Commons:Featured picture candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from Featured picture candidates)
Jump to: navigation, search
This project page in other languages:

Alemannisch | asturianu | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | English | español | suomi | français | galego | हिन्दी | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lëtzebuergesch | молдовеняскэ | norsk bokmål | português | polski | română | русский | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | 粵語 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Skip to current candidates Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates


FPCandiateicon.svg

Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures.

Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, and current month.

For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election.

Formal things[edit]

Nominating[edit]

Guidelines for nominators[edit]

Please read the complete guidelines before nominating.

This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:

  • Licensing - Images licensed with solely "GFDL" or "GFDL and an NC-only license" are not acceptable due the restrictions placed on re-use by these licenses.
  • ResolutionImages (with the exception of animations, videos, and SVGs) of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are 'strong mitigating reasons'. Note that a 1600 × 1200 image has 1.92 Mpx, just less than the 2 million level. A 1920 × 1080 image, commonly known as Full HD, has 2.07 Mpx, just more than the 2 million level.
Graphics on Commons are not only viewed on conventional computer screens. They may be used in high-resolution print versions, and the images may be cropped to focus on portions of the image. See Commons:Why we need high resolution media for more information.
  • Scans – While not official policy, Help:Scanning provides advice on the preparation of various types of images that may be useful.
  • General quality – pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality.
  • Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer. Digital manipulation for the purpose of correcting flaws in an image is generally acceptable, provided it is limited, well-done, and not intended to deceive.
    • For photographs, typical acceptable manipulations include cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and colour/exposure correction. More extensive manipulations, such as removal of distracting background elements, should be clearly described in the image text, by means of the {{Retouched picture}} template. Undescribed or mis-described manipulations which cause the main subject to be misrepresented are never acceptable.
    • For historic images, acceptable manipulations might include digitally fixing rips, removal of stains, cleanup of dirt, and, for mass-produced artworks such as engravings, removal of flaws inherent to the particular reproduction, such as over-inking. Careful colour adjustments may be used to bring out the original work from the signs of ageing, though care should be taken to restore a natural appearance. The original artistic intent should be considered when deciding whether it is appropriate to make a change. Edits to historic material should be documented in detail within the file description, and an unedited version should be uploaded and cross linked for comparison.
  • Valueour main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that:
    • almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others,
    • night-shots are pretty but normally more details can be shown on pictures taken at daytime,
    • beautiful does not always mean valuable.


Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents

There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolours, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject.

Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the original painting are generally not considered featurable.

Works that may be scanned include most works created by processes that allow for mass distribution. For instance, illustrations published with novels. For these, it is generally accepted that a certain amount of extra manipulation is permissible to remove flaws inherent to one copy of the work, since the particular copy – of which hundreds, or even thousands of copies also exist – is not so important as the work itself.

Works created to serve a purpose include diagrams, scientific illustrations, and demonstrations of contemporary artistic styles. For these, the main requirement is that they serve their purpose well.

Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable:

  • Notable in its own right: Works by major artists, or works that are otherwise notable, such as the subjects of a controversy.
  • Of high artistic merit: Works which, while not particularly well known, are none the less wonderful examples of their particular type or school of art.
  • Of high historic merit: The historical method values very early illustrations of scenes and events over later ones. Hence, a work of poor quality depicting a contemporaneous historical event can be nonetheless important, even if the artistic merit is relatively low. Likewise, scans or photographs of important documents – which may not be at all artistic – nonetheless may be highly valuable if the documents are historically significant. The reason for the image's historical importance should be briefly stated in the nomination, for those reviewers unfamiliar with the subject.
  • Of high illustrative merit: Works that illustrate or help explain notable subjects, for instance, illustrations of books, scientific subjects, or technical processes. The amount of artistic merit required for these will vary by subject, but, for instance, an illustration that makes the working of a complicated piece of machinery very clear need not be notable as a piece of artwork as well, whereas an illustration for a book might well be expected to reach much higher artistic standards.

Digital restorations must also be well documented. An unedited version of the image should be uploaded locally, when possible, and cross-linked from the file hosting page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced."

Photographs

On the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.

  • Focus – every important object in the picture should normally be sharp.
  • Exposure refers to the shutter diaphragm combination that renders an image with a tonal curve that ideally is able to represent in acceptable detail shadows and highlights within the image. This is called latitude. Images can be on the low side of the tonal curve (low range), the middle (middle range) or high side (upper range). Digital cameras (or images) have a narrower latitude than film. Lack of shadow detail is not necessarily a negative characteristic. In fact, it can be part of the desired effect. Burned highlights in large areas are a distracting element.
  • Composition refers to the arrangement of the elements within the image. The "Rule of Thirds" is a good guideline for composition and is an inheritance from the painting school. The idea is to divide the image with two imaginary horizontal and two vertical lines, thus dividing the image into thirds horizontally and vertically. Centering the subject is often less interesting than placing the subject in one of the "interest points", the 4 intersection between these horizontal and vertical lines intersect. Horizons should almost never be placed in the middle, where they "cut" the image in half. The upper or lower horizontal line is often a good choice. The main idea is to use space to create a dynamic image.
    • Foreground and background – foreground and background objects may be distracting. You should check that something in front of the subject doesn't hide important elements and that something in background doesn't spoil the composition (for example that the streetlight doesn't "stand" on someone's head).
  • Movement control refers to the manner in which motion is represented in the image. Motion can be frozen or blurred. Neither one is better than the other. It is the intention of representation. Movement is relative within the objects of the image. For example, photographing a race car that appears frozen in relation to the background does not give us a sense of speed or motion, so technique dictates to represent the car in a frozen manner but with a blurred background, thus creating the sense of motion, this is called "panning". On the other hand, representing a basketball player in a high jump frozen in relation to everything else, due to the "unnatural" nature of the pose would be a good photograph.
  • Depth of field (DOF) refers to the area in focus in front of and beyond main subject. Depth of field is chosen according to the specific needs of every picture. Large or small DOF can either way add or subtract to the quality of the image. Low depth of field can be used to bring attention to the main subject, separating it from the general environment. High depth of field can be used to emphasize space. Short focal length lenses (wide angles) yield large DOF, and vice versa, long focal lenses (telephotos) have shallow DOF. Small apertures yield large DOF and conversely, large apertures yield shallow DOF.

On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, colour, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.

  • Shape refers to the contour of the main subjects.
  • Volume refers to the three dimensional quality of the object. This is accomplished using side light. Contrary to general belief, front lighting is not the best light. It tends to flatten subject. Best light of day is early morning or late afternoon.
  • Colour is important. Over saturated colours are not good.
  • Texture refers to the quality of the surface of the subject. It is enhanced by side lighting… it is the "feel" to the touch.
  • Perspective refers to the "angle" accompanied by lines that disappear into a vanishing point that may or may not be inside the image.
  • Balance refers to the arrangement of subjects within the image that can either give equal weight or appear to be heavier on one side.
  • Proportion refers to the relation of size of objects in picture. Generally, we tend to represent small objects small in relation to others, but a good technique is to represent small objects large contrary to natural size relationship. For example, a small flower is given preponderance over a large mountain…. This is called inversion of scales.
Not all elements must be present. Some photographs can be judged on individual characteristics, that is, an image can be about color or texture, or colour AND texture, etc.
  • Noise refers to unwanted corruption of colour brightness and quality and can be caused by underexposure. It is not a desirable quality and can be grounds for opposition.
  • Symbolic meaning or relevance … Opinion wars can begin here … A bad picture of a very difficult subject is a better picture than a good picture of an ordinary subject. A good picture of a difficult subject is an extraordinary photograph.
Images can be culturally biased by the photographer and/or the observer. The meaning of the image should be judged according to the cultural context of the image, not by the cultural context of the observer. An image "speaks" to people, and it has the capacity to evoke emotion such as tenderness, rage, rejection, happiness, sadness, etc. Good photographs are not limited to evoking pleasant sensations …

You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating.

Video and audio

Set nominations

Sets are temporarily disallowed for technical reasons; will reopen soon.

If a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set.

  • All images should be processed and presented in a similar manner to ensure consistency amongst the set.
  • All images should be linked to all others in the "Other Versions" section of the image summary.
  • If the set of subjects has a limited number of elements, then there should be a complete set of images. This may result in images in this kind of set with no "wow" factor, and perhaps little value on their own. Their value is closely bound to the value of having a complete set of these subjects. The decision to feature should be based on this overall value.
  • If the set of subjects is unlimited, the images should be chosen judiciously. Each image should be sufficiently different to the others to add a great deal of value to the overall set. The majority of images should be able to qualify for FP on their own.
  • All images should be of high technical quality.

Adding a new nomination[edit]

If you believe that you have found or created an image that could be considered valuable, with appropriate image description and licensing, then do the following.

Step 1: copy the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg. Then click on the "create new nomination" button.

All single files:

For renominations, simply add /2 after the filename. For example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2


Set nominations ONLY

Sets are temporarily disallowed for technical reasons; will reopen soon.

Step 2: follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save that page.

Step 3: manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list: Click here, and add the following line to the TOP of the nominations list:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg}}

Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify him/her using {{subst:FPC-notice}}.

Voting[edit]

Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for his/her own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed.

You may use following templates:

  • {{Support}} (Symbol support vote.svg Support),
  • {{Oppose}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose),
  • {{Neutral}} (Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral),
  • {{Comment}} (Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment),
  • {{Info}} (Pictogram voting info.svg Info),
  • {{Question}} (Pictogram voting question.svg Question),
  • {{Request}} (Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request).

You may indicate that the image has no chance of success with the template {{FPX|reason - ~~~~}}, where reason explains why the image is clearly unacceptable as a FP. The template can only be used when there are no support votes other than the one from the nominator.

A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above.

Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:

  • No reason
  • "I don't like it" and other empty assessments
  • "You can do better" and other criticisms of the author/nominator rather than the image

Remember also to put your signature (~~~~).

Featured picture delisting candidates[edit]

Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep It deserves to remain a featured picture
{{Delist}} Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist It does not deserve to be a featured picture anymore.

This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Do not replace the old image with the new image as an FP.
{{Delistandreplace}} Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace Replace the current FP with the proposed replacement.

If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box:


In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include:

  • Information on the origin of the image (creator, uploader);
  • A link to the original FP nomination (it will appear under "Links" on the image description page);
  • Your reasons for nominating the image and your username.

After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list.

As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the original creator, uploader(s), and nominator with a link to the delisting candidate. {{subst:FPC-notice-removal}} can be used for this purpose.

Featured picture candidate policy[edit]

General rules[edit]

  1. The voting period is 9 complete days counted from the nomination. After the end of this period the result will be determined. Votes added on day 10 and after are not counted.
  2. Nominations by anonymous contributors are welcome
  3. Contributions to discussion by anonymous contributors are welcome
  4. Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Exception: registered users can always vote in their own nominations no matter the account age and number of edits.
  5. Nominations do not count as votes. Support must be explicitly stated.
  6. Nominators and authors can withdraw their nominated pictures at any time. This is done by adding the following template: {{withdraw}} ~~~~
  7. Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project.
  8. Rules of the 5th day based on vote counts on day number 5 (day of nomination + 5)
    1. Pictures are speedy declined if they have no support (apart from the nominator).
    2. Pictures are speedy promoted if they have 10 support votes or more and no oppose votes. (Note that if it takes more than five days to reach this threshold, the picture can be promoted as soon as it is reached.)
    3. Once either speedy criterion is reached, the voting period is considered closed, and no more votes may be added.
  9. Pictures tagged {{FPX}} may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied, provided there are no support votes other than that of the nominator.
  10. Pictures tagged {{FPD}} (FP-Denied) may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied.
  11. Only two active nominations by the same user (that is, nominations under review and not yet closed) are allowed. The main purpose of this measure is to contribute to a better average quality of nominations, by driving nominators/creators to choose carefully the pictures presented to the forum.

Featuring and delisting rules[edit]

A candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:

  1. Appropriate license (of course)
  2. At least 7 supporting votes
  3. Ratio of supporting/opposing votes at least 2/1 (a two-thirds majority); same for delist/keep votes
  4. Two different versions of the same picture cannot both be featured, but only the one with higher level of support, as determined by the closer. Whenever the closer is not sure which version has consensus to be featured, he/she should attempt to contact the voters to clarify their opinions if not clear from the nomination page.

The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5. There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations.

The FPCBot handles the vote counting and closing in most cases, current exceptions are candidates containing multiple versions of the image as well as FPXed and withdrawn nominations. Any experienced user may close the requests not handled by the bot. For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished. Also note that there is a manual review stage between the bot has counted the votes and before they are finally closed by the bot, this manual review can be done by any user that are familiar with the voting rules.

Above all, be polite[edit]

Please don't forget that the image you are judging is somebody's work. Avoid using phrases like "it looks terrible" and "I hate it". If you must oppose, please do so with consideration. Also remember that your command of English might not be the same as someone else's. Choose your words with care.

Happy judging… and remember... all rules can be broken.

See also[edit]

Table of contents[edit]

List may contain works considered Not Safe for Work (nudity).

Nominators are requested, out of courtesy, to include the {{nsfw}} template with such images. Users may select the gadget in user preferences "Deferred display of images tagged with {{nsfw}} on COM:FPC" to enable the template's effect of hiding the image until selected.

Contents

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

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Bristol Balloon Fiesta 2009 MMB 05.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Nov 2014 at 13:37:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A hot air balloon at the Bristol Balloon Fiesta.

File:Kiikla mõisa tuuleveski.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2014 at 23:41:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ruins of Kiikla Manor windmill, Estonia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Amadvr - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 23:41, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 23:41, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great composition and fitting background (sky). --Graphium 07:48, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 08:43, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 11:49, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Dilma Rousseff - foto oficial 2011-01-09.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2014 at 22:12:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Swidnica - Kosciol Pokoju- wnetrze 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2014 at 21:50:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior of Peace Church in Świdnica, Poland
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think the colours of the pipe organs are good, according to other images in Category (for example: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%C5%9Awidnica,_Ko%C5%9Bci%C3%B3%C5%82_Pokoju.JPG) --Halavar (talk) 23:55, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Colours of organs are to be as they are. I want them to be cold, metallic and constrasting with warmth of this wooden church. This is not unnatural colour. --Jar.ciurus (talk) 14:30, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Wroclaw - Uniwersytet Wroclawski o poranku.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2014 at 21:48:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wrocław University Main Building, Poland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jar.ciurus - uploaded by Jar.ciurus - nominated by Halavar -- Halavar (talk) 21:48, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Halavar (talk) 21:48, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. (There's a dust spot in the top left corner) -- Colin (talk) 22:59, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 23:29, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support excellent - blue hour as it should be! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:44, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kadellar (talk) 09:01, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 11:49, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 14:41, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 15:04, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'd complain it was a little overprocessed, but being a long blue-hour exposure and getting so much else right more than offsets that. Daniel Case (talk) 16:07, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Martin and Colin. --Graphium 17:57, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 18:28, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Rainbow Horseshoe Falls.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2014 at 20:02:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A boat of the canadian company Hornsblower on the Niagara river, next to the Horseshoe Fall (Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Gzzz
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral as creator -- Gzzz (talk) 20:02, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Graphium 17:27, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

File:2014 Fields Swaledale Gunnerside.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2014 at 16:46:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fields and drystone walls in Swaledale near Gunnerside
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Fields and drystone walls in Swaledale near Gunnerside
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by -- Kreuzschnabel 16:46, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kreuzschnabel 16:46, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cute --LivioAndronico talk 17:05, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral f/2.8 was not a good choice for sharpness, there was enough light.--Hubertl (talk) 18:22, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 19:52, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose quality and wow not the best I'm afraid --A.Savin 21:07, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree the DoF isn't as good as it could be but I love the zig-zag walls and farm buildings. -- Colin (talk) 23:07, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Colin. Might be great, but this one is still good. --Halavar (talk) 23:59, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 12:15, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Knock Out IMG 3830.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2014 at 16:23:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rose 'Knock Out' in the Volksgarten in Vienna in the late afternoon
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, nominated and uploaded by Hubertl -- Hubertl (talk) 16:23, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Hubertl (talk) 16:23, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow and technical issues like lighting. --Graphium 16:35, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
    • What technical issues "like lighting" do you mean exactly? Sounds interesting! --Hubertl (talk) 17:22, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
      • Either the lighting conditions were too dim, or the photo is underexposed. Either way, it doesn't make the photo look good. Sorry. --Graphium 18:28, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 16:58, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 17:33, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Underexposed and DoF too shallow. Daniel Case (talk) 18:24, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
    • With all due respect, but there are no underexposed areas at all. Even not in the original RAW file. You can prove it, there is no noise, so I did´nt used any noise reduction. I had to lower the luminance a little bit down, because of the extreme red. Have you opened it on a calibrated monitor or just with your notebook? DOF can be a problem with an object, larger than five centimeter. Even with f/9.0, the end of the really sharp area from this lens. --Hubertl (talk) 20:44, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
      • I refer you to Graphium's response above. I can barely see it. I understand you had to take the luminance down. But did you do it to the whole image, or just the flower? Daniel Case (talk) 05:56, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Variante[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg InfoI changed it now to the completely unprocessed version.

Rosa 'Knock out'

File:2014 Kłodzko, ul. Grottgera 17.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2014 at 15:21:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:21, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:21, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 16:04, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 16:58, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There’s something about the sky I don’t like. The colour is too blazing, too bright and saturated, and there’s a bright seam along the skyline on the roofs as if there has been severe manipulation. --Kreuzschnabel 17:30, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel, looks overprocessed. Daniel Case (talk) 18:26, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel. And I don't even care too much whether it's processed or not - the strong saturation is not pleasing to look at and distracts from the rest of the image, so it would make sense to reduce the saturation here imo. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 18:32, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel. --Graphium 18:36, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Graphium 07:47, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
I reduced sky saturation and brightness. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 19:01, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Still a bright seam along the roofs, and the previousw colouring still shines through the leaves on the left. What’s worse, there’s now a posterized zone in the sky, see annotation. --Kreuzschnabel 20:51, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
Lock again, I redeveloped raw file. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 22:47, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Apollo of the Belvedere.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2014 at 08:51:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Apollo of the Belvedere
  • I added an annotation where the edge is partly blurred. Looks like severe denoising to me, at least it’s not natural. --Kreuzschnabel 05:43, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I can't see that it would be overexposed. Good composition and good quality for me. -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 22:18, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Río Moraca, norte de Podgorica, Montenegro, 2014-04-14, DD 09.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 22:20:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Morača river, near the road from Podgorica to Serbia, Montenegro. The river is the most relevant one in Podgorica, capital of Montenegro.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Morača river, near the road from Podgorica to Serbia, Montenegro. The river is the most relevant one in Podgorica, capital of Montenegro. All by me, Poco2 22:20, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 22:20, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I noticed also a better? crop. Please think about it. Thanks, --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:47, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
    Alchemist-hp: I followed your advice and ✓ cropped it Poco2 20:21, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice. I would remove the green pillow, the profile of aluminum, the rubber piece and black tube(marked), are not important disturbances but do not help. The four power towers on the right, should lose the contrast selectively, because they seem a reflection stripe IMO. The Alchemist-hp crop suggestion is good. -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 16:28, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
    Not sure what you expect. Do you want me to clone all that out? Poco2 20:22, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
    I do not expect, is only a suggestion(always are suggestions) to clone, are not relevant elements (IMO). But if you prefer the realistic per Hubertl, np for my: "are not important".  ; ) -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 21:07, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
    Ok, thanks, I am not sure, though about it. I can easily get rid of that but if posible I'd avoid this kind of editing. Maybe we hear more opinions. Poco2 21:16, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice, even (or especially) the rubbish is pretty realistic.--Hubertl (talk) 18:18, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Graphium 18:31, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Image:Fijian soldier runs up the Masada Snake Path.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 20:31:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Fijian UN observer (holiday) runs the snake path up the Masada Plateau, Israel.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by jotpe - uploaded by jotpe - nominated by Jotpe -- Jotpe (talk) 20:31, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jotpe (talk) 20:31, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Interesting but it lacks a little something for me, sorry. It is maybe a bit tilted on left. -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 19:57, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Gjirokastër Castle (by Pudelek) 3.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 15:18:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gjirokastër Castle, Albania - Clock Tower
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 15:18, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Another version of [1]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 15:18, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support well seen --Böhringer (talk) 07:43, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A technically sound image but it lacks wow, I'm afraid. --Graphium 18:32, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Nice picture and good composition. -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 08:40, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

File:금동약사불입상.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 14:11:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Statue of Buddha made in Unified Silla period.

File:Homosexuality in Khajuraho sculpture.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 14:02:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Homosexuality in Khajuraho sculpture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dey.sandip - uploaded by Dey.sandip - nominated by Dey.sandip -- Dey.sandip (talk) 14:02, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dey.sandip (talk) 14:02, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral We have only 2 FPs of this famous monument, but this composition is not good enough. The statues at the bottom are half cut. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:45, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
    • I have cropped slightly from the bottom to correct the composition. Thanks. -- Dey.sandip (talk) 15:02, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
      • OK, neutral now. Yann (talk) 15:41, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 22:21, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Tyto alba - Cetrería - 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 13:27:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A barn owl (Tyto alba) just about to pose on the falconer's hand.

File:Pont sur l'Orb, Roquebrun.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 12:18:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bridge over the Orb River, Roquebrun, France.

File:Mitterbach Gemeindealpe Panorama West 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 11:41:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panorama from Gemeindealpe Mitterbach (Lower Austria) westwards
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Panorama from Gemeindealpe Mitterbach (Lower Austria) westwards. All by Uoaei1 -- Uoaei1 (talk) 11:41, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uoaei1 (talk) 11:41, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great. — revimsg 14:59, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Although I wouldn't have minded a wider one. Daniel Case (talk) 15:02, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 19:07, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 00:03, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 05:36, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unfortunate light, sorry. I do not like those typical backlight clouds. A shot in the morning had been remarkably better. --Tuxyso (talk) 13:00, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Tuxyso. It may have worked with the three trees out of shadow. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 18:21, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 21:37, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ApolloWissen (talk) 11:46, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Oberes Belvedere Wien, Panorama.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 11:19:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Oberes Belvedere Wien
weiß nicht; wegschneiden kann man immer --Böhringer (talk) 21:07, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
Nach einem Zuschnitt hast Du aber eine harmonische Komposition. Der viele nichtssagende Himmel stört da nur. Grüße, --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:34, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
+1. --King of ♠ 00:03, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Variante[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info de (die erste sah ich mehr als Zentralperspektive) hier die, von Alchemist vorgeschlagene Variante:

Oberes Belvedere Wien

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support better for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:10, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I prefer this version --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:40, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 18:19, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:45, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ApolloWissen (talk) 11:42, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wish we could see all the bottom wall, but with this crop it's less of an issue. Daniel Case (talk) 16:06, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Cultural Heritage Preservation Institute of Belgrade by night.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2014 at 07:57:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cultural Heritage Preservation Institute of Belgrade by night
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 07:57, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 07:57, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Wall and staircase are lit, the subject is not (or at lest insufficiently). Kleuske (talk) 10:26, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info perhaps an image in the "blue hour" for a better color contrast (blue - yellow). --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:49, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

File:2014 Lądek-Zdrój, kościół Narodzenia NMP 07.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2014 at 16:56:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 16:56, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 16:56, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Not a Diliff but not too bad either :-) There’s a perspective problem though. The chain of the chandelier is not vertical though I am pretty sure it ought to be. --Kreuzschnabel 19:58, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done I corrected tilt. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 20:55, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Worthy of Diliff, however. Daniel Case (talk) 04:45, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
    • Except my interiors are typically a wider angle of view and 30-60 megapixels, whereas this one is 8 megapixels. Diliff (talk) 09:43, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Although I would have liked to see it a bit brighter and with more of the foreground seating (which would then require a panorama). Diliff (talk) 09:43, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 11:24, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 12:07, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 12:36, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:48, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 18:46, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Basik07 (talk) 23:35, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 09:26, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:09, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Kallady Bridge Batticaloa.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2014 at 01:23:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kallady Bridge was built in 1924 by British Ceylon
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by AntanO -- AntonTalk 01:24, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- AntonTalk 01:24, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose chromatic aberration, overprocessed, poor detail, low resolution and uninteresting composition of 95 % blue areas, sorry – the sky would be much more interesting with some clouds in it :-) Try to shift the horizon out of center next time. Either more sky or more ground, but 50:50 is a boring view in most cases. And I’d suggest to consult QIC before putting up a nomination here – an image failing QIC would have to be very special to success here. --Kreuzschnabel 10:17, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose And on top (or on bottom?) of that, the bridge is too small a part of the picture for it to be a useful picture of it. Daniel Case (talk) 20:31, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice, but to much sky and to much water. The bridge is to small. A panorama of several images will be a better option for this kind of images. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:07, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Puente de la Margineda, Santa Coloma, Andorra, 2013-12-30, DD 08-10 HDR.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2014 at 23:00:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

HDR shot of the Pont de la Margineda is a bridge located in Santa Coloma d'Andorra, Andorra la Vella Parish, Andorra. The bridge was built in the 14-15th century and spans the Gran Valira river (biggest in the country). The archstones are pumice, to keep the structure light whereas the walls are made of granite.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info HDR shot of the Pont de la Margineda is a bridge located in Santa Coloma d'Andorra, Andorra la Vella Parish, Andorra. The bridge was built in the 14-15th century and spans the Gran Valira river (biggest in the country). The archstones are pumice, to keep the structure light whereas the walls are made of granite. All by me, Poco2 23:00, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 23:00, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The dramatic river is really good. Pictogram voting question.svg Question Is it a normal light traffic sign at the very right? The red cross looks somehow retouched. --Tuxyso (talk) 23:05, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
    There is no edition apart of the HDR fusion, but I could edit it to make it "smoother". It is not a normal traffic light, but rather a sign to specify the direction of a lane that changes during the day. It could be that the cross was even blinking, I am not sure. Poco2 23:16, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Picturesque. --King of ♠ 04:33, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose lacking objectiveness for an encyplopedic picture, average technical accomplishment --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:55, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I suggest to crop out the top part (top left is very blurry, and the steel pylon doesn’t add value) and a bit off the right to get rid of the traffic signage. This crop would shift the bridge over the center close to golden ratio. See image note on nomination page. --Kreuzschnabel 10:27, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the way the eye follows the river to the bridge and the distant hills. I would be reluctant to crop out any of the sky, which adds to the overall picture. It is unfortunate that one's browser tends to start viewing a 100% picture at the top-left, where the image is most blurred, but the rest of the image is sharp. -- Colin (talk) 13:25, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:32, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 12:46, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Why not encyclopedic? Because of long exposure or because of HDR? Nice image. --Kadellar (talk) 13:32, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very Nice. The long exposure displays perfectly the fluid flow around the rocks, is a great example of turbulent flow in channels formed by spaced obstacles as in industrial heat exchangers, the photo it perfect for this exemplification. Added the category fluid flows. The other cut is better but I prefer this one, I like cirrus, are beautiful. -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 12:15, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --· Favalli ⟡ 22:26, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

HDR shot of the Pont de la Margineda is a bridge located in Santa Coloma d'Andorra, Andorra la Vella Parish, Andorra. The bridge was built in the 14-15th century and spans the Gran Valira river (biggest in the country). The archstones are pumice, to keep the structure light whereas the walls are made of granite.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Alternative with new crop Poco2 19:50, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as above --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:55, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This one is better. Yann (talk) 15:43, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Composition wise, I like this one more. While the sky was nice, it now seems to have a better focus on the main subject (the river and the valley). It is not too light, not too tight. What comes to the objectiveness, the colors look quite natural to me. The major enchancement seems to have been done for bringing back the sky (otherwise overblown) where the use of HDR is quite reasonable. To be honest, I don't see a major lack of encyclopedic value - atleast not because of that. --Ximonic (talk) 15:55, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — revimsg 16:48, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Because commons is art too, the perfect is enemmy of art --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:42, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:50, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 14:33, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but I do not like the top crop with the truncated hill at the left. --Tuxyso (talk) 15:55, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like this version for focusing mainly on the bridge :-) --Kreuzschnabel 16:52, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 17:35, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I support the other one -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 17:57, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Nature in Margarita Island, Nueva Esparta, Venezuela 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2014 at 10:13:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nature in Margarita Island, Nueva Esparta, Venezuela 01.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 10:13, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose 1. Bad file name. Taxa name of the species shown is necessary at leat in the description. 2. Too noisy. 3. Unfortunate crop (too much space on the right, too little animal on the left). --Kreuzschnabel 11:09, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done Thanks, nice review, however, change filename is some complex, I preffer wait after to this nomination end. Thanks --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:59, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Busy background due to wide focal length. The intention may me to show its habitat; but it (the execution) seems very amateur to me. Jee 16:30, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
It would be more interesting than to reach a conclusion as that photography is amateur, using objective evidence, beyond the composition itself. Judging this composition as if it were a zoo without taking into account the conditions of access to inhabit an almost extinct expecie, it seems very amateurish. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:57, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
I've a (language) difficulty to follow you. But I checked your previous FPs, including one I supported. It seems you are using wide angle for more DOF and then removing/blurring the background. I can see some missing parts in one picture and honestly I don't know how useful such edits in Wikimedia projects. Jee 07:52, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, I'm not following u, please, could you explain what you mean with honestly I don't know how useful such edits in Wikimedia projects --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 08:17, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
My understanding is that Wikimedia projects prefer an "accurate" representation of the subject. That's why Commons:Image guidelines and en:Wikipedia:Featured picture criteria only encourages a very "limited" editing. The problem of selective blurring is that we lose many "accurate" information about the shape, colour, furs, etc. on the edges of a subject. I don't know how vital it is; that's why I said honestly I don't know. But FP should be the "best representation of the subject" in every aspects; so I personally don't support such edits. (I'm not talking about removing a distracting background element away from the subject.) Jee 08:56, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
For "best representation of the subject" or "best in scope", I invite you to COM:VI. If you consider that these sections should change some things, I invite you to visit the discussion pages and propose the necessary changes, but please, do not mess this nomination with comments like honestly I don't know how useful such edits in Wikimedia projects that have nothing to do with this nomination. I'm really making a big effort to assume good faith. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 10:43, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose We have two FP's of this species by you, both very similar views of the head of an iguana on this island. What makes this one superior to those? Do you want to delist? -- Colin (talk) 13:44, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Maybe I'm a fan of iguanas. I know it's hard for you to see the differences, but each iguana has its own peculiarities and details in his head. For an iguana, maybe all humans have a similar head. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:02, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Quite possible but if there are hundreds of slightly different iguana faces that does not force us to have hundreds of similar iguana FPs. --Kreuzschnabel 20:01, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
We have thousands of QI "trains in stations". :-) -- Colin (talk) 23:33, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment. I do not think an iguana put a gun to your head to force us to select their head like FP, however, this is the view of everyone, for me this iguana is very special, since I was a kid was called the iguana boy not because of my love for iguanas, but nowadays I think are important to human survival because they promote biodiversity. It is a personal opinion, and I respect everyone's opinion, especially negative votes with objective arguments. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 22:16, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Cheetah Brothers AdF.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2014 at 07:20:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Two young cheetah brothers cleaning each other after having fed. Cheetah are solitary animals but when they are young they stay together for some time, in so-called coalitions, that help them survive until they become mature individuals.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This image is not at all challenging form a technical point of view, but I think it is very inspirational: it shows brotherhood, fraternal love, cooperation, mutual help... The key in terms of timing was to get both tongues out. All by me-- Arturo de Frias Marques (talk) 07:20, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arturo de Frias Marques (talk) 07:20, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In despite of the overcategorization of the file (you can delete Category:Acinonyx (countains Acinonyx jubatus) and Category:Botswana (countains Okavango Delta)) -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 08:35, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done and pointed Arturo to COM:OVERCAT for an explanation and instructions. -- Slaunger (talk) 11:03, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 09:05, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:04, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I think it would be more impressive with a tighter crop (suggestion added in file page). Would make it too small though. --Kreuzschnabel 11:11, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
    @Kreuzschnabel: please add your proposals or suggestions only at the nomination pages. Our Commons rule ;-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:27, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
    All right, thanks --Kreuzschnabel 11:43, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment In the EXIF it says "(c) 2012 Arturo de Frias. Reproduction prohibited without prior written consent. Please contact arturodefriasphoto@yahoo.com or visit www.arturodefrias.com". I think this is misleading given that the file is licensed as CC-BY-SA 4.0. Arturo de Frias Marques, if you are in doubt how to adjust your EXIF template, such that is aligned for CC-BY-SA, have a look at a random file page of mine for an example. When I designed my EXIF template for Commons uploads I spend some time researching how the recommended EXIF format is for compliance to CC-BY-SA. -- Slaunger (talk) 11:13, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
    • I use Jeffrey Friedl's Creative Commons Lightroom Plugin. This supports versions 3 and 4 of CC and contains some sanity checks to make sure you have filled in the correct options. I combine this with a "wiki" template that applies the plugin and makes sure I have chosen the correct licence.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great subject, well focused and exposed. Other crops are indeed possible (I think a square one looks pretty good) and I would be very tempted to clone out some of the blades of grass that cover the left cheetah. -- Colin (talk) 12:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kadellar (talk) 14:03, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thanks everybody for your comments / suggestions. I have uploaded a new version, with a slightly tighter crop, and without the copyright info as suggested by Slaunger. Sorry about the (c), all my files have it and I forgot to delete it when uploading as FPC. Colin, you are right, a square crop would be good, but I tend to keep the original dimensions. Also right in that cloning out the grasses would help but again here I prefer to keep the file as similar to the original as possible. I will have in mind the Categories point in the future...
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:26, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 20:29, 27 October 2014 (UTC) Thanks for uploading a new version with an EXIF which is not in contradiction with the chosen license. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:29, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 19:03, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support yes, of course. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:51, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBruce1eetalk 11:23, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 15:09, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ApolloWissen (talk) 11:45, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Spanish Civil War - Mass grave - Estépar, Burgos.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2014 at 19:39:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

About 30 assassinated people in a mass grave. They were killed in August-September 1936, at the beginning of the Spanish Civil War in Estépar (Burgos), northern Spain. They were presumably republicans.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Mario Modesto Mata - uploaded by Mario Modesto Mata - nominated by Mario Modesto Mata -- Mario Modesto Mata (talk) 19:39, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mario Modesto Mata (talk) 19:39, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent and very impressive. Do you know if there are nationalist, or republican victims ? Did they have been shot ? Some corpses look like if they have wrists bound back...--Jebulon (talk) 21:23, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentDear Jebulon. In this case, only Republicans were assassinated, or saying in a better way, non-fascists. There were also some Nationalist's massacre in Paracuellos del Jarama, in Madrid. But in this case, primarily Republicans. And to your second question. Although this image has not the better angle shot, some of the skulls have in their back a hole, and in some cases, we could identify the bullets inside them. --Mario Modesto Mata (talk) 07:28, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
      • Even if I'm not sure that the word "fascist" is good for the spanish extreme right wing, so-called "nationalists" (no matter, it is a long discussion...), I thank you very much for this very interesting informations. I'm very interested by spanish history, and by the story of the Civil War. It seems that you were present during this excavation, and that there is another grave at right ? Do you think these victims could be identified ? --Jebulon (talk) 11:38, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
        • You are right. We can discuss for a long time about the term fascist applied for Spanish Nationalists. Anyway, I was there, participating for two days in the field season. And there are at least 4 mass graves there, that one you can see in the upper right corner, another one which is further, and another one on the left, which is still not excavated. Experts are planning to dig it next year. What I can tell you is that in the three mass graves already excavated, 70 people were identified. Forensic anthropologists took the skeletons to the lab and effectively they are trying to identify each of them, to give, if exists nowdays, to their families. --Mario Modesto Mata (talk) 19:32, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Baresi F (talk) 23:05, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 06:56, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Very impressive document. It should be in school textbooks. --Arturo de Frias Marques (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 08:39, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 09:04, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pugilist (talk) 13:19, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry to spoil the party – without doubt it’s impressive and of highest historical value, but in the present form the composition looks rather random to me, and not yet the best possible representation. In the first place, I’d crop out the unneccessary and disturbing dark parts on both sides, showing the grave only. Then, I don’t like the slant perspective making some of the numbers unreadable, I think a more upside-down view onto the grave would show more detail. --Kreuzschnabel 10:46, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks in advance for your comment Kreuzschnabel. I can sure you the image was not taken randomly. In the four faces of the mass grave, the only place where I was able to take it 1.5 metres above the level of the grave was in the place where I was taking it. If I were close to the limit of the grave, never mind in which side, even standing up my arms and taken the picture downwards, the whole grave would had never been photographed completely in all of its surface. In fact, I took also these pictures, but the complete surface of the grave did not appeared, and I prefered, effectively, to take the picture with the whole surface of the grave. I was not able to fly a dron to take pictures orthogonally. I am sure the photograph taken from this dron would be better than the image we are commenting, but unfortunately I haven't got it. But thanks in advance. In this way, I would improve my photography to meet your requirements. --Mario Modesto Mata (talk) 14:54, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for your answer. I’d find it much more suitable for instance had the grave only – from the same point – been photographed in portrait orientation, giving higher resolution on the horrible details. I will not doubt its encaclopedial or historical/political value. --Kreuzschnabel 15:45, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
        • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for being so reasonable. Undoubtedly, I will upload more images of these and other mass graves that are located in Estépar. But the main topic of this image is the mass grave itself. --Mario Modesto Mata (talk) 16:04, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Because of the value. For not Spanish users: it may be interesting for you to know that the government usually is not promoting any search for killed people during the Civil War, for example, world famous poet Federico García Lorca. Lots of families keep struggling to find their relatives. So, all in all, this is quite a rare image. --Kadellar (talk) 14:08, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Obvious HV. --JLPC (talk) 15:48, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 19:03, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gran valor educativo --· Favalli ⟡ 22:49, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

File:St Diego Skyline Panorama 2013.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2014 at 17:27:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Skyline of San Diego
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Skyline of San Diego
    all by me-- Tuxyso (talk) 17:27, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 17:27, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It is a bit tight top and bottom, and I've indicated a dust spot and an area that looks odd (bad cloning?). Otherwise, very good. -- Colin (talk) 18:50, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Thanks for your careful review, Colin. I've worked a bit on the sky - I guess the odd looking areas resulted from stitching - I've not done any retouching work on the image. The "dust spot" is also removed, but I think it was no dust because the camera, Olympus XZ-1, is a closed system. To the crop: I have enough space left at the bottom in my original file, but no space left at the top. Thus I decided to leave the image as it is without artificially increasing the sky vertically. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:32, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 20:07, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jebulon (talk) 21:03, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Image needs a bit of brightening - the whites right now are nowhere close to the clipping point. Otherwise excellent. --King of ♠ 00:56, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done. Thanks for the hint. Please take another look, King of Hearts. It's imho an improvement. --Tuxyso (talk) 05:42, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 06:10, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:05, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 13:10, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose valuable, but not featurable --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:49, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
    • Surprise Surprise! --Tuxyso (talk) 19:14, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
      • You may convince me what is special here on this pipe-shaped image of this skyline. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:50, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 00:13, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Surprise :-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:13, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support saubere Arbeit --Böhringer (talk) 11:27, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:51, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Baresi F (talk) 20:19, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ApolloWissen (talk) 11:45, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Graphium 17:50, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Kurkocin, wiatrak (WLZ14).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2014 at 14:07:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by 1bumer -- 1bumer (talk) 14:07, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 1bumer (talk) 14:07, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the shadowed part at left don't help, sorry -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 08:39, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice view, nice colours and nice atmosphere. No problem with the shadow. Everything is good to see, even in the shadow part. Light from behind would make this special atmosphere as he have here. --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:55, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support oczywiście :) --Pudelek (talk) 09:11, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The atmosphere is rather dull, in my opinion (=no wow). — Yerpo Eh? 12:36, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good quality, but not special enough. Sorry. Yann (talk) 13:51, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The light might not be the best, on the other hand I am nearly bored by all those it-never-rains-in-california-bright-sunlight images. This picture is perfectly composed with the cyan and green areas, and the mill’s center of gravity near the rule-of-thirds while its face turned away is looking far out of the frame, catching my eye. At least it’s an awesome example for well-done simplicity. And … though this alone is never enough for me to support … it’s nice and I like it :-) --Kreuzschnabel 15:52, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There’s an unsharp insect which ought to be cloned out, see note. --Kreuzschnabel 16:00, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
      • ✓ Done Thanks! Something flew away ;) --1bumer (talk) 16:53, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
        • Kreuzschnabel: Is it unfortunate coincidence that above and beneath this nomination are two pictures from California in bright sunlight? I hope you are not bored by my images. The Californian people can't help for the good weather. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:24, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
          • Coincidence indeed. I do not blame the Californians. And I really didn’t realize this context – hard to believe, I know, the california line came to my mind when I was thinking of a suitable illustration --Kreuzschnabel 21:16, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support a oczywiście też. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:43, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I ja też;) --Halavar (talk) 19:02, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but I agree with Yerpo. --Graphium 17:47, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Letterboxes Ocotillo Wells 2013.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2014 at 13:09:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Letterboxes in the desert
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Letterboxes in the Californian desert
    all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 13:09, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 13:09, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 17:02, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Technically fine but I'm not sure the idea has worked. The bushes are distracting and the stop sign isn't really related to the letterboxes. Such a landscape works better with a panoramic aspect rather than 3:2. -- Colin (talk) 18:43, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
    • The idea is simple: We drove through the desert for more than one hour and nothing was around us. Surprisingly certain traces of civilization appeared. The stop sign indicated: Stop, some people are living in this lonely area. The letterboxes are a representation for these few people who live in this unsociable area. For me this motive was very eye-catching and I really like it. BTW: I've added a landscape alternative - probably you find it more interesting. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:51, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support maybe color banding in the sky, but excellent.--Jebulon (talk) 21:06, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Thanks for the review, Jebulon. I made some local corrections on the sky. If you like, take a look if it is better than before. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:27, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
      • Looks indeed better, thanks.--Jebulon (talk) 22:09, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice motif. --King of ♠ 00:58, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice idea, but the composition is not the best: the letterboxes should stand against the sky, i.e. a lower point of view should be better. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:10, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Letterboxes Ocotillo Wells 2013 Crop.jpg

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment On the suggestion made by Colin I produced a landscape crop and added it as alternative. Berthold, probably you can also take a look if you prefer this version. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:51, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I also like this landscape crop - is has a very different look. I cannot really decide which one is better. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:51, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Tuxyso !--Jebulon (talk) 21:06, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the balance is better in this one. -- Colin (talk) 21:32, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This one is better, IMO. --Baresi F (talk) 23:07, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Also good. --King of ♠ 00:58, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:05, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:44, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Better, but the bushes behind the boxes are still distracting. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:28, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
I agree with Yann, and simplifying the background (e.g. by using the sky) would have helped bring out the boxes. Or cloning-out! -- Colin (talk) 13:44, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Yann, thanks for your comment but the viewpoint was intentionally chosen as it is. If you take a careful look you will see that the bottom of the letterboxes exactly match with the farer edge of the road. I can see no advantage for a lower viewpoint. Cloning out the bushes is imho no good idea - especially not from a documentary perspective. --Tuxyso (talk) 15:38, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Södersjukhuset September 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2014 at 11:09:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Södersjukhuset
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Södersjukhuset, constructed between 1937 and 1944, is one of the largest hospitals in Stockholm and has the largest emergency department in northern Europe. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 11:09, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 11:09, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could do with some brightening. --Kreuzschnabel 11:30, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Thank you Kreuzschnabel, I agree and new version uploaded.--ArildV (talk) 12:03, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
      • Much better. Certainly QI at high EV but I still don’t see any wow --Kreuzschnabel 11:14, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 12:34, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

File:1 yuanyang rice terrace qingkou 2012b.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2014 at 10:38:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Chensiyuan - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 10:38, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 10:38, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's a nice photo, but obvious dust spots (see note) should be removed. I would also apply some NR on the sky. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:18, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support May be improved, but FP nevertheless: huge size, nice light and colors, interesting place. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:53, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but the dust spots must be removed. --Kadellar (talk) 14:12, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose to much bad cloned out areas in the sky/clouds. Sorry, there isn't only the dustspots. Otherwise very nice. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:30, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose in more of the mentioned issues the left is leaning out. -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 12:44, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Orangerieschloss 01 (MK).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2014 at 10:26:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Talakad Ka, In.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2014 at 23:00:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info c/u/n by Muhammad Mahdi Karim -- Muhammad (talk) 23:00, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Muhammad (talk) 23:00, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The image is Free Art licensed as well. Still it’s not likely to success due to Nothing special and poor technical quality. --Kreuzschnabel 03:05, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special, technically quality is solala. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:11, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose An ordinary street. --Yikrazuul (talk) 17:20, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Phalangium opilio MHNT Profil.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2014 at 11:08:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Phalangium opilio

File:Botanischer Garten Berlin-Dahlem 10-2014 photo01 pond.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2014 at 10:40:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Autumn in Botanical Garden of Berlin (with gardener's house in the background)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by A.Savin / Preferred FP gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 10:40, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I don’t get the idea behind this picture. There’s a pond mostly obstructed by plants, a building partly obstructed by trees obstructing each other, and the only thing not hidden is cropped off. What’s the subject? --Kreuzschnabel 16:05, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 17:18, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No Wow for me and for above --LivioAndronico talk 18:02, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 13:11, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel. --Halavar (talk) 18:57, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

File:A day of fishing in Juan Griego.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2014 at 09:04:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A day of fishing in Juan Griego
Sure 11:32, 24 October 2014 (UTC)~
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The (centered) foot is really too prominent, and the cropped leg is a mistake of composition, IMO.--Jebulon (talk) 09:54, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry but the composition is not working for me, (for me) its a photo of water and a nice mountain with a cropped fisherman in the foreground.--ArildV (talk) 10:31, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. --Kreuzschnabel 15:55, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 16:25, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Plaque of death on Saint Mary of the Prayer and Death.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2014 at 07:45:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Plaque of death on Saint Mary of the Prayer and Death

File:Rekha Raju DS 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2014 at 06:31:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mohiniyattam performance
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Augustus Binu - uploaded by Augustus Binu - nominated by Bellus Delphina (talk) 06:31, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Bellus Delphina (talk) 06:31, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. Yann (talk) 09:27, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice, but disappointingly small.--Jebulon (talk) 09:53, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Above size requirements. Tough to take in such low lit areas and may involve a fair bit of cropping --Muhammad (talk) 10:56, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The file's description is insufficient for me: Where was the picture taken? What does Rekha Raju mean? Is that her name? Then something like The Indian (?) Mohiniyattam dancer Rekha Raju performing at XY theater would be appropriate. --El Grafo (talk) 14:30, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose 1. for size – a picture barely above the minimum requirement has to be very special for me to support. 2. The floor before her feet looks heavily cloned and softened/smeared. At the lower right of her, there’s a sharp piece among blurred ones. That does not work, sorry. Additionally, there’s considerable chromatic aberration in her hair decoration. The shot and pose as such is really very nice but IMHO it’s not among the very best Commons has to offer for the reasons given. --Kreuzschnabel 16:16, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Megachile incerta male 1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2014 at 06:14:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Megachile incerta male 1.jpg

File:Tartu vana kaubamaja hoonekompleksi lammutamine *.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2014 at 00:22:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Demolition of Tartu old mall
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by A.palu - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 00:22, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 00:22, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose While it’s most certainly a historic moment, the image itself shows no special quality for me. Besides, it’s quite noisy (see the shadowy parts of the roof to the right). --Kreuzschnabel 16:27, 24 October 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 06:22, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Image:Schleswig-Holstein, Warringholz, Naturdenkmal NIK 6595.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2014 at 22:47:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Natural monument (No. 32) in the Steinburg district in Warringholz.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. Gruss --Nightflyer (talk) 23:02, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm afraid I'm going to have to pass. A very well-done picture of a tree, but no wow there. Daniel Case (talk) 01:40, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Big wow for me (so big as theses trees are big) however the burned out white flowers are an issue for me. -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 11:15, 24 October 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 0 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 06:21, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Parasols, Evening, Beach, Rincon de la Victoria, Andalusia, Spain.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2014 at 17:53:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

evening on the beach, Rincon de la Victoria, Andalusia, Spain.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 17:53, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Evening on the beach, Rincon de la Victoria, Andalusia, Spain-- Jebulon (talk) 17:53, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Has an unexpected charm. Daniel Case (talk) 19:30, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yepp, nice idea, and well done. --Kreuzschnabel 06:16, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 16:22, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 01:40, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 09:20, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 15:50, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 16:47, 29 October 2014 (UTC) charmy!
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 07:14, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Siberian Tiger by Malene Th.jpg (delist)[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2014 at 13:33:41
Siberian tiger (Panthera tigris altaica) at Aalborg Zoo, Denmark

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Far below the standard and resolution of the current requirements. (Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist -- The Herald 13:33, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist for low resolution, and the closed eyes are irritating. Nice pic and unusual pose though, but clearly below FP level. --Kreuzschnabel 13:52, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Cayambe (talk) 14:13, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Kruusamägi (talk) 00:23, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 16:24, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
@Christian Ferrer: Reason please..The Herald 07:57, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
In despite of the small size WOW enough for me to keep it as FP. -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 08:11, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist I am no fan of delist nominations, but independently of the resolution this one does imho not deserve the FP seal. The iron background from the cage is very bad, also the dark shadow parts. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:28, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep an image was in the past featured! not today!!! This is and was for ever in the past, we can not "turm back time". All our FP have a time stap: featured at time XYZ ... --Alchemist-hp (talk) 09:11, 26 October 2014 (UTC) ok the will of the author: Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Alchemist-hp (talk) 19:45, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
    • Please look up our guidelines on delisting images: Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. Thus, delisting FPs which no longer meet the latest requirements should be a quite normal procedure – as a matter of fact, this is the only delisting reason given in the guidelines! Your point is entirely irrelevant, sorry. --Kreuzschnabel 11:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:07, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
    • See above.--Kreuzschnabel 11:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
      • @Kreuzschnabel: It's high time to correct our rules/guidlines. I think this is a stupid rule for old images, because we have our time-stamp! I shall take the liberty to ignore "stupid" rules! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 11:35, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
        • I personally don’t consider this rule stupid because FP is a collection of the best images Commons has to offer, in present tense. The idea behind FP is not so much granting a never-revokable "well done" for the photographer but building up a selection of the very best media present. It’s quite natural that old media has to leave while new and better images get in. Of course the rules may be changed but not because they’re stupid in your eyes but as a result of a discussion considering all aspects. Until then, you ought to stick to them when voting here. Your suggestion adds up to discard delisting entirely. --Kreuzschnabel 12:27, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
          • I have my opinion, I have my opinion, I have my opinion! And at first most important step: please show me a better similar image on our commons libary. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 13:04, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
            • Good to read you’ve got your opinion, but I already was quite aware of that. But sorry once more – why would we need a better similar one? If we would, any ugly lo-res webcam photo would be featurable if there wasn’t a better similar one. You see this point is ridiculous. This is not VIC, we don’t look for one pic per subject. If there is just one image of a certain subject on Commons, we don’t have to feature it just because there’s no better one! It’s a very simple matter: This very image here is below today’s FP level and therefore it should today be delisted, even if it did reach FP level when it was featured. That’s all. EOD for me, let’s go on with the voting. --Kreuzschnabel 16:37, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • @Kreuzschnabel:, @Jkadavoor: So let's start to delist this one too:

very low quality image?

  • An image with a very low quality, artificially "high" resolution, very noisy, BW, exorbitant unsharp, but our rules says: eligible for a delist process :-)
  • I think you see now, that your arguments are also not conclusive. Happy voting, thant's the main :-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 09:45, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • It is under Commons:Featured pictures/Historical where we consider a lot of other facts, including notability of the artist, subject, etc. :) Jee 11:33, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
    • ? I know. The quality is nevertheless bad. But for me is this image still also an FP-image! A histarical image from 2007 or not?  ;-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:00, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
      • Yes; we can nominate it under historical in next century (after 2104). :) Jee 12:10, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
        • No, a historical image can be also from "yesterday" too (some single evens, like earthquake, tsunami and a lot of other events) :-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:28, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist IMHO, a "formal FP" stamp is enough for this picture, now. Jee 16:47, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist per above. --King of ♠ 01:06, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep per above, while we can use "wow" and "not wow", "in my taste" and refuse (close the eyes) a obvious technical flaws (I also do this, and it is my shame too) I have to agree with Alchemist. This is not a criticism! Is a weight into the balance, if we exercise rigor that is always (IMHO) ; ) -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 11:22, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist The image size is too small and the editing too obvious. I agree it is no longer FP standard. Thanks for the mail Alchemist :) (I'd protest about the "Closed eyes isssue" - its a picture of an expression. You know it - it's the "Streetch! Grooaan, Maaan the world is great today puurrrr" it is impossible to do with open eyes :P ) Anyway it's nice to know what happens with my FP pics - it looks stupid i brag about them on my userpage when they are delisted ;D Oh and just for the record it is probably time to delist the others too. They were taken with the same camera and therefore quite likely has the same size issues:

I would be grateful if someone would see to it they get delisted too and that i get removed from the featured photographers list since i with this definitely am no longer entitled to be there. I barely know how to edit stuff in here any longer. Good luck in the future Wikimedia Commons. Yay for our cool project evolving. --Malene Thyssen (talk) 16:45, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

You see me a bit bewildered now. Seven years ago there was no bitterness and personal offence (or did I mistake the previous paragraph?) in delisting an FP. If this was a verdict on your photographic skills altogether, I would have to disappear from Commons much earlier :-) --Kreuzschnabel 20:20, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Bistorta officinalis 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2014 at 21:55:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

European bistort (Bistorta officinalis) found on the Gemeindealpe Mitterbach, Lower Austria

File:1 zhangjiajie huangshizhai wulingyuan panorama 2012.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2014 at 15:35:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Five fingers peak. Quartzite sandstone
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Chensiyuan - nominated by Arion -- ArionEstar (talk) 15:35, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArionEstar (talk) 15:35, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Impressive --Arturo de Frias Marques (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Qwertz1894 (talk) 19:08, 22 October 2014 (UTC) Not eligible to vote. Jee 07:31, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow. (And the resolution ...) --XRay talk 18:14, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 20:11, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Please remove the dust spots (see annotations) from the sky! -- Tobi 87 (talk) 13:10, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 10:21, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive subject and resolution. The post-processing of the image isn't perfect but the result is still exceptional enough for FP. Would appreciate some information on the image page about camera/lens, number of frames, software used, etc -- these things all help our educational mission. -- Colin (talk) 10:31, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Past-processing not perfect, Colin? There are extreme purple CAs on the background silhouette and all around the trees on the rocks. There are also artefacts of oversharpening at the sky area. I am missing a clear compositional idea - surely the rocks are impressive but imho arranged in a random way. --Tuxyso (talk) 13:16, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Tuxyso I am aware of the CA and noise and other imperfections at 100%, but this is also a 88MP image. If I stick it into IrfanView and resize it to 50% with a little sharpening I get a 22MP image that would rival anything a pro Canon DSLR can produce even with the best glass. Are you punishing the guy for uploading the full size image rather than heavily downsizing? Sure he could improve on this - but I don't know what software he's using or if he can afford anything better. Perhaps the camera/lens isn't that good. The rocks are arranged in a row and I think you'll have to have a word with God about his "random" arrangement :-). I've no idea if there is a better viewpoint but this one does show the formation in good detail, along with pleasant hills in the background - taken at a time of day/lighting when those hills are attractive silhouettes. -- Colin (talk) 15:28, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Colin, I have no complaints with stitchings which are not tack sharp at 100% due to non-downscaling. But a non-downscaled image is no excuse for inattentive processing. Sharpening artefacts and strong CAs are serious concerns especially if we speak of an FPC. My comment on the composition and its randomness was related to the way the rocks were photographed. --Tuxyso (talk) 16:15, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

*Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Anyway, a picture with a so big amount of dust spots cannot be a FP.--Jebulon (talk) 16:45, 25 October 2014 (UTC)--Jebulon (talk) 12:58, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

I have let the creator know, so I hope he can upload a version with these issues fixed. -- Colin (talk) 18:35, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Baresi F (talk) 20:19, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Jebulon I uploaded a new version: without dust spots and reduced CA. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:10, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
    • Thank you. Opposition removed.--Jebulon (talk) 12:58, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
    • I cannot see an improvement with the purple CAs (image cache purged and reloaded the image) --Tuxyso (talk) 15:45, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
      • Bei einer Ansicht von 200% sehe ich auch das Problem, nicht jedoch bei 100%. Das ist marginal, nicht der Rede Wert. Eines möchte ich jedoch nicht verschweigen: die letzte winzige ab 150% sichtbare CA bekomme ich nicht herausgerechnet. Das müsste schon der Upöoader bei den Einzelbildern durchführen. Aber es ist: nur eine unbedeutende Winzigkeit. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:54, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
        • Probably we look at different files. I do not review images at 200% view. Take a simple look on this 100% crop - these purple CAs are all around the mountains in the background and don't tell me these are "marginal". --Tuxyso (talk) 16:06, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
          • Purple??? I see a small green/cyan surface around the mountans. We see two different files?!? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:03, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
            • Surely, green, not purple. --Tuxyso (talk) 18:27, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The chromatic aberrations are quite notable especially on the right but also on the left. They are possible to fix. I wonder if the white balance is ok. The photo seems quite... yellowish. Is it like that for real? --Ximonic (talk) 16:04, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Graphium 18:18, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

File:1 Seda facing south.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2014 at 03:20:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

1 Seda facing south.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Sunset casting a shadow over the Larung Gar Buddhist Institute, the largest Tibetan Buddhist institute in the world. The Institute, located in a valley of Sêrtar County, is home to some 10,000 to 20,000 monks and pilgrims. This photo offers a rare glimpse of a remotely located civilisation. Created by Chensiyuan - uploaded by Chensiyuan - nominated by Chensiyuan -- Chensiyuan (talk) 03:20, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Chensiyuan (talk) 03:20, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the red may be over-saturated and I find the heavy shadow at the bottom unfortunate, but details aside I find this to be a real 'wow' image. It is truly astonishing what we crazy humans get up to! -- Des Callaghan (talk) 06:52, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Needs perspective correction, sides are leaning out (visible with the steel framework structures, which should be vertical), and I also don’t like the deep shadow in the foreground, it somehow separates me from the picture. --Kreuzschnabel 07:21, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I hate the shadow.--Claus (talk) 08:15, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the shadow and the oversaturated red and blue canal. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:03, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose very interesting view, but apart from the shadow the image is not really sharp as it could and should be (especially for a camera like the D800), we have some minor stitching errors also here (in bottom area) --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:52, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Loch Leathan Waterfall, Isle of Skye, Scotland - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2014 at 14:37:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Loch Leathan Waterfall, Isle of Skye, Scotland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff. Proof that I still take photos other than church interiors. :-) -- Diliff (talk) 14:37, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 14:37, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:49, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 16:19, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 16:29, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--LivioAndronico talk 16:35, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 16:39, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent. Some kind of HDR, or exposure stacking? Usually it’s hard not to blow an overcast sky like this in order to get the ground properly exposed. --Kreuzschnabel 16:47, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
    • Yes, true. This is a bracketed HDR image, but only comprised of two exposures, one for the foreground and the other for the sky. Diliff (talk) 17:39, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:24, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support because I want more churches... just kidding, very nice. --Kadellar (talk) 18:27, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 18:36, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Scottish bias. -- Colin (talk) 19:14, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 23:56, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I feel younger than ten years old.  A l p h a m a  Talk 00:13, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 01:01, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:33, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ///EuroCarGT 13:12, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. I even can hear the bagpipes.... --Arturo de Frias Marques (talk)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Sorry to interrupt but I am not entirely convinced. For me, the grass is a little too green and the sky colours to strong. The image appears to be slightly over-processed imo.--ArildV (talk) 16:44, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
    • The sky, I can appreciate your opinion... I did push the contrast on the sky as bright overcast clouds tend to lose their definition in photography (as Kreuzschnabel mentioned) but I disagree that the grass is too green. I didn't adjust the saturation. Scotland is just very green in summer. :-) Diliff (talk) 21:36, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
      • Not that it really matters to the nomination at this stage, but to show that the grass saturation has not been adjusted, here's one of the original files in Lightroom, with Lightroom settings visible to show that the saturation set to 0. I think the grass looks basically identical to the image on Commons. The main difference is, of course, the sky. Diliff (talk) 10:51, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
          • Diliff, thank you for your comments and images. I hope you did not interpret my comment as a general criticism of you images or general criticism of photo editing and of course I trust you when you say that the grass saturation has not been adjusted (you do not need to prove it). The combination (with my knowledge of Scotland, the light in these latitudes, habitat type) of the cloudy sky and the bright colors on the ground seemed somewhat unrealistic. Of course I can be wrong but i dont think it matter regarding my vote because I dont think the picture is especially beautiful with these colors (and therefore no WOW). I think I had supported your attached image (and I do not think the grass looks identical). Anyway, I voted neutral and you seem to get enough support.--ArildV (talk) 15:29, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with ArildV.--Jebulon (talk) 19:14, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 05:49, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ApolloWissen (talk) 11:46, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Paris - The Eiffel Tower in spring - 2307.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2014 at 13:22:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jorgeroyan - uploaded by Jorgeroyan - nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 13:22, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 13:22, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T (talk) 17:21, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Unusual and nice! --Kikos (talk) 20:25, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Refreshingly different. -Pugilist (talk) 22:56, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great pic, I was there two months ago and no flowers. :(  A l p h a m a  Talk 00:15, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting. --King of ♠ 01:01, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nicely framed by the trees. —Bruce1eetalk 06:10, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Appealing composition. --Cayambe (talk) 06:36, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry to poop the party... yes, the image is very appealing, no doubt. But still, I'd have preferred a way more radical composition here - or a very traditional one with the Eiffel tower being straight. Everything's kind of in between here, and that doesn't really work for me. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:37, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Well, if you're going to poop the party, at least clean up the floor after yourself Face-smile.svg. Daniel Case (talk) 19:27, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love the contrast between leaves and steel, between green and pink, brown and blue. Unusual picture in Commons.--Claus (talk) 08:19, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • See: this picture at QIC --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:46, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Just lacks that extra "wow" that's needed. --Graphium 18:14, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not the kind of picture of the tower I find every day. I like it! --Ximonic (talk) 08:07, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

File:2014 Yorkshire Dales country road Swaledale Askrigg.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2014 at 07:05:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Country road in the Yorkshire Dales linking upper Swaledale to Askrigg, Wensleydale
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Country road in the Yorkshire Dales linking upper Swaledale to Askrigg, Wensleydale
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info c/u/n by Kreuzschnabel 07:05, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kreuzschnabel 07:05, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 09:55, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice image, but Wow missing.--XRay talk 16:20, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The light and the shasowed backgtound are more disturbing than the very "little sky" however there is wow enough at full resolution for me. -- Christian Ferrer Talk / Images 20:29, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The "wow" here comes mostly from shape. --King of ♠ 01:03, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Chrumps (talk) 23:14, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 15:46, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Graphium 18:12, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Visent træ ved den italienske sti.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2014 at 05:45:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A dead tree, probably a dead pine, at "the Italian path", Mols Bjerge National Park near Molslaboratoriet
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A dead tree, probably a dead pine, at "the Italian path", Mols Bjerge National Park near Molslaboratoriet
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Villy Fink Isaksen -- Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 05:45, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 05:45, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Pinus sylvestris -- Des Callaghan (talk) 06:03, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice composition, but the tree itself looks a bit washed-out, maybe slightly overexposed. --Kreuzschnabel 07:26, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
    • New version uploaded, minor adjustments in curves. Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 07:48, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
      • Looks like more than a minor adjustment :-) seriously, it’s too dark now. I’d suggest something like this.
        • Yes, it was a minor adjustment! But how did you make your suggestion? I am still learning editing photos. Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 10:25, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
          • There isn’t nearly enough space here to give a tutorial about image editing. In a nutshell: I opened it in GIMP, selected Color/Curves and bent them until I was satisfied. Do you see the sky is unnaturally dark in your latest version? – You may upload my version as a new one, if you like it. --Kreuzschnabel 13:12, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • New version by Kreuzschnabel uploaded. Thanks to Kreuzschnabel. Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 14:48, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support - Pugilist (talk) 22:53, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No "wow" for me. --Yikrazuul (talk) 17:21, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Gewone smeerwortel (Symphytum officinale) 04.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2014 at 15:40:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Common Comfrey (Symphytum officinale). created by Famberhorst - uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by Famberhorst -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:40, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:40, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Maybe not the most beautiful flower, but the technical quality is convincing. --Uoaei1 (talk) 16:28, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The special Symphytum is the position of the blade relative to the hanging flowers. That is good to see this picture. Thank you for the compliment.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:44, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive lighting and quality. --Kreuzschnabel 07:35, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thank you for the compliment.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:51, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 09:57, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--H. Krisp (talk) 11:53, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --JLPC (talk) 14:09, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:56, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Swiss Open Geneva - 20140712 - Semi final Men - J. Gerard vs S. Houdet 106.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2014 at 11:48:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Joachim Gerard of Belgium during the semi-final of the Swiss Open Geneva against en:Stéphane Houdet.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Pleclown - uploaded by Pleclown - nominated by Pleclown -- Pleclown (talk) 11:48, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Joachim Gerard of Belgium during the semi-final of the Swiss Open Geneva against. -- Pleclown (talk) 11:48, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ArionEstar (talk) 16:00, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good timing. Can you please improve the description?? --Kadellar (talk) 21:44, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
    ✓ Done Pleclown (talk) 06:54, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Timing and motion control are very fine. On the other hand, the subject covers barely 30 percent of the image area, the rest is empty space, which does not add quality to the composition IMHO. A closer crop (suggestion added) would emphasize the mood considerably but would also reduce the image size below the 2 Mpix minimum, and sharpness would be below threshold. – Besides, I’m not satisfied with the white balance, the image looks blueish to me. --Kreuzschnabel 07:45, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support(vote removed to the alternative) Nice -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 12:10, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Joachim Gerard of Belgium during the semi-final of the Swiss Open Geneva against en:Stéphane Houdet.

File:Map to illustrate the Route of Prince Maximilian of Wied in the interior of North America 1832-1834.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2014 at 23:13:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Route of Prince Maximilian of Wied in the interior of North America 1832-1834

The map shows the northern states of the United States of America in 1832. At that time the rivers of the Mississippi and the Missouri formed the border between the east settled area of the Americans and the western area of the Indians. The areas of the different Indian tribes and the villages and towns of Americans are inscribed on the map. An orange line indicates the northern boundary of America. The red lines from Boston to the upper Missouri and back to New York marked the history of the Expedition of the scientist Maximilian zu Wied-Neuwied and the painter Karl Bodmer in the years 1832-1834.


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 06:18, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Tableau 5 Mouth of Fox River (Indiana) by Karl Bodmer.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2014 at 23:15:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mouth of Fox River (Indiana) by Karl Bodmer 1839

Karl Bodmer published this hand-colored aquatint "Mouth of Fox River (Indiana)" in 1839 for documenting the expedition, at the Karl Bodmer took part: Maximilian Prince of Wied's Travels in the Interior of North America, during the years 1832-1834. This "Fox River" is a tributary of the Wabash River in southern Illinois, entering the Wabash near New Harmony, Indiana.

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 23:15, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. Yann (talk) 10:12, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol support vote.svg Support; attractive original, looks well digitized, but I'm not sure if it's supposed to be leaning clockwise. — Yerpo Eh? 12:38, 27 October 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 06:17, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]

Sat 25 Oct → Thu 30 Oct
Sun 26 Oct → Fri 31 Oct
Mon 27 Oct → Sat 01 Nov
Tue 28 Oct → Sun 02 Nov
Wed 29 Oct → Mon 03 Nov
Thu 30 Oct → Tue 04 Nov

Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)[edit]

Tue 21 Oct → Thu 30 Oct
Wed 22 Oct → Fri 31 Oct
Thu 23 Oct → Sat 01 Nov
Fri 24 Oct → Sun 02 Nov
Sat 25 Oct → Mon 03 Nov
Sun 26 Oct → Tue 04 Nov
Mon 27 Oct → Wed 05 Nov
Tue 28 Oct → Thu 06 Nov
Wed 29 Oct → Fri 07 Nov
Thu 30 Oct → Sat 08 Nov

Closing a featured picture promotion request[edit]

The bot[edit]

Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below. However after the bot has counted the votes a manual review step is used to make sure the count is correct before the bot again picks up the work.

Manual procedure[edit]

Any experienced user may close requests.

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|category=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}}
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg)
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    featured or not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    becomes
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. If it is featured:
    • Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate category of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
    • Also add the picture to an appropriate subpage of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images.
    • Add the template {{Featured picture}} or {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
      • If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
      • If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessements template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
    • Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
      • The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
      • You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
    • Add == FP promotion ==

{{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.

  1. As the last step (whether the image is featured or not), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/October 2014), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.

Closing a delisting request[edit]

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    '''Result:''' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg)
  2. Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
    delisted or not delisted
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted ===
  3. Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/October 2014.
  4. If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
    1. Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
    2. Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes). Also, remove the image from all categories like Featured pictures of ....
    3. Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.