15:46, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Queryzo 14:17, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
3 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 07:35, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:The Rest.JPG - not featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Yovi — uploaded by Yovi — nominated by Yovi
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yovi 17:31, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. I like the dreamy look and the basic idea behind the picture. But the colors and the sky do not look inviting to take a rest there. --Dschwen 16:20, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ss181292 17:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC) - unless someone tell me what is the idea behind the picture.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose colors and no informative --Luc Viatour 06:40, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose What is this pic for? --Erina 07:42, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose If I had made this picture, I should not even keep it. Roger McLassus 08:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose obviously a prank Lycaon 10:03, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral ditto to Dschwen, i cannot support bau also cannot oppose. --Jacopo86 11:59, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose - ditto to Roger McLassus. Methinks this could more realistically be nominated for deletion, not for FP - MPF 18:15, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose - What the .... I think this one have lot more changes in winning deletion voting than FP. --Leclerc 15:47, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I quote one of the rules: "Nominators can withdraw their nominated pictures at any time." Roger McLassus 17:46, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • My suggestion was to withdraw the nomination. This is done by the nominator's statement: "I withdraw my nomination" - not by deleting the template from the list, as was done yesterday by Yovi. Like all nominations also withdrawn ones must afterwards be moved to the archive. I'll do this later and keep the template here for a while to make this point clear to everyone. Roger McLassus 13:24, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I'd disagree with that. If a nomination is withdrawn, it should be removed, and nothing recorded in the archive. The archive is for successful and unsuccessful nominations; not for something where the uploader may wish, for whatever reason, to have the pic as if it were never nominated in the first place. - MPF 21:53, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
I think, your opionion is not the mainstream view. Until now, withdrawals were always handled this way. Furthermore, removing the nomination-template does not delete it. It contiues to exist, but becomes isolated. But if you like, you can start a discussion about this point. Roger McLassus 07:15, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
1 support, 8 oppose, 1 neutral (withdrawn) → not featured Roger McLassus 13:24, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Hippo pod edit.jpg - featured[edit]

Hippo pod edit.jpg Hippo pod.jpg

Left: image for voting, right: original image for comparison (spot the mistake ;-) ).

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Pod of hippos in Luangwa Valley, Zambia, 2002. Taken by Paul Maritz (Paulmaz), edited and uploaded by User:Fir0002, nominated by Lumijaguaari (моє обговорення)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lumijaguaari (моє обговорення) 21:24, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - took a look at the hippo pics, and it is by far the best we have - MPF 22:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tarawneh 00:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support I think I even recognize a few of them ;-) Lycaon 07:27, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — The hippos fill all the frame. Indon 08:40, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour 09:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support simply a well done photo --AngMoKio 11:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tone 12:57, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo 13:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XN 15:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ziga 20:53, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jollyroger 14:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --TheBernFiles 15:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. Highlights look terrible in fullsize (not the fault of the edit though), but the removal of the leaf is unnecessary photo manipulation. However the nice subject prevents me from opposing. --Dschwen 17:00, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. I think the same than Dschwen--Lmbuga gl, pt, es: contacta comigo 01:03, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
13 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → featured Roger McLassus 06:07, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Golden-Mantled Ground Squirrel, Mount Rainier, July 2006.jpg - featured[edit]

Golden-Mantled Ground Squirrel, Mount Rainier, July 2006.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Golden-Mantled Ground Squirrel (Spermophilus lateralis), at Mount Rainier National Park, July 2006. Taken at or near Panorama Point on the Skyline Trail. created by K.lee — uploaded by K.lee — nominated by Atamari
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Atamari 18:47, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tone 20:03, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - MPF 22:03, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tarawneh 00:13, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, very interesting. --Farm 02:56, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Sam67fr 03:23, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportLycaon 07:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Goes to my favourite ;-). Indon 08:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cute! :> --Erina 08:46, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour 09:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --AngMoKio 11:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Brave squirrel! I wouldn't dare to climb that high. Moralist 13:59, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think it is a bit noisy, and furthermore resolution is a bit low compared to current new FPs here. Sorry.  Pabix  15:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lestat 18:45, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ziga 20:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jollyroger 14:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't think its too noisy. It's a pity its only 1024x1024 crop. --Wikimol 21:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice! --Olei 22:31, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lumijaguaari (моє обговорення) 12:57, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As announced in the German discussion I support this picture here. Roger McLassus 11:41, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
19 support, 1 oppose → featured Roger McLassus 06:05, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Persian rugs.jpg - not featured[edit]

300px 300px

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Nauman Ahmad (RWP, Punjab, Pakistan) — uploaded by Hautala — nominated by Hautala
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hautala 11:35, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Too dark. If it was less dark, it would be a great pic, anyway. It's still very good. Hmm... Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral --Erina 15:17, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support --Tarawneh 00:20, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support — Nice angle and it has valuable information. Indon 08:44, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - ditto to Erina, a bit too dark, would be nice if it could be brightened a bit. Minor point - the pic is wrongly titled, they are Punjabi rugs, not Persian rugs - MPF 09:57, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - A bit dark, but I prefer live photographs anyway. Rama 10:04, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, brightening would probably hurt the colours of the carpet. --Tone 12:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ziga 20:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- below average quality at full size, poorest lighting, lame subject -- Boereck 09:32, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose poor light --Jollyroger 14:53, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - good subject and framing, poor lighting. TheBernFiles 15:41, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support Prefer Edit 1. Good picture. Arad 22:35, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the subject and perspective, valuable. KenWalker 04:41, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - good subject but poor quality Lycaon 10:39, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good composition Ceridwen 22:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose beautiful subject, Poor lighting, dull colours --Luc Viatour 06:45, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - poor quality, poorest lighting--Lmbuga gl, pt, es: contacta comigo 00:57, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as above Roger McLassus 15:38, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
9 support, 7 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 06:04, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Cassilis historical area02.jpg - not featured[edit]

Cassilis Historical Park
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Uploaded and nominated by Fir0002 (self nom)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Fir0002 www 08:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Historical? The wreck in the BG looks like a Volkswagen Bug. Still, technically a great picture again. You really have advanced your exposure blending skills! --Dschwen 09:03, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks! :-) And it is the a Historical Area - there's a huge sign telling you so! :-) --Fir0002 www 10:10, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The car in the background is a late 30´s early 40´s car, it is not a VW bug. --Tomascastelazo 13:46, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - It looks like an FX/FJ Holden, quite suprised the body is still there Gnangarra
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice photo, though the res may be a bit higher (1280x853 is not that great). I wonder how long is that place abandoned... --Leclerc 16:29, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — Though the photo is nice and properly taken, I don't think if this deserves FP. Perhaps if the angle is changed that the wreck car is more exposed and the historical area is more visible, then I would vote it as FP. To me, this picture looks only like an ordinary junkyard. Indon 08:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral — I'm concerned about the colours particularly around the truck they look altered? Gnangarra 12:17, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
I can promise you that no color alteration was made. This effect was achieved by firing a remote flash just out of frame of the picture. The "look" of the picture is a result of HDR tone mapping - personally I find it aesthetic. --Fir0002 www 07:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lestat 18:51, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose artificial colors --Luc Viatour 04:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Nuvola apps package favorite.pngSymbol support vote.svg Support -- I love it! To me the colors are especially great! The composition is great! -- Boereck 09:31, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose can't see why "historical". Anyway, colors seem fake. --Jollyroger 14:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Declic 12:58, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Opposefake colours, nothing special --Digon3 14:24, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing unusual. --Olei 22:36, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Marginally interesting subject, pedestrian composition, fake colours. TheBernFiles 15:42, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose contrast --Queryzo 14:19, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
5 support, 8 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 06:03, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Yellow_woolly_bear_caterpillar.jpg - not featured[edit]

A yellow woolly bear caterpillar.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by DonES - uploaded by DonES - nominated by DonES 01:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Please forgive the narrow DOF. --DonES 01:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --> I think this is the caterpillar of the Spotted tussock moth (Lophocampa maculata). Yellow woolly bear caterpillars (Spilosoma virginica) are all yellow. I might be wrong. Might need a filename change? Snowwayout 01:42, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think you're right. I tried to ID it myself based on the woolly bear caterpillar, which looks quite similar, but has an orange band. How do I go about renaming the image? DonES 04:51, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • See FAQ but its a bit of a pain. Snowwayout 08:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • I've uploaded the correct image here. [13]. Do I re-nominate? --DonES 04:32, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I don't like the central composition. Anyway good pic, but not FP-quality, IMO. Maybe if it was cropped a bit or something... --Erina 15:14, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good depth and details. background fills the space but is not disturbing --Jollyroger 14:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. I like the documentary-style composition and the cute subject. TheBernFiles 15:43, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Boereck 09:15, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose composition--Lmbuga gl, pt, es: contacta comigo 00:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lycaon 05:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not even the caterpillar itself is all sharp, let alone its environment. The composition is a bit boring and the background somewhat disturbing. Altogether the picture misses FP-quality. Roger McLassus 15:36, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
4 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 06:03, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Conchiglie e biglie.jpg - not featured[edit]

Conchiglie e biglie.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Luigi Chiesa — uploaded by Luigi Chiesa — nominated by Luigi Chiesa
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Luigi Chiesa 16:43, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose What is so special about this pic? And what are the glass balls for??? --Erina 18:34, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentThe glass balls are chilldren toys, often used on beaches. I think that the photographer means to recreate his childhood.--Jacopo86 10:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - would be better without the marbles - MPF 20:35, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This may be nice as some sort of desktop wallpaper, but I find nothing special on this collection of balls and oysters to deserve being FP --Leclerc 01:57, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose to narrow field of wiev (Italiano: campo di visuale troppo stretto) --Jacopo86 10:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — Yes, the marbles spoiled the content, but with or without marbles, this photo has nothing special value for FP. Indon 11:04, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice idea, but wheres the point?--Queryzo 14:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 6 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 06:25, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Statue of Peter the great.jpg - not featured[edit]

Statue of Peter the great.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Moralist — uploaded by Moralist — nominated by Moralist. The statue of Peter the Great in Saint Petersburg.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Moralist 14:28, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ss181292 14:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC) - needs cropping
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentCropped it will be too small, anyway. --Erina 18:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not special -Quasipalm 14:58, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad composition (too much sky), an electric wire in the background crosses the heads of both the Tsar and his horse. Furthermore sharpness is insufficient even to read the inscription on the stone. Roger McLassus 15:26, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as Roger McLassus --Erina 18:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lestat 10:03, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This one seriously need cropping. But it is almost too small even without cropping, so ... no.--Leclerc 15:38, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose--Jacopo86 10:34, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — Too much sky and makes peter not the great, but small. Indon 11:05, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The "rule of the thirds" can be nice sometimes, but this is really too much (and the rule of the thirds makes no sense if you are only showing lots of uniform blue sky) Rama 11:42, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice desktop background for historians--Queryzo 14:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose another joke ???--Hi-tacks 16:43, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 11 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 06:25, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Eilean donan.JPG - not featured[edit]

Eilean donan.JPG

version with improved colours
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Moralist — uploaded by Moralist — nominated by Moralist. This is Eilean Donan Castle.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Moralist 14:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose cropping / resolution -Quasipalm 14:58, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient sharpness and resolution, disturbing object in the lower right corner, boring composition, oversaturated colours. Roger McLassus 15:30, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good, but resolution is too low. Lestat 10:04, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — The subject is already interesting, but the result is not great. Contrast can be improved and cropping can also help. Indon 11:07, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info How about the version with improved colours ? Rama 11:47, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose i dont know, sth is missing to make it a special one--Queryzo 14:32, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 5 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 06:26, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Cartesian coordinates 3D.svg - not featured[edit]

Cartesian coordinates 3D

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Gustavb — uploaded by Gustavb — nominated by norro 13:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support clear and instructional norro 13:54, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ss181292 14:55, 13 September 2006 (UTC) - arrowheads should be only on one end of axes.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose well-done, but not outstanding Roger McLassus 15:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose see Ss181292's comment, + I don't like the arrow showing origin (0,0,0). Just an O should be sufficient.  Pabix  16:01, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as Ss181292, and I don't like the arrow too. Anyway even if corrected, it's not FP quality - very good, needed and informative SVG but not this much of work. --Erina 18:32, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not bad for picture displaying cartesian coordinates, but these are just coordinates. I don't think such simple drawings should be FP. --Leclerc 02:02, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose informative, but not featured--Queryzo 14:39, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 6 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 06:27, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Cheetah4.jpg - featured[edit]

Cheetah4.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Schani of Flickr — uploaded by Jacoplane — nominated by Pharaoh Hound (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Pharaoh Hound (talk) 22:23, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour 04:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support – Wow! The cheetah is sharp and good DOF. Indon 11:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacopo86 15:20, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Declic 12:54, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, has encyclopedic value also. TheBernFiles 15:35, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - although likely a zoo shot, there's nothing visible to say that it definitely is and so spoil the pic - MPF 22:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support  Pabix  15:41, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Agree --Lmbuga gl, pt, es: contacta comigo 00:59, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -LadyofHats 22:43, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
10 support, 0 oppose → featured Roger McLassus 06:25, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:DirkvdM baracoa cabin.jpg - not featured[edit]

Baracoa cabin.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by DirkvdM
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support DirkvdM 18:25, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nothing special, rather low res. Lycaon 18:29, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This picture tells me about the living conditions of a particular place and time. Arquitecture, building material, surrondings, vegetation, etc. --Tomascastelazo 19:18, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - ditto to Tomascastelazo - MPF 00:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — Agree with Lycaon, unless it is a very special & unique picture, low-res is not a problem for FP. Indon 11:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Olegivvit 10:37, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, pretty but unexciting subject and photo. TheBernFiles 15:36, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I would support except for low res since higher res is available. -- KenWalker 04:37, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. I don't like the composition at all, cabin is obstructed, weird shadow in the lower right corner. A step back and left would probably have been a better vantage point. Oh yeah, and what's the deal with uploading crippleware?--Dschwen 07:15, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Crippleware? Hadn't heard of that term. This is not it, though, because I want my photos to be for free - for non-commercial use, that is. Since that is not allowed here, I was suggested this alternative. I don't like it, but don't have much of a choice. The basic idea is that if someone is to make money with a photograph, the photographer should be the first to benefit from it. I love the notion of freeware, but then it should be completely free. Pretty much what you say, but for me that also includes 'free of commercial gain'. Still, commecial websites are already using my photographs, so they don't consider them crippled, it seems. DirkvdM 18:59, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
I'd say you are wrong in several assumptions. IMO
1. People go to Commons for free files. If they were inclined to buy something, they'd looked elsewhere in first place. They'll either use the file for free even in low res, or find something else.
2. CC-BY-SA and especially FDL are unsuitable for majority of serious commercial/advertising usage. Serious photo buyer would usually need different licence. Photo users who don't care about licences usualy also don't need quality, and if they need higher image size, they would simply upscale your photo, even with the degradation!
I sell some of my photos here with stock agencies (see eg. Image:Tea leaves steeping in a zhong čaj 05.jpg), the photos here under free license and there under royalty-free license are the same resolution, and IMO presence on Commons don't affect the sales at all. --Wikimol 20:07, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - uploading downscaled versions is not the practice which should be promoted by FP. --Wikimol 20:07, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- apart from the discussion above: I think it is not that great a picture! sorry! -- Boereck 09:08, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose great picture, but where is the subject? --Queryzo 14:22, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as above, plus rather dull composition -LadyofHats 22:42, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
4 support, 9 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 06:24, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Hong kong bruce lee statue.jpg - not featured[edit]

Hong kong bruce lee statue.jpg Hong kong bruce lee statue 2.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Johnson Lau — uploaded by Johnson Lau — nominated by Johnson Lau
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Johnson Lau 05:25, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — Background is too distracting. Indon 08:37, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I have another version using f/1.4, which the background was blurred--Johnson Lau 14:05, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm still opposing it to be FP, sorry. The shadow on the statue is too harsh. The picture looks like an ordinary touristic photo. Really, if you can retake this scene picture again, can you wait for a better light than this? Indon 11:50, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — Background ; the subject is cut. Rama 09:57, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice photo. The Hong Kong background is imho part of the composition and fits very well to Bruce Lee. Maybe the colour saturation could be reduced a bit. --AngMoKio 11:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The photo was taken in RAW format and colour saturation could be reduced easily.--Johnson Lau 14:14, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the composition, including the city behind. Unfortunately its only part of the statue. Gnangarra 12:09, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Here is a photo showing the whole statue: Image:HK_Star_Bruce_Lee_16.jpg. The statue is fenced and I found impossible to take a full picture of it without being distracted.--Johnson Lau 14:05, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree with Dschwen this other image shows it possible, are you able to retake the image? If so I'd suggest(based on full image) that by placing the statue further right in the frame you could remove sufficient quantities of the fence, it would also loose some of the value in the background but thats not the main subject anyway. Gnangarra 16:03, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Sorry, but the composition looks random. The statue is unnecessarily cut (your example above only shows me it is possible to get a better angle. --Dschwen 14:49, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentThe background is 2 charateristic buildings of HongKong. The Central Plaza [14] is the 2nd highest building in HK. The Hong Kong Convention and Exhibition Centre [15] was the site of the handover ceremony. I didn't take the whole statue due to the ugly fence around it.--Johnson Lau 15:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per the above, due to suboptimal composition. TheBernFiles 15:38, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose composition--Queryzo 14:21, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose due to composition, background, light, and cutting. Roger McLassus 15:42, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as above --LadyofHats 22:41, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
2 support, 8 opposel → not featured Roger McLassus 06:23, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Brooklyn Bridge Postdlf.jpg - not featured[edit]

Brooklyn Bridge Postdlf.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Postdlf — uploaded by DeansFA — nominated by Tarawneh
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tarawneh 00:10, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Nice perspective and line patterns. I wish the bridge is not cut in the middle. Indon 08:38, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral technically a very good picture. Just don't know if it is special enough --AngMoKio 11:34, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too many bridges, they are easy to take, so have to be exceptionally good to be FP. Lycaon 18:33, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, ditto to Lycaon. --Tone 19:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per AngMoKio. TheBernFiles 15:39, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Average pic. Slightly tilted. --Dschwen 18:26, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. nothing special. not a bad photo but still... something missing -LadyofHats 22:39, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
2 support, 4 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 06:20, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Sunset at Torrey Pines State Beach CA.JPG - not featured[edit]

Sunset at Torrey Pines State Beach CA.JPG

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by levi.crouch — uploaded by levi.crouch — nominated by Levi.crouch
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Levi.crouch 04:49, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose All sunsets are pretty, so FP sunsets need to be exceptional Snowwayout 05:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose severe tilt, not exceptional -- Lycaon 06:25, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Ack Snowwayout, this looks like any other beach-sunset. --Dschwen 07:09, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ss181292 09:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC) - see Guidelines for nominators above.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lestat 10:01, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree with Dschwen--Erina 15:07, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - no Torrey Pines in view . . . 'specially when commons doesn't have a single pic of one :-(( MPF 22:35, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — no sunset for FP, please. Indon 11:00, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Maybe the sunset was nice, but the picture of it is boring. Roger McLassus 13:41, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose got thousands of those photos--Queryzo 14:26, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose it is no more than another sunset--Hi-tacks 08:54, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Seen many better sunsets in Commons --Javierme 21:31, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as above -LadyofHats 23:05, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- no thanks -- Boereck 09:08, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 14 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 10:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Echinocactus_ingens2.jpg - not featured[edit]

Echinocactus ingens2.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Nanosanchez — uploaded by Nanosanchez — nominated by Nanosanchez - Uploaded a new bigger version on 14th sept.
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. Good photo, but a bit small. in fact, not only a bit. much too small!  Pabix  07:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ss181292 09:41, 14 September 2006 (UTC) - resolution + distracting noise in background
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — per above. Indon 11:01, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose due to lighting, sharpness, composition, and size. Roger McLassus 13:45, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose pity its dark in the background--Queryzo 14:26, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice picture —the preceding unsigned comment is by Nanosanchez 21:49, 15. Sep 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 10:06, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Kobe port island02s3200.jpg - not featured[edit]

Kobe port island02s3200.jpg

(UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, oversaturated... --Erina 15:09, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment maybe usefull: {{oversaturated}} --XN 18:43, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - glare from lights - MPF 22:45, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Above, plus slight tilt. And any harbour bridge FP will have to compare to this one Sydney Harbour Bridge night.jpg.--Dschwen 09:06, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for the ligth of the sun (?) thath is too bright. --Jacopo86 10:25, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — Color is good, and I'm not against at saturation, but rather in noise when you see it full size. Indon 11:03, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose what is that white point?--Queryzo 14:28, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose and I don't think that Dschwen's advantage is so great... since it has serious artifact problems. Although, I may have supported it ~_~ --gren 04:08, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- per above -- Boereck 09:07, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 8 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 10:06, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Gasometer - not featured[edit]

Gasometer (old gas holder)

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XN - uploaded by XN - nominated by XN 11:56, 13 September 2006 (UTC)]]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XN 11:56, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose don't understand the picture norro 12:08, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Neither do I. Kprateek88 12:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I do, and I like it. It could have been a bit sharper though. Lycaon 13:52, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral i like the colors but the composition is a little disturbing. But i cannot oppose :) --Jacopo86 14:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Well, it seems it is some large tank used to holding gas and the photo is taken from the bottom of it. Basically, the lower 2/3 of picture is reflection in the water (probably, may be other liquid). But it is pretty confusing and requires some thinking to realize what it is ... may be nice in "Guess what the picture is" competition, but not as FP --Leclerc 02:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Artsy, but not really useful due to unclear subject matter. --Dschwen 07:18, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unclear subject matter Lestat 10:06, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It took me a while to understand the picture, but then I started to like it. I'd support it, if it were sharper. Roger McLassus 14:03, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 5 oppose, 3 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 06:27, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Autumn mountain trail.jpg - not featured[edit]

Autumn mountain trail.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Flicker.com user "a4gpa" — uploaded by TheBernFiles — nominated by TheBernFiles
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support TheBernFiles 15:04, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - very nice pic, but totally lacking in information (location, etc). Will support if details can be added. - MPF 22:15, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. While I don't understand people complaining about low DOF in macro images, this picture really suffers under the blurry bg. --Dschwen 08:05, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral -- the colors are bright (which I like), the composition is quite interesting with the grassy hill cutting the image in half (which I like) but the trees appear as one big lump at full-size. -- Boereck 09:26, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - composition, lack of sharp --Lmbuga gl, pt, es: contacta comigo 01:08, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 2 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured Roger McLassus 07:07, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Bridge at skansen.JPG - not featured[edit]

Bridge at skansen.JPG

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Zaphod - nominated by Zaphod
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support *Zaphod 12:58, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Sorry, but no. The composition is terrible, the way the reflection is cut off, trees randomly occlude the subject instead of framing it, blown highlights. Not FP material. --Dschwen 18:51, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Wikimol 20:12, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Well... it's nice, but not FP-quality. --Erina 08:23, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In addition to what Dschwen already said the picture is also considerably leaning to the left. Roger McLassus 19:14, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The bridge is way too obscured by leafs and trees ... and the rest of the picture is not worthy of being FP. --Leclerc 02:24, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the image contrast is too burned -LadyofHats 23:00, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- agree with Dschwen -- Boereck 08:57, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
Day 7: 1 support (nominator), 7 oppose → not featured Roger McLassus 06:23, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Image:Waterlily.jpg - not featured[edit]