Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list

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


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]] 10:50, 1 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.
The new rule is effective now. Please nominate only a maximum of 5 images per day. [1]

April 1, 2015[edit]

March 31, 2015[edit]

March 30, 2015[edit]

March 29, 2015[edit]

March 28, 2015[edit]

March 27, 2015[edit]

March 26, 2015[edit]

March 25, 2015[edit]

March 24, 2015[edit]

March 23, 2015[edit]

March 22, 2015[edit]

March 20, 2015[edit]

March 19, 2015[edit]

March 18, 2015[edit]

March 16, 2015[edit]

March 9, 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:Boat passing ruined lighthouse, Teluk Penyu Beach, Cilacap 2015-03-21.jpg[edit]

Boat passing ruined lighthouse, Teluk Penyu Beach, Cilacap 2015-03-21.jpg

  • Nomination Boat passing ruined lighthouse, Teluk Penyu Beach, Cilacap --Crisco 1492 06:30, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion The upper part of the picture looks overexposed. If not, the weather was not good enough for taking a Quality Image.--Jebulon 09:03, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
    No highlights are blown, and the details of the clouds are all visible. There's no requirement in the criteria for QIs to be taken on clear days. Crisco 1492 09:25, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't like the detail: The subject is too little and could be cropped. Dark and without detail areas IMO--Lmbuga 20:45, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Already cropped out of the original. A bit of leading room shows that the boat is going somewhere, and not just idling.Crisco 1492 08:56, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good enough for QI. Cannot see severe technical problems or mistakes caused by the photographer. Of course with an expensive high end lens and a more recent DSLR noise and sharpness could be somewhat better. -- Smial 09:39, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Industar_61_LD_58_f28.jpg[edit]

Industar 61 LD 58 f28.jpg

  • Nomination Industar 61 L/D 58 mm f/2.8 --Denis Barthel 15:05, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --XRay 15:17, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I disagree, see notes --Hubertl 17:52, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I disagree, as Hubertl. Several dust spots (see notes). Greenish IMO--Lmbuga 17:40, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I disagree,--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 21:52, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Walhalla in Donaustauf bei Regensburg.JPG[edit]

Walhalla in Donaustauf bei Regensburg.JPG

  • Nomination Walhalla (Danube), Donaustauf near Regensburg, Bavaria, Germany Hilarmont 06:13, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too strong distortion. --Cccefalon 06:36, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I disagree - I think it's dramatic and QI --Bsmalley 01:57, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Cccefalon --Code 05:34, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I will have a try with the image today... Hilarmont 14:37, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
    ich glaub nicht, dass es geht. Das war schon vom Architekten so beabsichtigt. Nur können wir ihn ja nicht mehr befragen. Aber jeder der da schon mal hochgegangen ist, hat genau diesen Eindruck bekommen, wenn auch durch sein eigenes Hirn korrigiert. --Hubertl 14:49, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
    @Hubertl: Gehen tut es schon, nur mit recht aufwändigen Methoden weil dann auf gewissen Seiten etwas fehlt. ;o) Ich lasse das hier aber vorerst ins leere Laufen. :) Hilarmont 21:07, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too high contrast leads to clipping in the clouds, and lost detail in dark areas. Also CA (red-green). -- Smial 09:43, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Sesimbra March 2015-6a.jpg[edit]

Sesimbra March 2015-6a.jpg

  • Nomination 18th century pannel of azulejos in the Church of Nossa Senhora do Castelo, Sesimbra, Portugal -- Alvesgaspar 09:55, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Can you fill the bottom left corner? --C messier 11:50, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Thank you for noticing Alvesgaspar 20:32, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Both sides leaning out. Mattbuck 09:05, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't think that this type of detailed reviewing is useful. Maybe it is leaning but the angle is so small that it doesn't affect the overall quality of the image. To CR thus. Alvesgaspar 19:09, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as Mattbuck.--Hubertl 09:46, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noisy and somewhat unsharp corners. Why ISO800 and f/4 with a non moving subject? -- Smial 10:40, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Colchicum montanum MHNT 2007.40.99.jpg[edit]

Colchicum montanum MHNT 2007.40.99.jpg

  • Nomination fruits and seeds of colchicum of Pyreneen - Fruits et graines de Colchique des Pyrénées --Ercé 16:19, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
    Cut-out is way too jagged.Crisco 1492 01:03, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting info.svg Info new version --Ercé 10:27, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
    Still really rough along the tendril. Crisco 1492 03:47, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality for me. --Bff 12:19, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Cut-out is still disturbing.Crisco 1492 12:27, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Cardona March 2015-6a.jpg[edit]

Cardona March 2015-6a.jpg

  • Nomination View from the Castle of Cardona to north, Spain -- Alvesgaspar 10:05, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It feels a bit washed out - could you reduce the blue shadows and midtones? Also I think there are a couple of dust spots. Mattbuck 22:52, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Alvesgaspar 20:34, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I can't see any difference between the versions. Mattbuck 23:07, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • There is some difference in the contrast and saturation. Anyway this is what the scene looked like when the shot was made. A careful exam of the detail will show that the colours are not washed up and that image quality is very good. Alvesgaspar 21:50, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm sending the nomination to CR, as the above comment doesn't seem to help and has the practical effect of an oppose vote. Alvesgaspar 19:13, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion

File:Macaron_with_decoration.jpg[edit]

Macaron with decoration.jpg

  • Nomination A macaron with decoration. --Hangsna 20:37, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Withdrawn
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality for a single shot, maybe a bit too noisy at the bottom. Third opinion appreciated --Hubertl 22:21, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Clearly visible dust spots. Sharpness below studio shot requirements. --Cccefalon 04:55, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Clearly visible dust spots, way too noisy, motion and/or defraction blurr. --Tobias "ToMar" Maier 13:42, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noise (maybe improvable), dust spots (clearly fixable) and the light is bad for food photography (probably not fixable). I'm sorry, but this could be done better. --Code 05:36, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as for user:code. The reflections caused by the lighting lead to underexposure and dull colors of all other parts of the image. -- Smial 10:33, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination OK, thanks for good feedback! /Hangsna 20:55, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 09:56, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

File:2015_Pendrive_Kingston_32_GB.jpg[edit]

2015 Pendrive Kingston 32 GB.jpg

  • Nomination Pendrive Kingston DataTraveler Ultimate 3.0 G3 32GB --Jacek Halicki 09:23, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality.--Johann Jaritz 10:31, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quality could be beter in this kind of picture--Lmbuga 23:43, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Can't see anything wrong with that? --El Grafo 13:23, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ground plane is not the first choice but still fine --Tobias "ToMar" Maier 13:29, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good quality.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 16:02, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 09:57, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

File:2014_Erywań,_Park_przy_Kaskadach_(10).jpg[edit]

2014 Erywań, Park przy Kaskadach (10).jpg

  • Nomination Park on the way to Cascade. Yerevan, Armenia. --Halavar 23:59, 19 March 2015 (UTC)* Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment its tilted ccw. --Hubertl 07:18, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
    ✓ Done New fixed version uploaded. Please take a look again. --Halavar 12:02, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK for me now. --Hubertl 08:59, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The left side is leaning out slightly. --Mattbuck 09:05, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl 09:58, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

File:2014_Erywań,_Park_przy_Kaskadach_(11).jpg[edit]

2014 Erywań, Park przy Kaskadach (11).jpg

  • Nomination Park on the way to Cascade. Yerevan, Armenia. --Halavar 23:59, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment its tilted ccw. --Hubertl 07:18, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done New fixed version uploaded. Please take a look again. --Halavar 12:02, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK for me now. --Hubertl 08:59, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm not quite convinced - the background focus is problematic - too sharp to not be distracting, too blurred to be the subject. --Mattbuck 09:05, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Mattbuck --Code 05:31, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? Code 05:31, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Reading railway station MMB 82 70802 43037 43172.jpg[edit]

Reading railway station MMB 82 70802 43037 43172.jpg

  • Nomination Reading railway station. Mattbuck 07:37, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Good quality. --Cccefalon 08:00, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose CA along the platform edge. --Steindy 23:16, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
    @Steindy: ✓ Done Mattbuck 09:11, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK for me --Rjcastillo 13:48, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

File:London MMB »0O0 Silwood Junction 378204.jpg[edit]

London MMB »0O0 Silwood Junction 378204.jpg

  • Nomination 378204 at Silwood Junction. Mattbuck 07:56, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 09:48, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose CA on two rails on the bottom right. --Steindy 23:32, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
    @Steindy: I couldn't actually see any CA, but I have desaturated it anyway. Mattbuck 09:13, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unfortunate composition due to crop at the bottom --Moroder 20:30, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Echternach, Place du Marche = beschermd erfgoed positie1 foto6 2014-06-09 10.03.jpg[edit]

Echternach, Place du Marche = beschermd erfgoed positie1 foto6 2014-06-09 10.03.jpg

  • Nomination Echternach-Luxemburg, view to a street --Michielverbeek 20:39, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry unsharp,noise and need perspective --Livioandronico2013 22:41, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Repairable, IMO --Hubertl 08:38, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't think,see note --Livioandronico2013 13:27, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose you are right Livioandronico2013, But why do we meet each other always at the gargoyle themes? ;-)

--Hubertl 09:04, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. Noise reduction without loss of too much detail is difficult, but possible. -- Smial 09:51, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 07:54, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

File:2014_Erywań,_Park_przy_Kaskadach_(14).jpg[edit]

2014 Erywań, Park przy Kaskadach (14).jpg

  • Nomination Park on the way to Cascade. Yerevan, Armenia. --Halavar 23:59, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Not the best quality, but ok in my opinion. --Hubertl 07:20, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but it needs perspective correction and at least a bit sharpening. --Hockei 17:48, 28 March 2015 (UTC) Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Better. --Hockei (talk) 10:26, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Halavar, won´t you do this slight perspective correction? --Hubertl 17:59, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Sorry for the delay. I uploaded now new fixed version. Hope it's good now. --Halavar 23:42, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 08:36, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Lasiommata_megera_-_Wall_brown.jpg[edit]

Lasiommata megera - Wall brown.jpg

  • Nomination A sunbathing Wall brown (Lasiommata megera). Canyon Kapıkaya, Karaisalı - Adana, Turkey. --Zcebeci 11:05, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK for me. --Hubertl 02:26, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not for me. Insufficient quality in my eyes. --Hockei 13:18, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ok for QI. --Code 05:40, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It needs be cropped IMO; and, ather cropped, the subject id too little and with poor detail.
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → More votes? Code 05:40, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Christina_Novelli.jpg[edit]

Christina Novelli.jpg

  • Nomination Christina Novelli at Nextdoor in Honolulu, Hawaii, May 15, 2014 --Peterchiapperino 00:19, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too noisy, this camera obviously doesn´t allow this high ISO rate, even with flash. --Hubertl 00:55, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A little noise is okay when it comes to concert photos taken in the dark, otherwise there would rarely be a quality concert photo unless taken in the day time. ~~~~
Its not only the noise, the only part, which has an acceptable sharpness, ist the left arm. --Hubertl 09:26, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like this picture but sorry, too much noise. --Billy 14:22, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too noisy, and tattoo left arm is completely blurred.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 15:09, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice colours, and composition. Noise is absolutely acceptable, but the face is out of focus, sorry. -- Smial 09:45, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 17:49, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

File: Ford A, Bj. 1929 (2011-09-24 3).JPG[edit]

Ford A, Bj. 1929 (2011-09-24 3).JPG

  • Nomination Ford A built in 1929 at Moselschiefer-Classic 2011 -- Spurzem 10:53, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient quality. Sorry. The part of the red car bottom left is too disturbing. --XRay 11:55, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
    Glaub mir, ich habe hier ausgezeichnete Bilder von Autos mit weit mehr störenden Dingen als diesem gesehen. Aber was soll's. -- Spurzem 12:01, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Das glaube ich dir ohne Weiteres. Man bemüht sich immer um objektive Kriterien, aber das ist oft genug gar nicht einfach. Das Auto ist schön getroffen, aber ich finde schon, dass der rote Kotflügel ablenkt. Aber insgesamt bin ich doch sehr angetan von deinen Bildern.--XRay 13:50, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
    This is not a German forum !!!--Jebulon 15:57, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Hahahahah I love you Jebulon Face-grin.svg--Livioandronico2013 16:25, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • To me the red fender isn't that disturbing, hence: Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Palauenc05 21:17, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Don´t worry about messing around in german, they just discussed, if a three-minute-egg really needs three minutes or in fact four. I suggest four and a half.--Hubertl 09:30, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Steindy 23:04, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
    @Steindy: I've just fixed your review. Your review said "Good quality", so I replaced the template "o" by "s".--XRay 07:18, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 16:00, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 08:34, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Oachkatzlschwoaf_(Eichhörnchen).jpg[edit]

Oachkatzlschwoaf (Eichhörnchen).jpg

  • Nomination squirrel. By User:AnjaSuess --Neuroxic 07:04, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Billy69150 07:55, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I disagree, clearly visible dust spots. --Cccefalon 11:46, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose lighting not QI --Charlesjsharp 18:21, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry! Poor little squirrel, he's very sad for IQ.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 17:32, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dustspot, squirrel blurred, looks like there is also posterisation. --C messier 19:05, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Decline?   --C messier 19:05, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Dubiosis-17.jpg[edit]

Dubiosis-17.jpg

  • Nomination Dubiosis beim dark Munich Festival 2014 --Pistenwolf 08:40, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noisy and unsharp around head --Daniel Case 05:59, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
    I do not agree with that, because it is not possible to shoot concerts under live conditions without some noisy, and in this case it is not much.--Pistenwolf 08:37, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too tight crop on top --Cccefalon 13:17, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment .... and please resolve redlink cat --Cccefalon 13:18, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose guitar and hands are too noisy.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 15:05, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent composition and good handling of difficult lighting. Noise is as to be expected. -- Smial 09:39, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 15:26, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Rapture-2.jpg[edit]

Rapture-2.jpg

  • Nomination Rapture Beim dark Munich Festival 2014 --Pistenwolf 08:40, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noisy --Daniel Case 05:59, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I do not agree with that, because it is not possible to shoot concerts under live conditions without some noisy. In this case i dont see much noisy.--Pistenwolf (talk) 08:49, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Acceptable noise for concert photo. One of the good ones of this kind here in QI from view of composition. Please resolve the redlink category. --Cccefalon 11:34, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very poor quality in my opinion. A concert photo does not necessarily has to be like this. Alvesgaspar 21:52, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose poor quality --PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 14:57, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Steindy 23:02, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thank you very much for the Review. For me the term "Poor Quality" or "Very Poor Quality " alone is not really meaningful and sould be justified. --Pistenwolf (talk) 11:15, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The same like Cccefalon Hilarmont 14:22, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice. Noise could be artistic, but I don't like the composition. Guitarrist and right area are too disturbing IMO--Lmbuga 17:29, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Difficult lighting, great shot. -- Smial 10:03, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 15:27, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Trostburg_Stiegenaufgang_innen.JPG[edit]

Trostburg Stiegenaufgang innen.JPG

  • Nomination The castle Trostburg in South Tyrol - Interior --Moroder 19:00, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient quality. --Tobias "ToMar" Maier 23:53, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I disagree. I don´t see Insufficiency, except some understandable noise in the dark areas. --Hubertl 05:02, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. Perhaps it should not be so bright but it is QI for me. -- Spurzem 12:53, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry,but too blurry for me--Σπάρτακος 12:03, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too unsharp and noisy. Alvesgaspar 21:54, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good for me.- All black and white shades are good --PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 17:35, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Steindy 23:01, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Half the ISO and double the exposure Time would have made this image come out in a better quality. --Ilmfoto 14:25, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't understand the subject of the picture (Seeing dates of the picture). As Alvesgaspar is too unsharp and noisy IMO. --Lmbuga 23:06, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm not sure I understand your question: the subject is the interior (architecture) of a castle probably 700 years old as written in the file description. I don't see anything wrong with the dates?! --Moroder 08:59, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
      • I just wanted to ask more accurate description. I also have inaccuracies in my pictures, because English--Lmbuga 17:23, 31 March 2015 (UTC). Sorry, perhaps an inopportune comment--Lmbuga 17:25, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not convinced with sharpness, noise, and unfortunate lighting. -- Smial 10:14, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 6 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 15:28, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Spotted_eagle_owl_(Bubo_africanus)_chick.jpg[edit]

Spotted eagle owl (Bubo africanus) chick.jpg

  • Nomination Spotted eagle owl (Bubo africanus) chick, Tswalu Kalahari Reserve, South Africa --Charlesjsharp 09:46, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion

* Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's pity that fingers disturb the picture.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 14:08, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Perhaps I should have explained that this wild chick was found on the ground having fallen out of its nest. The game ranger picked it up and replaced it in its nest and two days later we confirmed that the parent had accepted the chick back, which is quite unusual. --Charlesjsharp 18:27, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't think it should be rejected without an opinion following my explanation above. --Charlesjsharp 18:07, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment it´s not rejected right now. But you need additional other opinions in fact! --Hubertl 20:27, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support the fingers gives you a sizedimension, therefore for me its not disturbing that much.--Hubertl 09:08, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor dof, sorry, Poor composition IMO; Too tight at bottom --Lmbuga 22:56, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl 07:44, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Common_pheasant_(Phasianus_colchicus)_cock.jpg[edit]

Common pheasant (Phasianus colchicus) cock.jpg

  • Nomination Common pheasant (Phasianus colchicus) cock, Otmoor RSPB Reserve, Oxfordshire --Charlesjsharp 23:22, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no good crop, the feathers are cut.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 14:10, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
    * Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's not actually cropped. I left out a small portion of the tail as it allows the main body and head of the bird to be more in close up
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good, but the tail, cropped out, is disturbing--Lmbuga 17:15, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 02:12, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Trostburg_Bergfreid_Ostseite.JPG[edit]

Trostburg Bergfreid Ostseite.JPG

  • Nomination The castle Trostburg - Tower with clock east face --Moroder 13:46, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Please check for halos at the top.--XRay 17:25, 20 March 2015 (UTC)Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't know how to fix them provided they need to be fixed. --Moroder 17:04, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment May be it's oversharpened?--XRay 06:35, 22 March 2015 (UTC) Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment No I never sharpen my images, I like them smooth. I had already long discussions on QIC about the halo between hi contrast interfaces, typically the roofs against the sky, there is always a halo in digital Photography of the size of 3-5 pixels which is 1/1000 compared to the whole image which has a huge size. Therefor imo the halo is irrelevant. Thanks for the review, cheers --Moroder 09:51, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Perspective correction overdone IMO at the top (see the globe), and not enough on sides. Tight crop. Blown sky at left. Halo. Light not optimal. Not a QI (my taste), sorry.--Jebulon 10:01, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
    I accept everything which is opinable but the "overblown sky " is not true, please look at the histogram. --Moroder 16:59, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support for me it´s QI, the castle is seen from this position as it is seen on the picture. --Hubertl 19:59, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support QI for me --Isiwal 00:24, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not a good framing, which is a fundamental component of Photography. Alvesgaspar 21:57, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting question.svg Question Whats wrong with the framing? --Moroder 18:45, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • The crop is too tight and the shooting position is not the best: not only extreme distortion results but also is makes unclear what the subject is: only the tower? Alvesgaspar 19:25, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Since I can't afford a chopper, I take the pictures from the bottom where I access on foot between different constraining walls. Yes, the subject is the tower as described.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. @Moroder: Here we have typical very small sharpening halo, which is ok. In earlier discussions it was much broader ;-) -- Smial 10:19, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 09:36, 28 March 2015 (UT

File:Red-billed_tropicbird_(Phaethon_aethereus_mesonauta)_with_chick.jpg[edit]

Red-billed tropicbird (Phaethon aethereus mesonauta) with chick.jpg

  • Nomination Red-billed tropicbird (Phaethon aethereus mesonauta) with chick, Little Tobago --Charlesjsharp 10:13, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline Large area of overexposure in the centre. --Mattbuck 22:52, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
    New version uploaded reducing over-exposure --Charlesjsharp 09:38, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good for me now.--Hubertl 19:40, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor framing (too tight crop), most of subject is unsharp. Alvesgaspar 21:58, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As Alvesgaspar and too tight crop--Lmbuga 22:54, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose idem.--Jebulon 09:12, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Jebulon 09:12, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Münster,_St.-Paulus-Dom,_Skulptur_-Kardinal_von_Galen-_--_2014_--_3985.jpg[edit]

Münster, St.-Paulus-Dom, Skulptur -Kardinal von Galen- -- 2014 -- 3985.jpg

  • Nomination Sculpture “Clemens August Graf von Galen” (Toni Schneider-Manzell, 1978) at St. Paul's Cathedral, Münster, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 06:25, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Overexposure in the sky. --Mattbuck 22:52, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
    ✓ Fixed I just fixed the small overexposed parts (and CAs). Thanks for your advise.--XRay 06:33, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ok now.--Hubertl 19:41, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem 22:03, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor lighting, subject unsharp. Alvesgaspar 22:11, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Steindy 23:05, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor lighting, subject unsharp. As Alvesgaspar--Lmbuga 22:51, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Symbol support vote.svg Promoted   --Hubertl 01:58, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Iguana iguana, Gembira Loka Zoo, Yogyakarta, 2015-03-15 03.jpg[edit]

Iguana iguana, Gembira Loka Zoo, Yogyakarta, 2015-03-15 03.jpg

  • Nomination Captive Iguana iguana, Gembira Loka Zoo, Yogyakarta --Crisco 1492 02:35, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 11:38, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Head does not seem to be in focus. --Charlesjsharp 13:35, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Agree, focus is more on the creature's belly, but I think it's enough. Crisco 1492 09:14, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support yes for me too --Christian Ferrer 19:10, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Overall unsharpness. Alvesgaspar 21:59, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not sharp enough.--Jebulon 09:08, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Jebulon 09:08, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

File:Carcharodus_alceae_-_Mallow_Skipper.jpg[edit]

Carcharodus alceae - Mallow Skipper.jpg

  • Nomination A Mallow Skipper (Carcharodus alceae) feeding nectar of Ground pine (Ajuga chamaepitys) flowers. Canyon Kapıkaya, Karaisalı - Adana, Turkey. --Zcebeci 11:05, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not a great composition, but the subject is focussed. Therefore QI for me. Even when weak. Third opinion appreciated --Hubertl 11:13, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not really QI for me. --Charlesjsharp 13:51, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition: The picture needs a crop (composition) and, with the crop, is too litle--Lmbuga 17:09, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Symbol declined.svg Declined   --Hubertl 02:06, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Head of dead fish.JPG[edit]

Head of dead fish.JPG

  • Nomination head of dead fish, senegal --Jjgodox 19:10, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Please identify fish --Charlesjsharp 11:05, 11 March 2015 (UTC) identification done Jjgodox 17:32, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK now, though sharpness could be better. --Martin Falbisoner 12:25, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm not quite convinced as to the general JPEG quality. I'd like a few more opinions. --Mattbuck 22:31, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As Mattbuck. Alvesgaspar 22:07, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I really like this pic. It seems plenty sharp to me and it has a lot of cool insect activity. Bsmalley 03:00, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It needs more identify (not only Sphyraena sp.) IMO. Not categorized as Sphyraena or Category:Unidentified Sphyraena. Detail could be better and oversharpened IMO--Lmbuga 17:05, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Symbol declined.svg Declined   --Hubertl 17:54, 29 March 2015 (UTC)