Commons:Valued image candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
This project page in other languages:

English | français | polski | русский | +/−

Skip to image nominations Skip to image nominations Most valued reviews Skip to most valued reviews Skip to set nominations Skip to set nominations
Valued image seal.svg

These are the candidates to become valued images. Please note that this is not the same as featured pictures or quality images. If you simply want some feedback on your pictures you can get that at photography critiques.

Single images can be proposed for valued image (VI) status. Candidates must be proposed as being the most valuable of all Commons' images within a specified scope. Judging is carried out according to the valued image criteria.

A Most Valued Review (MVR) is opened where there are two or more candidates competing within essentially the same scope.

The rules for promotion can be found at Commons:Valued image candidates/Promotion rules.

An image which has previously been declined can be renominated within the same scope only if the issues leading to the original decline have been addressed. Previously nominated images that were closed as "undecided" can be renominated at any time. Once a candidate achieves VI or VIS status it can normally be demoted only if some better candidate replaces it during an MVR.

If you would like to nominate an image for VI status, please do so following the instructions below. If you are proposing a better candidate within essentially the same scope as an image which already has VI status, please open an MVR.

Skip to current candidates Valued Image links:

How to nominate an image for VI status[edit]

Nominations will be evaluated using the criteria listed at Commons:Valued image criteria. Please read those criteria before submitting an image to help cut down on the number of candidates that have a low chance of success. Make sure you understand the concept of scope and how to choose the correct scope for your nomination. Please make sure that your proposed image fulfills all of the necessary criteria before nominating it. For example, if it needs to be geocoded, do that in advance. If no appropriate categories exist, create and link them beforehand. Although some reviewers may help by fixing minor issues during the review process, it is your responsibility as nominator to ensure your image ticks all the necessary boxes before you propose it. If you nominate an image that ignores one of the criteria, don't be surprised if it fails VI review.

Adding a new nomination (image)[edit]

Step 1: Copy the image name into this box (excluding the File: prefix), at the end of the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Valued image candidates/My-image-filename.jpg. Then click on the "Create new nomination" button.


Step 2: Follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save the resulting VIC subpage.

Step 3: Manually add the candidate image towards the end of Commons:Valued image candidates/candidate list (under the heading "New valued image nominations"), as the last parameter in the VICs template. Click here, and append the following line as the last parameter of the relevant section:

|My-image-filename.jpg

so that it looks like this:

{{VICs
 ...
 |My-image-filename.jpg
}}

and save the candidate list.


Renomination[edit]

Declined VICs can be renominated by any registered user, but only after one or more of the root cause(s) leading to a decline has/have been addressed. Undecided VICs can be renominated as is although it is still recommended to consider and fix issue(s) which may have hindered a promotion of the candidate in the previous review.

Besides fixing issues with the previous nomination the following procedure shall be followed upon renomination.

Step 1: Edit the candidate subpage you intend to renominate. All declined and undecided VICs are placed in either Category:Declined valued image candidates, or Category:Undecided valued image candidates and sorted by the date of the previous nomination.

Step 2: Replace the previous nomination date and time by pasting in

|date={{subst:VI-time}}

Step 3: Replace the "undecided" or "declined" status with "nominated" (or "discussed" if you intend to add it to a Most Valued Review).

Step 4: If the previous nominator was a different user replace the nominator parameter with

|nominator=~~~

Step 5: If the candidate does not already have an archive link to previous reviews: Create one using the following procedure.

  • Cut the text in the previous review section (leave the closing braces "}}")
  • replace the review parameter with
|review=
{{subst:VIC-archive}}
}}
  • Save the page.
  • There is now a red link to Previous reviews. Click the link to create the archive subpage and paste in the previous reviews.
  • Save the previous reviews archive page

Step 6: Add the candidate to the candidates list.

How to open a Most Valued Review[edit]

There must be at least two candidates competing within essentially the same scope to open an MVR. Each needs its own VIC subpage, which should be created as above if it does not already exist. Then, add the following section at the end of the page Commons:Valued image candidates/Most valued review candidate list:

=== Scope ===
{{VICs
  |candidate1.jpg
  |candidate2.jpg
}}

where candidate1.jpg and candidate2.jpg are the VIC subpages of the respective candidates. If need be, also remove the relevant image(s) from the list in Pending valued image candidates

If one of the candidates is an existing VI within essentially the same scope, the original VIC subpage is re-opened for voting by changing its status to status=discussed and new reviews are appended to the original VIC subpage. However, any original votes are not counted within the MVR.

Each candidate should have its status parameter set to discussed, while the MVR is ongoing.

How to review the candidates[edit]

How to review an image[edit]

Any registered user can review the valued image candidates. Comments are welcome from everyone, but neither the nominator nor the original image author may vote (that does not exclude voting from users who have edited the image with a view to improving it).

Nominations should be evaluated using the criteria listed at Commons:Valued image criteria. Please read those and the page on scope carefully before reviewing. Reviewing here is a serious business, and a reviewer who just breezes by to say "I like it!" is not adding anything of value. You need to spend the time to check the nomination against every one of the six VI criteria, and you also need to carry out searches to satisfy yourself on the "most valuable" criterion.

Review procedure[edit]

  • On the review page the image <!!--or image set--> is presented in the review size. You are welcome to view the image in full resolution by following the image links, but bear in mind that it is the appearance of the image at review size which matters.
  • Check the candidate carefully against each of the six VI criteria. The criteria are mandatory, and to succeed the candidate has to satisfy all six.
  • Use the where used field, if provided, to study the current usage of the candidate in Wikimedia projects. If you find usage of interest do add relevant links to the nomination.
  • Look for other images of the same kind of subject by following the links to relevant categories in the image page, and to any Commons galleries.
    • If you find another image which is already a VI within essentially the same scope, the candidate and the existing VI should be moved to Most Valued Review (MVR) to determine which one is the more valued.
    • If you find one or more other images which in your opinion are equally or more valued images within essentially the same scope, you should nominate these images as well and move all the candidates to an MVR.
  • Once you have made up your mind, edit the review page and add your vote or comment to the review parameter as follows:
You type You get When
*{{Comment}} My Comment. -- ~~~~ *Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment My comment. -- Me You have a comment.
*{{Info}} My information. -- ~~~~ *Pictogram voting info.svg Info My information. -- Me You have information.
*{{Neutral}} Reason for neutral vote. -- ~~~~ *Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Reason for neutral vote. -- Me You are uncertain or wish to record a neutral vote.
*{{Oppose}} Reason for opposing vote. -- ~~~~ *Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Reason for opposing vote. -- Me You think that the candidate fails one or more of the six mandatory criteria.
*{{Question}} My question. -- ~~~~ *Pictogram voting question.svg Question My question. -- Me You have a question.
*{{Support}} Reason for supporting. -- ~~~~ *Symbol support vote.svg Support Reason for supporting. -- Me You think that the candidate meets all of the six mandatory criteria.
  • If the nomination fails one of the six criteria, but in a way that can be fixed, you can optionally let the nominator know what needs to be done using the {{VIF}} template.
  • Your comment goes immediately before the final closing braces "}}" on the page.


How to update the status
  • Finally, change the status of the nomination if appropriate:
    • status=nominated When no votes or only neutral votes have been added to the review field (blue image border).
    • status=supported When there is at least one {{Support}} vote but no {{Oppose}} votes (light green image border).
    • status=opposed When there is at least one {{Oppose}} vote but no {{Support}} votes (red image border).
    • status=discussed When there is at least one {{Oppose}} vote and one {{Support}} vote (yellow image border).


Remember the criteria: 1. Most valuable 2. Suitable scope 3. Illustrates well 4. Fully described 5. Geocoded 6. Well categorized.

Changes in scope during the review period[edit]

The nominator is allowed to make changes in scope as the review proceeds, for example in response to reviewer votes or comments. Whenever a scope is changed the nominator should post a signed comment at the bottom of the review area using {{VIC-scope-change|old scope|new scope|--~~~~}}, and should also leave a note on the talk page of all existing voters asking them to reconsider their vote. A support vote made before the change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn.


Pending valued image candidates[edit]

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache
12014 closed valued image candidates
 Closed as Nominations 
Promoted
  
9910 (82.5%) 
Undecided
  
786 (6.5%) 
Declined
  
1318 (11%) 


New valued image nominations[edit]

   
Argane oil production.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Chrumps (talk) on 2014-07-23 22:49 (UTC)
Scope:
The production of argan oil by traditional methods

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Geolocalization is needed + Maybe it would be nice to add the names of town and country in the scope. --JLPC (talk) 17:40, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Champniers 86 Croix Jubilé 1826 situation 2014.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
JLPC (talk) on 2014-07-24 13:57 (UTC)
Scope:
Christian Jubilee cross, Champniers, Vienne, France
Reason:
The only one in scope -- JLPC (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful. --P e z i (talk) 18:31, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 18:38, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
San paolo ,basilica.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Livioandronico2013 (talk) on 2014-07-24 21:14 (UTC)
Scope:
San Paul,Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The scope must not contain model only category where the image is placed --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:49, 25 July 2014 (UTC)✓ Done Thanks for review --Livioandronico2013 (talk) 07:16, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Pontchâteau-01.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Wayne77 (talk) on 2014-07-24 22:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Chapels in Loire-Atlantique , Chapel dedicated to St. Mary Magdalene, Pontchâteau, exposure S-SE.

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:51, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Église Saint-Exupère de Toulouse Interior Pulpit.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2014-07-25 05:52 (UTC)
Scope:
Church Saint-Exupère from Toulouse, pulpit.

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 15:20, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Home of Luigi Nono, Zattere al ponte Longo, Dorsoduro, Venice, Italy -Plaque.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2014-07-25 05:55 (UTC)
Scope:
Zattere (Venice) Memorial plaque on the birthplace of composer Luigi Nono
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't think this plaque is special enough to merit its own scope. Sorry. Yann (talk) 13:43, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram voting info.svg Scope changed from Memorial plaque on the birthplace of composer Luigi Nono, in Venice. to Zattere (Venice) Memorial plaque on the birthplace of composer Luigi Nono {{{3}}}

  • Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Scoop most suitable --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 14:03, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The both, this plaque and this image, have the merit to exist, new scope is ok for me. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:54, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Open for review.
Staustufe Fankel.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ikar.us (talk) on 2014-07-25 11:23 (UTC)
Scope:
Fankel barrage, Mosel river, Germany
Reason:
The berrage has two articles in de:, one for the river lock and one for the hydroplant, and is valued as prototype for all the Mosel barrages. -- Ikar.us (talk)

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 15:27, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Seilfähre StJosef.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ikar.us (talk) on 2014-07-25 11:31 (UTC)
Scope:
St. Josef reaction ferry, Mosel river, Germany

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment. Could you fix the upper right corner, please ? --JLPC (talk) 15:22, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

  • How could it be fixed? Is the result of a necessary rotation. Clones trees would look more ugly IMO. --Ikar.us (talk) 15:44, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment If not fixed, I'm afraid the image will not be considered valuable. --Joydeep Talk 15:54, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
  • New file uploaded : not perfect of course, but better, I think. Anyway, feel free to reverse. Friendly. --JLPC (talk) 17:36, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Looks really good, thank you! --Ikar.us (talk) 17:53, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Looks very good. Very well edited. --Joydeep Talk 18:23, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good & Useful. Good example of cooperation --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:14, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Open for review.
Chateau Tanlay galerie trompe-l-oeil.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Myrabella (talk) on 2014-07-25 12:25 (UTC)
Scope:
Gallery painted in trompe-l’œil (Château de Tanlay), Burgundy, France
Reason:
The most complete available view of this amazing gallery covered with grisaille frescoes painted in trompe-l’œil. -- Myrabella (talk)

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope --JLPC (talk) 15:28, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Carica papaya 14 7 2012.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Joydeep Talk on 2014-07-25 16:20 (UTC)
Scope:
Carica papaya (Papaya) fruit in plant

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope --JLPC (talk) 16:43, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Civray 86 Fresque St Nicolas 2013.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
JLPC (talk) on 2014-07-25 16:46 (UTC)
Scope:
Fresco of the Patron Saint, church of Civray, Vienne, France, interior
Reason:
Best in small scope -- JLPC (talk)

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope. --Joydeep Talk 20:07, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
CarlStraat Köln.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ikar.us (talk) on 2014-07-25 16:55 (UTC)
Scope:
Diving bell river service vessel Carl Straat, Germany

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Good but a caption in English is required. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:17, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Ehemaliges Feuerwehr Zeughaus Aspang Markt DSC 4147w.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
P e z i (talk) on 2014-07-25 20:16 (UTC)
Scope:
Former fire station in Aspang-Markt, SE view

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 21:38, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Todbjerg Tower 2014-07-25.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Slaunger (talk) on 2014-07-25 21:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Todbjerg Tårnet
Used in:
da:Todbjerg Tårnet
Reason:
New photo from today. There are other good photos in the category, which also illustrates the subject well. The nominated photo is perspective corrected and has better resolution. I also think the light is good. -- Slaunger (talk)

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:19, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Curit - Shinkolobwe.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Klaproth (talk) on 2014-07-25 22:23 (UTC)
Scope:
Needles of curite
Used in:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curit

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Look at the change in the scope are you okay? --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:23, 26 July 2014 (UTC) Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes. On way or another, it is the only high-res image of idiomorphic curite needles, so either scope is okay. -- Klaproth (talk) 20:10, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Ferussacia submajor 01.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2014-07-26 05:32 (UTC)
Scope:
Ferussacia submajor, Shell

Pictogram voting info.svg Info I found no other picture of this species in the web.

  • Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope and very valuable. --Joydeep Talk 06:47, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Open for review.
Kwakwaka'wakw transformation mask.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Myrabella (talk) on 2014-07-26 07:46 (UTC)
Scope:
Kwakwaka'wakw transformation mask (human figure shape)

Symbol support vote.svg Support Well photographed. Best in scope. -- Klaproth (talk) 20:14, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Gonocerus acuteangulus MHNT mating.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2014-07-26 12:39 (UTC)
Scope:
Gonocerus acuteangulatus, mating

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope. --Joydeep Talk 16:07, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Ponte de la Crea (Venice).jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2014-07-26 12:44 (UTC)
Scope:
Ponte de la Crea, in Venice. Southwest exposure.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful. --P e z i (talk) 15:02, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Open for review.
Aspang-Markt Brunnen Hauptplatz DSC 1036w.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
P e z i (talk) on 2014-07-26 14:47 (UTC)
Scope:
Fountain at Hauptplatz, Aspang-Markt, South view
Used in:
de:Liste der denkmalgeschützten Objekte in Aspang-Markt

Symbol support vote.svg Support useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:30, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Wetterhaeschen Aspang-Markt Hauptplatz DSC 1057w.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
P e z i (talk) on 2014-07-26 17:47 (UTC)
Scope:
Wetterhäuschen am Hauptplatz, Aspang-Markt, NW view

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:30, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Wetterhaeuschen Aspang Markt DSC 6005w.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
P e z i (talk) on 2014-07-26 17:47 (UTC)
Scope:
Wetterhäuschen am Hauptplatz, Aspang-Markt, SW view

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:31, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Steyr Zwischenbrücken 4 DSC 2736w.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
P e z i (talk) on 2014-07-27 01:32 (UTC)
Scope:
Zwischenbrücken 4 (Steyr), South view
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Maybe he should be one category for the scope. Or two nominations for the same image. Why not? --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:38, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done I agree. Scope changed. --P e z i (talk) 17:47, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Open for review.
Pterotmetus staphyliniformis MHNT Forme brachyptère.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2014-07-27 06:35 (UTC)
Scope:
Pterotmetus staphyliniformis, shortwing form.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful. --P e z i (talk) 12:34, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Open for review.
Chiesa dei Gesuiti (Venice) Chaire.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2014-07-27 06:47 (UTC)
Scope:
Interior of Chiesa dei Gesuiti (Venice), pulpit.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful. --P e z i (talk) 12:34, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Open for review.
Cerithium dialeucum 01.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2014-07-27 06:48 (UTC)
Scope:
Cerithium dialeucum (White-studded Cerith), Shell
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful. --P e z i (talk) 12:37, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Open for review.
Michaelerkirche Steyr Westturm DSC 2720w.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
P e z i (talk) on 2014-07-27 12:30 (UTC)
Scope:
Michaelerkirche (Steyr), Western clock tower

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:04, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Michaelerkirche Steyr Ostturm DSC 2722w.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
P e z i (talk) on 2014-07-27 12:30 (UTC)
Scope:
Michaelerkirche (Steyr), Eastern clock tower

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:05, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Michaelerkirche Steyr Giebelfresco DSC 2723w.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
P e z i (talk) on 2014-07-27 16:31 (UTC)
Scope:
Michaelerkirche (Steyr), pediment fresco

Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:57, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Franklin Pierce.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Designate (talk) on 2014-07-27 18:29 (UTC)
Scope:
Franklin Pierce
Used in:
Franklin Pierce on Wikipedia
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment over all, it's better than File:Pierce.jpg quality-wise, but those black circles are really disturbing. We have some people around who are really good in restorating old photographs – maybe one of them could give it a bit of a cleanup? --El Grafo (talk) 15:51, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Open for review.
Michaelerkirche Steyr Portal DSC 2726w.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
P e z i (talk) on 2014-07-27 22:48 (UTC)
Scope:
Michaelerkirche (Steyr), portal
Used in:
de:Michaelerkirche (Steyr)

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:08, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Cronenbourg-Gare.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ikar.us (talk) on 2014-07-27 23:49 (UTC)
Scope:
Cronenbourg station, Strasbourg, France
Reason:
Includes the characteristic part of the facade and the memorial. -- Ikar.us (talk)

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Picus viridis MHNT ZOO 2010 11 162 HdB Miramas.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2014-07-28 05:12 (UTC)
Scope:
Picus viridis (European Green Woodpecker), eggs
Open for review.
Pala di San Zaccaria (Venezia).jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2014-07-28 05:15 (UTC)
Scope:
San Zaccaria Altarpiece
Open for review.

Closed valued image candidates[edit]

Most valued reviews[edit]

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache

All open candidates in an MVR has to be in the discussed state, while the review is ongoing. Only when all candidates are due for closure can the MVR be closed.

Refer to the promotion rules and the instructions for closure for details.

Shiva-Parvati-SFAsianArtMuseum.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Hispalois (talk) on 2013-08-11 00:04 (UTC)
Scope:
Shiva and Parvati in sculpture.
Reason:
Only image in Commons of Shiva and Parvati (both in sculpture and in painting) that displays Shiva with an erect penis. -- Hispalois (talk)

Symbol support vote.svg Support best in rich scope. Good caption --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:14, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:22, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 18:38, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Pending valued image set candidates[edit]

New valued image set nominations[edit]

Warning This section has been deactivated because of technical issues. Please do not add any VI set candidate.

Closed valued image set candidates[edit]