Commons:Quality images candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Translate this page; This page contains changes which are not marked for translation.

Skip to nominations
Other languages:
العربية • ‎čeština • ‎Deutsch • ‎English • ‎español • ‎français • ‎日本語 • ‎македонски • ‎Nederlands • ‎polski • ‎português • ‎русский • ‎svenska
float

These are the candidates for becoming quality images. Please note that this is not the same thing as featured pictures. Additionally, if you just want some feedback on your pictures you can get that at Commons:Photography critiques.

Purpose[edit]

The purpose of quality images is to encourage the people that are the foundation of Commons, the individual users who provide the unique images that expand this collection. While featured pictures identifies the absolute best of all the images loaded into Commons, Quality images sets out to identify and encourage users' efforts in providing quality images to Commons.
Additionally, quality images should be a place to refer other users to when explaining methods for improving an image.

Guidelines[edit]

All nominated images should be the work of Commons users.

For nominators[edit]

Below are the general guidelines for Quality images, more detailed criteria is available at Image guidelines.

Image page requirements[edit]
  1. Copyright status. Quality image candidates have to be uploaded to Commons under a suitable license. The full license requirements are at Commons:Copyright tags.
  2. Images should comply with all Commons policies and practices, including Commons:Photographs of identifiable people.
  3. Quality images shall have a meaningful file name, be properly categorized and have an accurate description on the file page in one or more languages. It is preferred, but not mandatory, to include an English description.
  4. No advertisements or signatures in image. Copyright and authorship information of quality images should be located on the Image page and may be in the image metadata, but should not interfere with image contents.


Creator[edit]

Pictures must have been created by a Wikimedian in order to be eligible for QI status. This means that pictures from, for example, Flickr are ineligible. (Note that Featured Pictures do not have this requirement.) Photographical reproductions of two-dimensional works of art, made by Wikimedians, are eligible (and should be licensed PD-old according to the Commons guidelines). If an image is promoted despite not being the creation of a Wikimedian, the QI status should be removed as soon as the mistake is detected.

Technical requirements[edit]

More detailed criteria are available at Commons:Image guidelines.

Resolution[edit]

Bitmapped images (JPEG, PNG, GIF, TIFF) should normally have at least 2 megapixels; reviewers may demand more for subjects that can be photographed easily. This is because images on Commons may be printed, viewed on monitors with very high resolution, or used in future media.

This does not apply to vector graphics (SVG).

Image quality[edit]

Digital images can suffer various problems originating in image capture and processing, such as preventable noise, problems with JPEG compression, lack of information in shadow or highlight areas, or problems with capture of colors. All these issues should be handled correctly.

Composition and lighting[edit]

The arrangement of the subject within the image should contribute to the image. Foreground and background objects should not be distracting. Lighting and focus also contribute to the overall result; the subject should be sharp, uncluttered, and well-exposed.

Value[edit]

Our main goal is to encourage quality images being contributed to Wikicommons, valuable for Wikimedia and other projects.

How to nominate[edit]

Simply add a line of this form at the top of Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list Nominations section

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description  --~~~~ |}}

The description shouldn't be more than a few words, and please leave a blank line between your new entry and any existing entries.

If you are nominating an image by another Wikimedian, include their username in the description as below

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description (by [[User:USERNAME|USERNAME]]) --~~~~ |}}

Note: there is a Gadget, QInominator, which makes nominations quicker. It adds a small "Nominate this image for QI" link at the top of every file page. Clicking the link adds the Image to a list of potential candidates. When this list is completed, edit Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list. At the top of the edit window a green bar will be displayed. Clicking the bar inserts all potential candidates into the edit window.


Number of nominations[edit]

Carefully select your best images to nominate. No more than five images per day can be added by a single nominator.


Evaluating images[edit]

Any registered user, other than the author and the nominator, can review a nomination.
When evaluating images the reviewer should consider the same guidelines as the nominator.

How to review[edit]

How to update the status

Carefully review the image. Open it in full resolution, and check if the quality criteria are met.

  • If you decide to promote the nomination, change the relevant line from
File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description --~~~~ | }}

to

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Promotion|Very short description --Nominators signature |Why you liked it. --~~~~}}

In other words, change the template from /Nomination to /Promotion and add your signature, possibly with some short comment.

  • If you decide to decline the nomination, change the relevant line from
File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description --~~~~ | }}

to

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Decline|Very short description --Nominators signature |Why you didn't like it. --~~~~}}

In other words, change the template from /Nomination to /Decline and add your signature, possibly with a statement of the criteria under which the image failed (you can use titles of section from the guidelines). If there are many problems, please note only 2 or 3 of the most severe, or add multiple problems. When declining a nomination please do explain the reasons on the nominator's talk page - as a rule, be nice and encouraging! In the message you should give a more detailed explanation of your decision.

Note: Please evaluate the oldest images first and, if possible, for every picture you nominate, please review at least one of the other candidates.


Grace period and promotion[edit]

If there are no objections in period of 2 days (exactly: 48 hours) from review, the image becomes promoted or fails, according to the review it received. If you have objection, just change its status to Discuss and it will be moved to the Consensual review section.

How to execute decision[edit]

QICbot automatically handles this 2 days after a decision has been made, and promoted images are cached in Commons:Quality Images/Recently promoted awaiting categorization before their automatic insertion in to appropriate Quality images pages.

If you believe that you have identified an exceptional image that is worthy of Featured picture status then also nominate the image at Commons:Featured picture candidates.

  • Images awaiting review show the nomination outlined in blue.
  • Images the reviewer has accepted show the nomination outlined in green
  • Images the reviewer has rejected show the nomination outlined in red

Unassessed images (nomination outlined in blue)[edit]

Nominated images which have not generated assessments either to promote nor to decline, or a consensus (equal opposition as support in consensual review) after 8 days on this page should be removed from this page without promotion, archived in Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives April 2015 and Category:Unassessed QI candidates added to the image.

Consensual review process[edit]

Consensual review is a catch all place used in the case the procedure described above is insufficient and needs discussion for more opinions to emerge.

How to ask for consensual review[edit]

To ask for consensual review, just change the /Promotion, /Decline to /Discuss and add your comments immediately following the review. An automatic bot will move it to the consensual review section within one day.

Please only send things to consensual review that have been reviewed as promoted/declined. If, as a reviewer, you can not make a decision, add your comments, but leave the candidate on this page.

Consensual review rules[edit]

See Commons:Quality images candidates#Rules

Page refresh: purge this page's cache


Contents

Nominations[edit]

Due to the Mediawiki parser code ~~~~ signatures are only working on this page if you have Javascript enabled. If you do not have Javascript enabled please manually sign with

--[[User:yourname|yourname]] 16:58, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Please open a new date section if you are nominating an image after 0:00 o'clock (UTC).
  • Please leave a blank line between your new entry and any existing entries.
  • Please help in reviewing "old" nominations here below first, many are still unassessed.
Thank you.
Please nominate only a maximum of 5 images per day. [3] The minimum resolution for submissions is 4 megapixels.[4]

April 18, 2015[edit]

April 17, 2015[edit]

42

April 16, 2015[edit]

April 15, 2015[edit]

April 14, 2015[edit]

April 13, 2015[edit]

April 12, 2015[edit]

April 11, 2015[edit]

April 10, 2015[edit]

April 9, 2015[edit]

April 8, 2015[edit]

April 7, 2015[edit]

Consensual review[edit]

Rules

These rules are in accordance with the procedures normally followed in this section. If you don’t agree with them please feel free to propose changes.

  • To ask for consensual review, just change the /Promotion, /Decline to /Discuss and add your comments immediately following the review. An automatic bot will move it to the consensual review section within one day. Alternatively move the image line from the main queue to Consensual Review/Images and follow the instructions in the edit window.
  • You can move an image here if you contest the decision of the reviewer or have doubts about its eligibility (in which case an 'oppose' is assumed). In any case, please explain your reasons. Our QICBot will move it for you. When the bot moves it, you might have to revisit the nomination and expand your review into the Consensual Review format and add "votes".
  • The decision is taken by majority of opinions, including the one of the first reviewer and excluding the nominator's. After a minimum period of 48 hours since the last entry, the decision will be registered at the end of the text using the template {{QICresult}} and then executed, according to the Guidelines.
Using {{support}} or {{oppose}} will make it easier to count your vote.
Votes by anonymous contributors aren't counted
  • In case of draw, or if no additional opinions are given other than the first reviewer's, the nomination can be closed as inconclusive after 8 days, counted from its entry.
  • Turn any existing comments into bullet points—add Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose and Symbol support vote.svg Support if necessary.
  • Add a comment explaining why you've moved the image here - be careful to stay inside the braces.
  • Preview and save with a sensible edit summary like "+Image:Example.jpg".


Consensual Review[edit]

File:Hondeghem Estaminet de l'ancienne maison commune.jpg[edit]

Hondeghem Estaminet de l'ancienne maison commune.jpg

  • Nomination Hondeghem Estaminet de l'ancienne maison commune.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 17:51, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Insufficient quality. --Touzrimounir 18:31, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
    Touzrimounir Can you give me the pleasure to motivate your opposition? Pierre and I do you'd be terribly grateful! Thanks --Livioandronico2013 18:52, 17 April 2015 (UTC)Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A pic ‎(4 608 × 3 456 pixels, taille du fichier : 11,73 Mio, type MIME : image/jpeg), corrected with RawTerapee ! Please, Touzrimounir I would be happy to know why it's Insuffisant quality.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 21:10, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Weak support The left part of the picture is blurry, perhaps may be cropped Ezarate 01:50, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @ Ezarate thank you for your review. The left part croped, gives a pic too tight.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 09:29, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Ξυλόσκαλο 3751.jpg[edit]

Ξυλόσκαλο 3751.jpg

  • Nomination Fog on Lefka Ori, Crete. --C messier 13:51, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but: no meaningful file naming, stains, uncalibrated Colorspace. --F. Riedelio 15:56, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
    Name is in greek (i think this acceptable) and is the name of the place (+ image number from the camera). Uncalibrated Colorspace maybe due to RawTherapee, I think I can fix it. Can you note the stains on the picture? --C messier 18:38, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
I note some stains on the picture. --F. Riedelio 15:51, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Irisbus_Cristalis_ETB_12_n°115_TCL_Place_Carnot_-_Florian_Fèvre.JPG[edit]

Irisbus Cristalis ETB 12 n°115 TCL Place Carnot - Florian Fèvre.JPG

  • Nomination Trolleybus in Limoges --Billy69150 15:52, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Tilt/perspective issues. --C messier 10:20, 8 April 2015 (UTC) ✓ Done --Billy69150 10:39, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
    Suffers from pincushion distortion on the left, and there is a lot of almost empty space above the subject. Mattbuck 07:52, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Why is this image in CR? --C messier 09:28, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Sea Fishing, Batticaloa.jpg[edit]

Sea Fishing, Batticaloa.jpg

  • Nomination Fishermen return to seashore --AntanO 18:17, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Touzrimounir 18:35, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I disagree: Colour noise in the sea part and posterisation in the sky. --Cccefalon 19:18, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I can't see any relevant chromatic noise or posterization. Alvesgaspar 14:23, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great composition but Cccefalon is right. On the left side in the sky there is some heavy posterization. It's really a pity. Otherwise the picture was FP-worthy in my eyes. I don't know if that's fixable. --Code 09:20, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Hoverfly April 2014-1.jpg[edit]

Hoverfly April 2014-1.jpg

  • Nomination A female hoverfly (Epistrophe eligans) on a Narrow leaved Cistus flower. The only one fly of this species that I have seen in Portugal. Alvesgaspar 21:01, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion *Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 21:13, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looking at Wikipedia etc. I think this is a different species. --Charlesjsharp 12:09, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info No, it is not. It was identified by an expert (diptera.info) Alvesgaspar 19:37, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
    • @Alvesgaspar:: I think it would be relevant to add details about the identification process on the file page, preferably with a link to the discussion where the identification is established. -- Slaunger 16:12, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Gurk Domplatz Friedensglocke 10042015 0701.jpg[edit]

Gurk Domplatz Friedensglocke 10042015 0701.jpg

  • Nomination “Peace bell” on Domplatz (with the cathedral in the background), Gurk, Carinthia, Austria --Johann Jaritz 06:28, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Good quality.--ArildV 12:23, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
    Sorry. But the bell is too distorded for me. It looks nearly like a big shoe. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 08:07, 16 April 2015 (UTC)✓ Done Thanks for your review. Straightened and cropped version uploaded (without cathedral behind). --Johann Jaritz 12:21, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Good composition now but for me it should not be so bright. Perhaps a bit more dark and contrast. -- Spurzem 07:32, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Thanks for your review. New version uploaded. Darker image and more contrast now. --Johann Jaritz 11:16, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good now. -- Spurzem 13:15, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 19:01, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 21:53, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 03:04, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Lupinus Stradch.jpg[edit]

Lupinus Stradch.jpg

  • Nomination Lupin flowers on the side of the Highway M10 (Ukraine) near Stradch. --Mykola Swarnyk 02:39, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion * Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient quality because of extreme oversaturation. --Hubertl 04:25, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
    * Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment What about previous version? It seamed too blue to me. Mykola Swarnyk 16:12, 15 April 2015
    maybe this will be better? Mykola Swarnyk 16:39, 17 April 2015 (UTC) (UTC)

File:Friedhofskirche_St._Maria-4.jpg[edit]

Friedhofskirche St. Maria-4.jpg

  • Nomination Pilastergegliederter Saalbau mit flacher Stichkappentonne und eingezogenem Chor, Dachreiter mit Spitzhelm, vermutlich von Michael Stiller, 1722 --Tobias "ToMar" Maier 07:41, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient quality. Subject unsharp. Third opinion appreciated --Hubertl 11:36, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A third opinion means "discuss". Or am I wrong? --Tobias "ToMar" Maier 21:17, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The subject is really not sharp. --ArishG 13:41, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Webysther_20150321171849-2_-_Painel_Tiradentes_de_Candido_Portinari.jpg[edit]

Webysther 20150321171849-2 - Painel Tiradentes de Candido Portinari.jpg

  • Nomination Painel Tiradentes, Candido Portinari. One of best works. --Webysther 14:22, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose 18,431 × 3,351 pixels, but sorry, blurried, noise, poor detail, CAs. With this resolution other users may think differently: Discuss--Lmbuga 18:37, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info In place of exposition is not possible use tripod, flash and have low light. O do no how fix this issues. To create this image i used another 20 joined. -- Webysther 11:09, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For me the resolution is good enogh to resolv the problems. In 3k pixel is impossible to see any problem. -- Webysther (talk) 01:15, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Vache00.JPG[edit]

Vache00.JPG

  • Nomination Sexy charolais cattle.--Classiccardinal 20:22, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support GQ --Palauenc05 05:30, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficiently sharp and inappropriate description. --Charlesjsharp 09:24, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Charles --Σπάρτακος 12:23, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Iglesia_de_San_Nicolás,_Tallinn,_Estonia,_2012-08-11,_DD_17.JPG[edit]

Iglesia de San Nicolás, Tallinn, Estonia, 2012-08-11, DD 17.JPG

  • Nomination St. Nicholas' Church, Tallinn, Estonia --Poco a poco 10:17, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Steeple unsharp, with CA --Daniel Case 05:29, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • No reaction, please, let's discuss this one --Poco a poco 20:24, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral No good perspective for me. Overall we see tilted lines. -- Spurzem 11:03, 16 April 2015 (UTC).
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The tilted lines underline the character of the subject: beeing high. And leads the eye up to the sky in good colour and with beautiful clouds. --ArishG 15:50, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I disagree. Look to the hauses at the right. They don't lead me to the beautiful sky. I only think they will fall in. -- Spurzem 20:47, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: you are voting in 2 different directions Poco a poco 10:20, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The verticals should be rectilinear. --Code 16:52, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
  • @Daniel Case: Are you still opposing? --Code (talk) 16:54, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline? Code 16:52, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:BustoaBelgranoTandil-abr2015.jpg[edit]

BustoaBelgranoTandil-abr2015.jpg

  • Nomination Busto a Manuel Belgrano en Tandil, Argentina --Ezarate 16:29, 4 April 2015 (UTC)* Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment needs some perspective corrections. The technical quality is sufficient for QI. IMO --Hubertl 17:53, 4 April 2015 (UTC) ✓ Done --Ezarate 20:44, 4 April 2015 (UTC) @Hubertl: And? --Ezarate 00:00, 9 April 2015 (UTC) 09:46, 8 April 2015 (UTC)*Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Now is more distorted. --C messier 10:25, 8 April 2015 (UTC) Another version uploaded --Ezarate 00:00, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
    It's overexposed now. --C messier 21:49, 9 April 2015 (UTC) fixed --Ezarate 00:39, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
    Now it's leaning again. --C messier 17:47, 11 April 2015 (UTC) now? --Ezarate 18:17, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
    Nope. You need to correct the perspective, not just rotate it. Mattbuck 08:04, 12 April 2015 (UTC) redone --Ezarate 13:13, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Acceptable now. --Hubertl 08:02, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
    None of the verticals are vertical in the latest version. --Mattbuck 21:35, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

File:European_robin_(Erithacus_rubecula)_with_nest_material.jpg[edit]

European robin (Erithacus rubecula) with nest material.jpg

✓ Done lightened image uploaded. --Charles (talk)

Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:56, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Southern_vine_snake_(Thelotornis_capensis_capensis).jpg[edit]

Southern vine snake (Thelotornis capensis capensis).jpg

  • Nomination Southern vine snake (Thelotornis capensis capensis), Phinda Private Game Reserve, KwaZulu Natal, South Africa --Charlesjsharp 11:18, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unsharp --Christian Ferrer 17:14, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
    2nd opinion please. This tit-for-tat oppose done in response to my oppose of file:Apis mellifera on Cistus albidus 01.jpg --Charlesjsharp 10:35, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment yes indeed, you, first you have my attention this way with the examples you cite, however when I want to decline your photos I did not need to invent a pretext, this image is really unsharp --Christian Ferrer 04:52, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment and you too the first, isn't it your opposes in response to my oppose on File:Nyala (Nyala angasii) female.jpg? --Christian Ferrer 05:16, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, it's a nice picture but it's unsharp IMO to be QI. As Christian Ferrer--Lmbuga 20:45, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:53, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Small_tortoiseshell_(Aglais_urticae_L.)_Port_Meadow.jpg[edit]

Small tortoiseshell (Aglais urticae L.) Port Meadow.jpg

Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:51, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:2015-02-28_Electric_Avenue_Museumsquartier_Wien_Kunstmeile_9540.jpg[edit]

2015-02-28 Electric Avenue Museumsquartier Wien Kunstmeile 9540.jpg

  • Nomination Electric Avenue, Museumsquartier, Vienna --Hubertl 04:53, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but too much noise and a few blurry. --Livioandronico2013 09:42, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
    I think, for this situation (dark room, capturing the content of monitors) the noise is acceptable --Hubertl 07:59, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Beside the question about quality: I'm not sure, if taking a photo of another photographs images might perhaps be a copyvio of if de minimis applies here. --Cccefalon 06:41, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This is a permanent presented art object, open to the public. And because of the austrian copyright laws (which exactly this situation makes the difference to the german and all other countries law situation afaik worldwide) its part of FOP. Permanent in the decisions of austrian high court jurisdiction means, at least six month. In this case, this art object is presented longer than one year. Vos fēlīcibus Austriacorum, photografica! Sed, quae ante semper ambulant lente tuas!--Hubertl 06:48, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
My latin lessons are too long ago, but I got the FOP part :) thank you for your explanations, this copvio stuff is always a little bit tricky ... --Cccefalon 04:54, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Soferne ich es einigermaßen richtig übersetzt habe: Ihr glücklichen Ösis, fotografiert! Was immer vor eurer Linse vorbeispaziert.--Hubertl 19:07, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:49, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:2014 Wolfstein 01.jpg[edit]

2014 Wolfstein 01.jpg

  • Nomination Ruine of "Burg Wolfstein" in Bavaria, part of a former house --Derzno 14:55, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Nice, but the crop is tight above.--Jebulon 17:21, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
    ✓ Done New version uploaded, aggressive crop slightly extended but unfortunately the original data doesn’t contain much more on the top of t he picture. --~~~~

File:Stollenmundloch_Grube_Magdalena_Morsbach.JPG[edit]

Stollenmundloch Grube Magdalena Morsbach.JPG

  • Nomination Stollenmundloch der Grube Magdalena in Morsbach, NRW, Hausteinrahmung von 1890 inschriftlich datiert. Denkmalgeschütztes Bauwerk. 2.050 m langer Stollen, eröffnet 1890 für den Abbau von Eisenerz. --Reneman 12:21, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment QI for me with English description. The image data must be in at least two languages. If possible, English. To be classified in Commons:Quality images/Recently promoted (It is not a rule, it is my opinion)--Lmbuga 14:15, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. The user does not respond, but the picture is good. I think that the nomination must be in English, but I'm not sure and, if so, it's a good picture and, perhaps, an interesting partner--Lmbuga 16:42, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could a German user explain to the author what happens?--Lmbuga 16:50, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hm. According to his Babel-infobox on dewiki Reneman speaks English as well. But however: Lmbuga ist der Meinung, die Nominierung des Bildes müsste in Englisch erfolgen, weil das Bild sonst nachher nicht kategorisiert werden kann. Außerdem sollte die Bildbschreibung in mindestens zwei Sprachen sein, vorzugsweise sollte eine davon Englisch sein. Lmbuga räumt aber ein, dass das keine feststehende Regel ist, sondern seine eigene Meinung. Von mir übrigens ein
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support: Very good quality. --Code 05:27, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 02:47, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Nyala_(Nyala_angasii)_male.jpg[edit]

Nyala (Nyala angasii) male.jpg

  • Nomination Nyala (Nyala angasii) male, Phinda Private Game Reserve, KwaZulu Natal, South Africa --Charlesjsharp 21:56, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unsharp --Christian Ferrer 17:18, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
    2nd opinion please. This tit-for-tat oppose done in response to my oppose of file:Apis mellifera on Cistus albidus 01.jpg --Charlesjsharp 10:37, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment thanks to highlight that, really a pity that your comment can make this image sharper, that's proove your idea of sharpness when it concerns your images or images from others that you want to decline.... --Christian Ferrer 04:45, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment and you too the first, isn't it your opposes in response to my oppose on File:Nyala (Nyala angasii) female.jpg? --Christian Ferrer 05:17, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:46, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Apis_mellifera_on_Cistus_albidus_01.jpg[edit]

Apis mellifera on Cistus albidus 01.jpg

  • Nomination Apis mellifera (Western honey bee) on Cistus albidus --Christian Ferrer 11:23, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Zcebeci 11:34, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bee is not sharp. --Charlesjsharp 13:54, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The bee is less sharp than the flower because it is active and there is a little motion blur on the bee, but it's not really disturbing and widely acceptable IMO --Christian Ferrer 17:09, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Accetable --Livioandronico2013 08:10, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done thank you all, reworked version uploaded, the last one is better --Christian Ferrer 17:32, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The sharpened area is a little area, but it's QI IMO. Bee is too little as subject, but the subject is not only the bee--Lmbuga 20:57, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 02:45, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Lycaena thersamon - Lesser Fiery Copper 01.jpg[edit]

Lycaena thersamon - Lesser Fiery Copper 01.jpg

  • Nomination Wing upperside of male Lesser Fiery Copper (Lycaena thersamon). Adana - Turkey. --Zcebeci 10:13, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality --Halavar 10:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Wings not in focus and are the colours not over-saturated? --Charlesjsharp 13:52, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl 02:44, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Lycaena_thersamon_-_Lesser_Fiery_Copper_02.jpg[edit]

Lycaena thersamon - Lesser Fiery Copper 02.jpg

  • Nomination Wing upperside of male Lesser Fiery Copper (Lycaena thersamon). Adana - Turkey. --Zcebeci 10:13, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality --Halavar 10:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Head is not in focus. --Charlesjsharp 13:52, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Head is not in focus. For my taste, too much space at right--Lmbuga 14:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:43, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Golf_I_2014-09-07_13-35-24.jpg[edit]

Golf I 2014-09-07 13-35-24.jpg

  • Nomination Golf I --Berthold Werner 09:24, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Σπάρτακος 16:40, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry. But in my opinion the car is too distorted. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 18:11, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Spurzem, maybe a more "normal" focal length around 30-35mm would have been better here. Also, I find the background a bit busy. --El Grafo 09:25, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with others, and it seems to me the crop is too tight .-.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 07:29, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:42, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Flap-necked_chameleon_(Chamaeleo_dilepis)_female.jpg[edit]

Flap-necked chameleon (Chamaeleo dilepis) female.jpg

  • Nomination Flap-necked chameleon (Chamaeleo dilepis) female, iSimangaliso Wetland Park, KwaZulu Natal, South Africa --Charlesjsharp 12:29, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Nice and very good -- Spurzem 12:34, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unsharp, you said my images are unsharp (here and here, yours is much less sharp --Christian Ferrer 17:25, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • For someone who ask to me for a high level of sharpness (Charlesjsharp), see my exemple, I want at least the half of sharpness that he ask to me. It is logical not revenge. --Christian Ferrer 10:50, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Anyway the head isn't not sharp.Please,before criticizing the photos of others is good to see their own, with affection --Livioandronico2013 08:18, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As I said above. -- Spurzem 08:43, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sharp enough. --Code 09:26, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's not very good IMO, but QI: very good composition, but the head could be better. Good resolution, bigger than other pictures, and the head is not fully or completely unfocussed--Lmbuga 12:38, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. --PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 13:02, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Agree with Lmbuga: acceptable. --Aiwok 10:02, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks fine for me --Denkmalhelfer 13:48, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 6 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 02:40, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Pipe_organ_of_St._George_in_Locorotondo.jpg[edit]

Pipe organ of St. George in Locorotondo.jpg

  • Nomination Pipe organ of St. George in Locorotondo --Livioandronico2013 09:32, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient quality. Sorry. The overexposed window at the top is too disturbing. --XRay 11:05, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
    Excuse me but I like have other opinions,the Subject have a good exposure--Livioandronico2013 11:35, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment No problem. If you have the RAW file you should try to reduce the lights at the windows.--XRay 12:11, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
    ✓ Done Better XRay? Thanks --Livioandronico2013 18:25, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Ok for me --Uoaei1 15:25, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It's not good, but it's better. And it may be acceptable.--XRay 17:02, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Good view to the organ but the window is too bright. -- Spurzem 18:29, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 02:23, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:PlacaenEscuelaNormal.JPG[edit]

PlacaenEscuelaNormal.JPG

  • Nomination Plaque infront of Escuela Normal, Tandil, Argentina --Ezarate 21:33, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Cayambe 08:00, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Could easily be taken with exactly frontal view, so distortion is not acceptable for me. --Uoaei1 18:45, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl 02:24, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Ålesund in May 2013.JPG[edit]

Ålesund in May 2013.JPG

  • Nomination A shot of Ålesund, Norway. --Miyagawa 17:13, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
    Has a slight CW tilt. Could benefit from a geocode. Nicely detailed with lovely light. -- Slaunger 19:49, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, certainly very nice, but perspective distortion (barrel or lens distortion), blown out (overexposed areas: See 3 notes as example). CAs (perhaps minor CAs: See note).--Lmbuga 19:37, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:26, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:BustoaSarmiento-Tandil.jpg[edit]

BustoaSarmiento-Tandil.jpg

  • Nomination Bust to Domingo Faustino Sarmiento, Tandil, Argentina --Ezarate 16:29, 4 April 2015 (UTC)* Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment needs some perspective corrections. The technical quality is sufficient for QI. IMO --Hubertl 17:53, 4 April 2015 (UTC) ✓ Done --Ezarate 20:44, 4 April 2015 (UTC) Another version uploaded --Ezarate 00:00, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ok for me now --Hubertl 22:22, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too bright for me. --Mattbuck 08:04, 12 April 2015 (UTC) colors levels reduced
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I can't read the signs: Most of the important area of the picture is a bit blurried. Unbalanced IMO. Low resolution--Lmbuga 13:24, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:26, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Wraxall 2013 MMB 96 Christmas Tree.jpg[edit]

Wraxall 2013 MMB 96 Christmas Tree.jpg

  • Nomination Christmas tree. Mattbuck 06:43, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Unfortunalty good idea but a bit dark --Billy69150 09:55, 3 April 2015 (UTC) it need a crop at right for to avoid the door --Christian Ferrer 21:44, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
    ✓ Done Mattbuck 07:52, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer 08:35, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unfortunate crop: top is missing. --Palauenc05 20:35, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
    There was a not insignificant amount of tree beyond what is visible. Mattbuck 20:15, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Palauenc05 --Billy 17:08, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:28, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Tip_of_Trullo_in_Alberobello_2015.jpg[edit]

Tip of Trullo in Alberobello 2015.jpg

  • Nomination Tip of Trullo in Alberobello 2015 --Livioandronico2013 10:46, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol support vote.svg Support Bello. Good quality.--Johann Jaritz 11:02, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose blown sky top right? --Charlesjsharp 12:33, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support Irrelevant --Moroder 07:41, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition seems seems a little bit off center and tilted. Also I don't like the large nearly contrast less light grey areas. There is not much to see. The Bricks in the foreground are not sharp and the back ground is pretty much featureless grey (which might have been good if some more intersesting stuff was in the middle) --Aiwok 13:19, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Irrelevant also for me --Σπάρτακος 12:00, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 02:30, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Camouflaged oriental garden lizard.jpg[edit]

Camouflaged oriental garden lizard.jpg

  • Nomination Camouflaged oriental garden lizard --AntanO 10:15, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Some minor flaws but overall good quality and QI. --Cccefalon 10:25, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Head not sharp --Charlesjsharp 12:29, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 07:42, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, it's nice but the unfocussed flower of the right is disturbing. Head is not realy in focus IMO. --Lmbuga 12:32, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl 02:31, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Harburg-Außenmühlenteich.jpg[edit]

Harburg-Außenmühlenteich.jpg

  • Nomination Der erste warme Freitag 2015 wird benutzt, um das Jahr im Freien zu feiern. --ArishG 21:53, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol support vote.svg SupportNice mood. QI for me.--Johann Jaritz 06:25, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sky blown out. Aber sowas von, da nützt auch die beste Stimmung nix. --Cccefalon 07:24, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Der Himmel ist nun mal nicht immer blau. Mir gefallen die dezenten Farben sehr gut; aber sicher ist das Geschmackssache. -- Spurzem 08:56, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The Wörnitz Harburger Stadtpark Valley is a romantic place.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 10:59, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 20:38, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Are you all blind-folded by spring mood? The branches are completly eaten away by the overblown sky. This has nothing to do with blue or grey sky, it is just a notable photographic mistake. I thought, I am dealing here with photographers but instead, I have to read a completly stupid support vote The Wörnitz Valley is a romantic place. This is kindergarden in it's purest and poorest form. --Cccefalon 07:47, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Just a little humor to bring joy, it's Spring as you say Smile Sorry for the geolocation errors, That said the pic seems (to me) technically correct, under a spring sky of April.- As said Spurzem "Le ciel n'est pas toujours bleu, en cette période. J'aime les couleurs subtiles très bien; mais cela est sûrement une question de goût"..--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 08:42, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as Cccfalon.--Hubertl 08:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, blown out sky --Denkmalhelfer 13:47, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 02:32, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Ehemaliges_Forsthaus_%28D-5-76-151-106%29_02.jpg[edit]

Ehemaliges Forsthaus (D-5-76-151-106) 02.jpg

  • Nomination Forsthouse in Nerreth, Wendelstein Middlefrankonia --Derzno 09:08, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
    Needs perspective correction and fix of the strong CA Poco a poco 10:12, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion ✓ Done new version uploaded. --Derzno 15:35, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
    QI -- Spurzem 07:41, 10 April 2015 (UTC) Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem 08:58, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
    The CA is gone but the perspective needs an improvement --Poco a poco 10:07, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support--Palauenc05 07:44, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It needs perspective correction. Too tight for my taste--Lmbuga 19:13, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Crop is really pretty tight. Light and colour are quite good imho --Aiwok 10:07, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 02:33, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Nyala_(Nyala_angasii)_female.jpg[edit]

Nyala (Nyala angasii) female.jpg

  • Nomination Nyala (Nyala angasii) female, uMkhuse Game Park, KwaZulu Natal --Charlesjsharp 22:50, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bad light, strong disturbing shadows and overexposed area on one leg --Christian Ferrer 11:14, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment New version uploaded with partial brightening. 2nd opinion please on this harsh oppose. I do not see bad light, or strong disturbing shadows --Charlesjsharp 20:19, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, the tree trunk, on the right side of the pic, brings back very disturbing shadows .--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ (talk) 13:10, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but a part of the tree end on the animal and confuse me. --Denkmalhelfer 13:46, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 02:35, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Nationaal Park Weerribben-Wieden. Locatie Weerribben. Rijp op eikenbladeren.JPG[edit]

Nationaal Park Weerribben-Wieden. Locatie Weerribben. Rijp op eikenbladeren.JPG

  • Nomination De Weerribben-Wieden National Park. Location Weerribben. Hoarfrost on oak leaves (Quercus).
    --Agnes Monkelbaan 17:48, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hoar frost is not sharp enough. --Charlesjsharp 23:02, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done New version.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:56, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment seems over-processed now, but see what others think, --Charlesjsharp 20:23, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Acceptable. --Cccefalon 06:57, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The colours of the previous version are more natural. Frost is a liquid. May be not so sharp --ArishG 05:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC))
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks fine for me but not fully sahrp. --Denkmalhelfer 13:44, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 02:35, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Aleksanterinkatu.jpg[edit]

Aleksanterinkatu.jpg

  • Nomination Aleksanterinkatu, Helsinki. --Óðinn 21:23, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient quality. Sorry. The latern at the left is cropped, people and latern at the right too. --XRay 04:34, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment New version uploaded. --Óðinn 04:38, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline?   --Cayambe 16:18, 15 April 2015 (UTC)

File:SAAP Hyd.jpg[edit]

SAAP Hyd.jpg

  • Nomination Entrance of erstwhile Sports Authority of Andhra Pradesh.--Nikhilb239 08:04, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient quality. Blurred, perspective distortion, not sharp enough (18mm with this lens is very often a problem!) --Hubertl 08:28, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I disagree. The image is somewhat tilted, what can be fixed easily. But where is the blur? Sharpness is completely acceptabel. --Smial 10:52, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose please see my note: very bad perspective distortion on the left side.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 13:17, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose With PEL, and wrong lighting IMO.--Jebulon 20:28, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 02:36, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Fields,_İmamoğlu_06.JPG[edit]

Fields, İmamoğlu 06.JPG

  • Nomination Fields in İmamoğlu, Adana - Turkey. --Zcebeci 12:33, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think it is tilted. Colours also a bit oversaturated. --Kadellar 15:01, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
    No saturation was applied. Pls see its other versions too. It was a sloppy land and therefore it may look like a bit tilted. Thanks for your kind review. --Zcebeci 00:03, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support QI for me. I do not see tilt and the colours are good. --Halavar 23:00, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support QI for me.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 10:26, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturated and looks tilted. -- Slaunger 20:31, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturated. I don't like the composition: too much sky (rule of thirds)--Lmbuga 14:06, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 12:52, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 12:33, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Clearly tilted, and I don't use the mountains as point of reference but what it appears to be a flat surface. --C messier 13:44, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry,oversaturated --Livioandronico2013 20:06, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't think it's oversaturated (though I might've saturated it a bit less myself) and I see no tilt. I like the composition. Reminds me of my township pictures. Jakec 20:07, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturated.--Jebulon 20:19, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 6 oppose → Decline?   --Jebulon 20:19, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Timetable (day 8 after nomination)[edit]

Fri 10 Apr → Sat 18 Apr
Sat 11 Apr → Sun 19 Apr
Sun 12 Apr → Mon 20 Apr
Mon 13 Apr → Tue 21 Apr
Tue 14 Apr → Wed 22 Apr
Wed 15 Apr → Thu 23 Apr
Thu 16 Apr → Fri 24 Apr
Fri 17 Apr → Sat 25 Apr
Sat 18 Apr → Sun 26 Apr