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]

Image:07-17-2012 - Emborio - Emporio - Santorini - Greece - 11.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2014 at 08:33:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Old town of Emporeio, Santorini, Greece.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Old town of Emporeio, Santorini, Greece. Photo created, uploaded and nominated by Norbert Nagel (talk) 08:33, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 08:33, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Ioannovsky Convent SPB 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2014 at 07:37:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ioannovsky Convent SPB 01.jpg

File:Halde Haniel Amphitheater 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2014 at 07:37:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mining waste tip (Halde Haniel) in Bottrop with Amphitheater
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Mining waste tip (Halde Haniel) in Bottrop with Amphitheater (for events)
    all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 07:37, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 07:37, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Panoramica da Rampa do Vale do Pati.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2014 at 19:09:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Carlos Perez Couto - nominated by Arion -- User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 19:09, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 19:09, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- I would like the photo to be sharper still, especially at long distances, but I like the composition and my feeling is it is a successful photo. Ariadacapo (talk) 20:42, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request @Ariadacapo: You can identify if these images are the same? If they are the same, it is necessary that one be deleted. User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 01:11, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
File:Rampa do Pati.jpg
Rampa do Pati.jpg
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's a beautiful landscape and a good shooting position. But IMHO post-processing it not good here. The sky looks oversaturated and the clarity (micro-contrast) is overdone and there are too many very dark areas. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:50, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
@Tuxyso: It's fixable? User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 13:11, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Kolomna 04-2014 img11 Skating arena.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2014 at 18:29:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Kolomna Speed skating arena in Kolomna, Moscow Oblast, Russia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by A.Savin --A.Savin 18:29, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 18:29, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's a good candidate. Have you considered cropping a little more (not much) of the top and bottom? I think it could improve the composition. --Slaunger (talk) 20:00, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
The current one is precise 3:2 ratio, the crop I find good as it is and would not change (some space to breathe is always needed). --A.Savin 20:20, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK, that's reasonable. --Slaunger (talk) 20:27, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Boeing FA-18F Super Hornet at take off Danish Air Show 2014-06-22 aligned.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2014 at 18:14:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet taking off at Danish Air Show 2014
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by --Slaunger (talk) 18:14, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet taking off at Danish Air Show 2014. The F-18 is a seldom guest in Denmark, the last time it landed in the country was in 2009. This year it showed up at the Danish Air Show 2014 held at Air Base Karup with over 120,000 spectators (2% of the population). Probably because it is a candidate for a replacement of the existing fleet of 30 General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon. The two other candidates are the Eurofighter Typhoon and the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II. --Slaunger (talk) 18:14, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 18:14, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 07:26, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good, but I would stamp out two spots (birds or whatever it is, see note). All in all the surface of the plane looks relatively soft. Did you apply some NR or is it due to shooting conditions (speed, Mitzieher)? --Tuxyso (talk) 07:43, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very good shot. I also find that it looks like the noise reduction was very strong. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 09:06, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Moni Preveli Cat 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2014 at 17:20:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sleeping cat in Preveli Monastery (Moni Preveli), Crete

File:Juvenile buteo lineatus elegans, Presidio.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2014 at 15:52:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Juvenile red-shouldered hawk (Buteo lineatus elegans) at the Presidio, San Francisco, California.

File:Mont Saint-Michel at night - BeBo86.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2014 at 13:13:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mont Saint-Michel at dusk/night
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by BeBo86 - uploaded by BeBo86 - nominated by BeBo86 -- BeBo86 (talk) 13:13, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- BeBo86 (talk) 13:13, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Brackenheim (talk) 18:09, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Wow - awesome picture. But: sharpness issues, unfortunately. Anything you can do? Did you take another shot? --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:14, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
    • @Martin Falbisoner: thanks for your comment. In this case, one big problem was tourists crossing the new built bridge, so all shots were a bit shaky. (Note: I have downsampled it a bit now, as a consequence of perspective correction.) Level of detail is comparable to the existing FP of Mont Saint-Michel BeBo86 (talk) 13:09, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sharpness is OK for me (night shot). Composition and motive is very nice. I will support the image if you correct the verticals (take a look at the very left building) --Tuxyso (talk) 07:52, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
    • @Tuxyso: THANKS a lot and you are right!!! ✓ Done BeBo86 (talk) 13:09, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Much bigger than the other FP of it I'm aware of ;) So could have been a nice replacement (I would have seen no reason to keep both which are similar). But the sharpness issue largely nullifies this improvement. Composition wise I don't see why the mount is not centered (the empty space on the right adds no value). Not a fan of the scaffoldings either. - Benh (talk) 09:37, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
    • @Benh: Compared to the other file, level of detail is close to equal - yes. "Improvements" could be: less overexposed areas (thanks to exposure bracketing), more pleasing colors, more interesting sky (which gives the picture depth), and corrected perspective (thanks to Tuxyso) which the other file has not. I like the composition as it is, because a) I like the blurred clouds b) the composition doesn't look too centered and c) the result is a nice 16:9 picture :-) The scaffoldings are a pity but they simply are there BeBo86 (talk) 13:09, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I wonder why the image wasn't taken a bit earlier. Were the lights only switched on by then? Personally, I would like more light, both in the sky and on the darker parts of the rock. --DXR (talk) 13:42, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Johnnie Walker Splash.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2014 at 12:15:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Böhringer - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 12:15, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 12:15, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- excellent photograph (possible trademark rights infractions (?) ignored) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:08, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good! You could increase the eductational value if you describe in-detail (on the file description page) how the photograph was created. --Tuxyso (talk) 07:54, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

File:RedCCTV.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2014 at 11:51:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Red brick building roof edge corner detail
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Lawrence Jesterton - uploaded by Tuválkin - nominated by Tuvalkin -- Red brick building roof edge corner detail shot showing tin rooftiles, fancy decorative brickwork, and four security cameras painted the same shade of red. blending in the building. Lotsa wow IMHO, but no idea about techical aspects, as I am a know-nothing about photography; lack of geolocation, or indeed of any useful description about the location, detracts a lot for its positive points, but maybe it will be identified. -- Tuválkin 11:51, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As nom. -- Tuválkin 11:51, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Missing sharpness, and strange composition for me (I would maybe support a detail view of the Moscow State Historical Museum without rather boring elements like cameras and ladders). --A.Savin 13:28, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the identifying the place (I been a few times but back in 2000, was not sure…) — that matters for me more than this being a FP or not, frankly. Along with the intrincate brickwork, the “camo” cameras is for me the wow factor on this photo, although I can see that what’s my wow is next guy’s ew. -- Tuválkin 19:22, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per A.Savin... though I understand your idea. --Cayambe (talk) 18:12, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Benny Trapp Triturus macedonicus Griechenland.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2014 at 11:35:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Benny Trapp - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 11:35, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 11:35, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support: As far as I can tell, that's good quality for an under water shot. The nose appears to be slightly out of focus and the given location is pretty rough, but all in all it's a very nice shot. --El Grafo (talk) 12:52, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose: I know these underwater shots are hard, and the few times I have tried, the results have been pretty miserable, and not as useful as this nomination. But when I compare with our existing FP gallery of underwater shots, this seems no quite to climb over the bar. The separation from main subject to background is not so clear, the triturus appears for me a little oversharpened. The composition, while good, is not quite on par with FP level too IMO, sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 17:51, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Slaunger -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:17, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Eisenach Germany Burschenschaftsdenkmal-02a.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2014 at 07:22:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fresco "Kampf der Asen mit den Mächten der Finsternis" of Otto Gussmann in the cupola of Burschenschaftsdenkmal in Eisenach
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Cccefalon. The fresco of Otto Gussmann is placed in a cupola, hence the circular depiction. -- CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 07:22, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 07:22, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- truly great work documenting this piece of art. Thank you! -- Ariadacapo (talk) 07:45, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the/this kind of evidence --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 08:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good photo with excellent exposure control, colors and detail level. Interesting fresco as well. --Slaunger (talk) 17:44, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

File:The combine John Deere W540 in the barley harvest.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2014 at 20:01:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The combine John Deere W540 in the barley harvest.

File:Professor Amanda Fisher FMedSci FRS.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2014 at 16:32:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Professor Amanda Fisher
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Royal Society uploader - uploaded by Royal Society uploader - nominated by Ahura21 -- PERSIA♠ 16:32, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- PERSIA♠ 16:32, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A valuable portrait of good technical quality of a notable scientist. But I miss the wow, sorry. As a portrait I find it lacks expression, the composition is not interesting, nor the light. There are at least three dust spots, which ought to be removed. The photo would be an excellent candidate for COM:VIC. --Slaunger (talk) 18:25, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Also technically not convincing. Bottom crop (cropped hands) is unfortunate. Also the slight cutting of the arm at the right looks rather random. Some shadow parts are imho too dark. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:08, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Cuneiform Inscriptions of Darius and Xerxes - Ganjnameh - Outside Hamadan - Western Iran - 01 (7423532748).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2014 at 16:32:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ganjnameh, is an ancient inscription, 5 km southwest of Hamedan, on the side of Alvand Mountain in Iran.

File:Mont Saint-Michel - BeBo86.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2014 at 15:41:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Le Mont Saint-Michel, Basse-Normandie, France
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by BeBo86 - uploaded by BeBo86 - nominated by BeBo86 -- BeBo86 (talk) 15:41, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- BeBo86 (talk) 15:41, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The light is quite good, and I like the compositional aspect of the curved road leading to Mont Saint-Michel. However, I think the crop is a little too tight and the image appears a little soft in focus, especially on the buildings closer to the littoral water and at the edges of the photo. The FP bar for this type of photos is just a little larger in my opinion. I had a look at the file page, which was over-categorized. I believe I have fixed that, and also added a few categories of relevance. Still a good photo, but not quite FP for me, sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 18:15, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dman41689 (talk) 06:08, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info @Slaunger: - yes you are right, the building close to the littoral tower is a pity. However, I did not want to use higher f-stop, because as a result exposure time would have been extended -> this was a no-go, because it was quite windy and my tripod was not as stable as it should have been ;-) But I think the details of the main subject - the abbey - are well focused. Thanks for helping with categories!!!
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. I don't think the white balance is set correctly, it seems too greeny yellow tinted to me. The middle is reasonably sharp but it becomes quite soft around the edges. There would be no benefit in using a smaller aperture (higher f-stop) as it would have just made the image less sharp. Most lenses are sharpest at around f/8 and start to become diffraction limited from f/11 onwards (with an APS-C sensor such as the NEX-5N's). I think the issue with the softness is primarily down to the lens and not the settings. Diliff (talk) 10:41, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Diliff: is downsampling an option? BeBo86 (talk) 11:06, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
    • Well it's an option but not a good one because it doesn't fix the problem, it just hides it. I know we can sometimes be critical of an image's sharpness at 100% and be less critical of a downsampled image that has the same real level of detail, but I don't think that downsampling is the right way to think about the problem. Diliff (talk) 11:58, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
      • I agree. That's why I did no downsampling. I can not change the behavior of my lenses. If 1000€ equipment is not sufficient for FP (at least in this case) I have to live with that ;-) BeBo86 (talk) 12:14, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
      • I agree with the comments of Diliff. Don't go down the downsampling path - it does not lead to real improvements, but often loss of information. --Slaunger (talk) 17:40, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
        • Downsampling does not necessarily yield loss of information, as most of the data in picture is made up from interpolation (which is why Slaunger said "often loss", but even this is exaggerated IMO). Moderate downsampling probably won't remove actual data in many many cases. Anyone familiar with image or signal processing to help sort this out? In any way, I don't think it solves the pb either. If someone judges an image by its sharpness when viewed at 100%, then she/he is the problem. - Benh (talk) 09:49, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Mont Saint-Michel - BeBo86 Remix.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Remix from original - Mont Saint-Michel - BeBo86.JPG by BeBo86. Please dear BeBo86 evaluate this alternative, I liked the picture and I think this might be useful. If you do not agree please comment that I remove this alternative. Adjust colors, improved sharpness. Thank you -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 17:36, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think the alternative is a good improvement, but still the crop is too tight IMO, and the soft focus at the sides are almost impossible to fix and still prevalent in this edit, sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 17:43, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
    • hi @Slaunger:, np, the target is to generate a useful alternative for evaluating and Commons (and ty for comment ; ))) ) -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 18:54, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Juvenile Night Heron at Abbotts Lagoon.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2014 at 14:26:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Juvenile black-crowned night-heron (Nycticorax nycticorax) at Abbotts Lagoon, Point Reyes National Seashore, California.

File:A butterfly feeding on the tears of a turtle in Ecuador.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2014 at 12:07:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Two Julia Butterflies drinking the tears from the turtles in Ecuador
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ama la Vida TV - uploaded by User:Russavia - nominated by Russavia -- russavia (talk) 12:07, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- russavia (talk) 12:07, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Not resting at all. It obviously feeds on the turtle's tears. Gidip (talk) 13:02, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
    • @Gidip: Should I withdraw the nomination out of respect for the turtle? We can't have a FP showing an unhappy living thing. russavia (talk) 13:19, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks Gidip for the info. Jee 16:00, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The crop is not ideal but the moment is very nice and so is the quality. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 15:54, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 16:21, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kbh3rd (talk) 01:13, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dman41689 (talk) 06:07, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Technical quality is not perfect, but this image has great wow for me. --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:22, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The focus is not where it should be, there are some really distracting bugs in the background, but yes, it's a thing I wasn't aware of, and it's big wow for me as well. - Benh (talk) 07:20, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:23, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The photo would benefit from cloning out the dark spot left of the butterfly (another insect) and perhaps by cropping out the blurry stem (see my annotation). For now too obvious photographic flaws for me, but can be easily enhanced. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 07:28, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fabulous photo, regardless the high JPEG compression. --Ras67 (talk) 14:34, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Brackenheim (talk) 18:10, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very interesting, and striking photo. --Slaunger (talk) 20:13, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Галичица, поглед на две езера, 2011.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2014 at 08:56:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lake Ohrid and Lake Prespa seen from Galičica
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Darkocv - uploaded by Darkocv - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:56, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:56, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There is a large very blurred area, which has to be fixed if possible (see annotation). It would add value to the file page if the photo was geolocated, and if a bilingual editor could also provide an English description on the file page, it would be great too. In my opinion the vertical resolution is too marginal for a panorama. --Slaunger (talk) 14:51, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I would like to support this but cannot with those smudges. Simply cropping them out results in a much less satisfactory composition. I would also be happy to see annotations on the image description page identifying salient features, such as which lake is which. @Slaunger, I added an English description based on Google Translate aided by my recognition of all words but one being cognate with the Russian I know. (I would never blindly trust GT.) Kbh3rd (talk) 20:34, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
    • @Kbh3rd: Thanks for taking your time to process my request. --Slaunger (talk) 20:46, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Kormoran gi susi krilata, Prespa.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2014 at 08:45:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cormorant standing on a stake in Lake Prespa, Macedonia

File:Anne Giardini 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2014 at 07:08:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

portrait of Anne Giardini
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by SFU Public Affairs and Media Relations - uploaded and nominated by Dman41689 (talk) 07:08, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dman41689 (talk) 07:08, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think this is a portrait of good technical quality. Good resolution, light and colors. As a portrait, I find it unimaginative from a comositional point of view, stiff and boring. All leading to low wow despite the fancy outfit. --Slaunger (talk) 15:01, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Pyrrhosoma nymphula.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2014 at 05:04:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pyrrhosoma nymphula
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Biopics - uploaded by Biopics - nominated by -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:04, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:04, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Dman41689 (talk) 07:12, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 16:22, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 18:06, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - The lower wing and the tail are hurt, perhaps not fatally, by the narrow depth-of-field which otherwise contributes greatly to the image. (I don't like bugs, but this one's rather pretty.) -- Kbh3rd (talk) 21:07, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good quality; complementary colors --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:28, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 11:21, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Nymphaea in Červený Újezd.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Aug 2014 at 14:54:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nymphaea (Nuphar pumila)  in Červený Újezd Castle, Červený Újezd, Prague-West District, Czech Republic
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info: created by Yalagch - uploaded by Yalagch - nominated by Yalagch.--Yalagch (talk) 14:54, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Central part of the flower overexposed, background heavily noisy. The species needs to be identified (and categorized). Please, try Quality Images first. --Cayambe (talk) 19:59, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Cayambe. I would like to add though, that I think the composition is good. --Slaunger (talk) 20:35, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Yalagch (talk) 21:14, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Nymphaea in Červený Újezd Remix.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Remix from original - Nymphaea in Červený Újezd by Yalagch. Please dear Yalagch evaluate this alternative, I liked the picture and I think this might be useful. If you do not agree please comment that I remove this alternative. Cleaned, partial fix bg noise, fix overexposure and a bit intensified colors. Thank you -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 00:50, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Yalagch (talk) 21:14, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

File:1 rocinha night 2014 panorama.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Aug 2014 at 00:07:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Panorama of the Rocinha, Rio de Janeiro at night, the largest favela in Brazil, with the Morro Dois Irmãos under the clouds, in the background, in June 2014. Created by and uploaded by Chensiyuan - nominated by Arion -- User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 00:07, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 00:07, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 07:44, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:52, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not only a very interesting image, well exposed etc... it is also unbelievably sharp... I can almost see the mobile game the girls in the foreground are playing... :-) Really good!! —Arturo de Frias Marques (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I have never seen so many satellite dishes in a single image before! Very detailed and interesting to explore. The file page could benefit from a geolocation. --Slaunger (talk) 20:04, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
@Slaunger: ✓ Done. Approximate geocoordinates added. User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 22:45, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
@ArionEstar:. Thanks. Regrettably, the GeoCommons database is currently unavailable, so clicking the links in the Location template does not work, so I have not yet had the possibility to 'enjoy' the geodata. I have notified Dschwen about that problem. Maybe he can help, or knows who can help fix that problem. --Slaunger (talk) 18:37, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ximonic (talk) 23:31, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 18:17, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Fun to compare feature-for-feature with the somewhat wider daylight image made from the same vantage point. Kbh3rd (talk) 01:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wow! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:29, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Big wow, and interesting to explore (enjoyed coming across the two girls who must have a very nice moment on that roof). But just can't help thinking how even better these wonderful panoramas would be if author were a tad more careful when processing her/his pictures (noise, CA, which are the easy steps...) - Benh (talk) 10:00, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

File:St. Jakob Kirche Rothenburg 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2014 at 21:33:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. James's Church in Rothenburg ob der Tauber photographed from town hall tower
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support crop a bit tight but still very beautiful --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the review Martin. For information purposes I've uploaded a version with a wider view. I think my choice for the crop is OK as it is. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:16, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
      • Well maybe this is just me, but I'd support that. That's a more convincing photo to me. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 09:09, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DXR (talk) 18:08, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Pope Francis Korea Haemi Castle 19.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2014 at 09:11:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pope Francis at the closing Mass for Asian Youth Day, Seoul, 17 August 2014
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jeon Han - uploaded by Russavia - nominated by Russavia -- russavia (talk) 09:11, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- russavia (talk) 09:11, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment User:Jkadavoor mentioned on IRC this might need a rotation, if so could others help out with it. I feel it might be fine as is. russavia (talk) 09:12, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't know whether the pole need to be straight. Good work probably in a condition where flash is not allowed. Jee 09:21, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The green tint, also compared with the watermarked version, should be fixed I think. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 16:13, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Julian H, could you fix them? Jee 16:16, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
    • I can try later. Or is it possible to fix the tint without re-compressing the image? Probably not, but that would be ideal. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 16:48, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done: New version uploaded. I had to remove the html link from the EXIF because commons won't let me upload a file with html syntax in the EXIF. Why that worked the first time, I don't know. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 17:16, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
      • Thanks Julian. We've a discussion about the html tags in EXIF, and our understanding is only html tags like <a> are prohibited; plain URL has no issue. Jee 02:58, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment the left "border" is not totally vertical. See note. It's fixable? User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 00:44, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • We can't consider that pole which is part of popemobile. Jee 02:58, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support now. Habemus Papam! ;-) User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 19:37, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Mig-29s intercepeted by F-15s - DF-ST-90-05759.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2014 at 15:19:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aircraft in flight
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Staff Sgt. Kevin L. Bishop (US Air Force) - uploaded by WarBaCoN - nominated by Ariadacapo -- Ariadacapo (talk) 15:19, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ariadacapo (talk) 15:19, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Strong Symbol support vote.svg Support - Kbh3rd (talk) 03:31, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 10:11, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Sorry. The (stated) subjects are no more than specs. There's a lot of cloud and condenstation trails, which look very exciting, but if there are Mig-29's and F-15 displayed is anybodies guess. Kleuske (talk) 11:22, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes, the contrails are the picture. The fact that the objects that make the trails are miniscule does not detract from them in the least. That those objects are named does not make it mandatory that I be able to read the serial numbers on them for this to be a valuable, high quality image. Kbh3rd (talk) 16:22, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - As per Kbh3rd. Plenty of Wow. -- Pugilist (talk) 17:11, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow, unusually 718smiley.svg Awesome! contrails. --Slaunger (talk) 19:55, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Kleuske + tilted horizon. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 05:26, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
    • The tilted horizon caused by the photographer's aircraft banking to the right and the contrail of one F-15 crossing up and over the other's path both make this a very dynamic photograph. You can practically feel the velocity as the nearer pair of aircraft close in on the farther pair. If there's a rule that says horizons must be horizontal, remember that breaking rules can make for much more interesting composition. -- Kbh3rd (talk) 01:46, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dman41689 (talk) 07:23, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Kbh3rd, absolutely! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:33, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. I don't think we need to be able to identify the planes, we can probably trust the caption and appreciate the composition as it is. It does look almost too perfect, as if they knew exactly what they were doing and what kind of photo they would get. Maybe I'm wrong and it was just an extremely lucky photo. :-) Diliff (talk) 13:16, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Hawk T1 Aircraft High Above RAF Valley with Benevolent Fund Logo MOD 45150071.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2014 at 15:13:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hawk aircraft
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ashley Shelley (Royal Air Force) - uploaded by - nominated by Ariadacapo -- Ariadacapo (talk) 15:13, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ariadacapo (talk) 15:13, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very creative, but the horizon is not "horizontal". User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 00:25, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I see your point. To me however, it’s part of what makes this picture so great: the sense of space, dizzing trajectory, and incredible point of view... Ariadacapo (talk) 06:04, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support And I think it is reasonable to align the crop with the aircraft and not with the horizon, which plays a relatively small role composition-wise. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 07:38, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pugilist (talk) 17:16, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and 718smiley.svg Awesome! --Slaunger (talk) 19:49, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow --LivioAndronico talk 17:10, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Phoenicopterus ruber in São Paulo Zoo.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Aug 2014 at 14:36:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Phoenicopterus ruber in São Paulo Zoo
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 14:36, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 15:30, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support My country! User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 16:03, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support A little bit DoF missing. --XRay talk 18:38, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 22:59, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I actually think the DoF is just right. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 06:19, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 14:59, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Portrait format would be better than this landscape format. --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:49, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Conditional oppose The background is posterized. Will support if fixed. --Slaunger (talk) 19:45, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
@Slaunger: this can be a focus's effect or not. User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 20:22, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
@ArionEstar: I doubt it. My guess is, it is the result of a selective background blur in postprocessing (which is sensible for getting good bokeh) gone haywire. I doubt it is present in the raw file. I think it can be salvaged by reprocessing the raw file. --Slaunger (talk) 20:26, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment On several occasions I have encountered the same problem. I will try to solve the problem this weekend, however, it would be interesting for someone to show the way of how to solve it. Thanks --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 14:02, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
@Wilfredor: My method is very simple-minded, I just mask the background and apply a selective Gaussian blur of modest radius. I usually do not get any posterization from that method. If your raw is posterized, I have no idea how to solve that. (Is it?) --Slaunger (talk) 19:20, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Mixing in a little of the original noise should, in theory, fix all banding issues. I highly doubt that the RAW has banding, because banding doesn't exist if there is noise (which is why a little noise is a good thing and adds information), and a camera producing a RAW without any noise at all would be new to me. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 21:53, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
@Slaunger: Thanks for the comments, nice review Julian. I've been looking for different ways to solve the problem, however, add Gaussian blur is exactly what I did and what I think caused the posterization. I Rebuilded from RAW. I have added more information on this, please let me know if it is well --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 02:01, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
"Unaltered version"

Phoenicopterus ruber in São Paulo Zoo

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Also added is another version without noise reduction and background correction --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 10:14, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Huvudsta May 2014 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Aug 2014 at 12:34:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Huvudsta metro station, Stockholm. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 12:34, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 12:34, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support of course... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:26, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 15:31, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kadellar (talk) 15:46, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 17:58, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Lights a little bit overexposed (see clock in the background). --XRay talk 18:39, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Almost abstract. Not bothered by the clock; it's an inevitable consequence of keeping the shutter open for the motion blur. Daniel Case (talk) 03:39, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support per XRay, very cool effect with the motion blur on the train. --Slaunger (talk) 19:42, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Brackenheim (talk) 18:16, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Canterbury Cathedral Cloisters, Kent, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Aug 2014 at 11:42:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Canterbury Cathedral cloisters


Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /— TintoMeches, 13:33, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors

File:Chelmsford Cathedral Nave 2, Essex, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Aug 2014 at 11:41:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Chelmsford Cathedral Nave
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff. This cathedral is certainly not one of England's most majestic medieval cathedrals, but it's nonetheless quite pretty and, I think, elegantly captured. -- Diliff (talk) 11:41, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 11:41, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 12:47, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 13:44, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:27, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 15:36, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:10, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support :-) --XRay talk 18:41, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 11:45, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:00, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:27, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support And nice metadata. So this must be one of your "quick and easy" ones, as it is 'only' based on three bracketed exposures contrary to the usual five. (Still, the quality is excellent). --Slaunger (talk) 19:32, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
    • Yes, I sometimes use only three if there is less dynamic range in the scene. The other settings (aperture, ISO etc) are also determined by how close the relevant objects in the scene are (if there is something very close, I need to use f/13 or f/16for maximum DOF, otherwise more like f/8 or f/11 for better sharpness), and how bright the scene is (I try to keep the ISO low, but some very dark interiors need a higher ISO because the upper exposure of a five bracket set would exceed 30 seconds at a low ISO. And also I don't want to wait 30+ seconds per segment! The full panorama will take forever to shoot!). Glad that the metadata is helping you understand the images better. Diliff (talk) 11:42, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
      • @Diliff: Yes, I understand. It all makes sense. Thanks for the explanations! --Slaunger (talk) 19:16, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:31, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Brackenheim (talk) 18:17, 22 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /— TintoMeches, 13:31, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors

File:ISS-20 Thunderstorms on the Brazilian Horizon.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2014 at 23:52:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Thunderstorms on the Brazilian Horizon
IMHO all issues from the previous nomination are fixed (the corresponding picture is in the file history).
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As nominator -- Ras67 (talk) 23:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I love the reflections on the rivers! -- Wolf im Wald 00:29, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I love the meteorology! Kbh3rd (talk) 04:19, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support My country! User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 13:39, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Dramatic view and good wow. --Slaunger (talk) 14:29, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 17:25, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow is almost guaranteed in images from ISS, but this one has extra wow... Kleuske (talk) 18:52, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:54, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:26, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Anolis marmoratus Lamarre 2010-04-05.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2014 at 21:45:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Leopard anole in cultivar bush
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Created, uploaded and nominated by Slaunger -- Slaunger (talk) 21:45, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The leopard anole (Anolis marmoratus speciosus in this case based on the location) is normally either bright green (male) or brown (female), but it can also change its color with mood and surroundings - a common characterisic of Anoles. This individual I found in a bush, in a village in the southern parts of Grande Terre, Guadeloupe, where I heard noise and found this little well camouflaged individual, which I guess must have been lurking for prey and/or defending its territory. It was difficult to get clean shots of the creature as it was moving fast when I came nearer. This shot is not perfect either as a leaf in the foreground slightly overlaps with the tip of its mouth, but I find it is mitigated by the difficult conditions of the shot. --Slaunger (talk) 21:45, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 21:45, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not sharp, but beautiful composition and colors, and big wow for me. And I prefer this over the numerous super easy sharp shots we find too much over here. - Benh (talk) 10:29, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • weakSymbol support vote.svg Support sharpness could be better but per Benh. --mathias K 15:35, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:55, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Dman41689 (talk) 07:15, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice photo, but the DOF is very small. --Ras67 (talk) 22:48, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 12:58, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Schloss Schönbrunn Wien 2014 (Zuschnitt 1).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2014 at 21:39:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Schönbrunn Palace in Vienna, Austria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Der Wolf im Wald -- Wolf im Wald 21:39, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolf im Wald 21:39, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 07:25, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The building lot and the car in the park are disqualifying for me, without them I would support immediately. Sorry! --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:18, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very high detail level, crisp, good light, colours and excellent exposure control. The construction work and car are a bit unfortunate, but I find it fills such a small fraction of the entire view that I do not see it as a problem, and certainly much less prominent than in other FPs. --Slaunger (talk) 14:48, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above. Very good! --mathias K 15:32, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice. The van is a real pity, but the cranes are just part of the city imo. --Kadellar (talk) 11:54, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 14:58, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good, I also like the tiny construction lot. One minor issue: If you take a look on the foreground there is a visible variation of sharpness on the grass areas I guess due to stitching. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:06, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Dman41689 (talk) 07:16, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- KTC (talk) 20:55, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Beach of Seaside in Walton County in Florida Panhandle.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2014 at 20:38:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Beach of Seaside in Walton County in Florida Panhandle.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Michael Gäbler - uploaded by Michael Gäbler - nominated by Michael Gäbler -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:38, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:38, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I made the color slide 1991 with Olympus OM-4 and Kodachrome 25 Reversal film, 35 mm, ASA 25 daylight and scanned it now with the scanner Nikon Coolscan V ED and Vue Scan 9x64 (9.0.82). I like the colours by Kodachrome 25. They are unchanged after 23 years. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:38, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree Michael. The scan really looks good after 23 years. I would normally object to such a photo due to limited value, but the composition and colors are really great and a pleasure for the eye, so I will make an exception for this revived little gem Smile. --Slaunger (talk) 22:01, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
    • I had not noticed the missing tube problem at first. Striking my support for now. Will support if fixed. --Slaunger (talk) 22:10, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
      • Supporting again after tube fix. Now that I know there was a problem there I cannot help notice that the tube fix looks a little weird. I think it could be further refined, but not enough for me to oppose as it is now. --Slaunger (talk) 14:40, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment WOW! but what about the vanishing tube? --82.57.142.136 22:05, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This really is something different. I would also support if the tube was solved. --Ximonic (talk) 22:32, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done I rebuild the image. The tube is returned. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 00:54, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ximonic (talk) 13:56, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There is some color banding on the sky. --Ivar (talk) 05:41, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The image is clearly manipulated (compare original with current) so needs a "retouched" template. The sky is very posterised -- you've ruined it with the alterations. I think you should go back to the original and just fix the little black top-left corner and leave the rest alone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colin (talk • contribs) 23:41, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Colin; nice compositional idea but way too processed. Daniel Case (talk) 03:30, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done I rebuild the image like Colin wrote. Please check the image. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 00:31, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Much better now imho - there's nothing wrong with a bit of sea grass lying around on the beach etc. However, compared to the original version, the sand has lost a bit of detail now (kinda looks a bit overexposed?). --El Grafo (talk) 13:32, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Better. I'm still not convinced this small picture is special enough for FP, but not strongly enough to oppose. -- Colin (talk) 18:53, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Berlin, Denkmal für die im Nationalsozialismus ermordeten Sinti und Roma Europas -- 2013 -- 4627.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2014 at 19:30:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Memorial to the Sinti and Roma victims of National Socialism, Berlin, Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XRay - uploaded by XRay - nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 19:30, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 19:30, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I like very much the simple composition (less is more). The leaf in the foreground is a little distracting and I would consider cloning it out (although the dead leaf perhaps adds a bit to the meaning of it all, I am not sure). The flower looks not so good in full resolution, either soft in focus and/or oversaturated. I do not know if something can be done with that? Otherwise very nice. --Slaunger (talk) 21:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • It may be that the image without the leaf is more perfect. I find, however, that the lonely leaf fits well to the symbolic monument.--XRay talk 07:48, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • After giving it some thought: Your are right regarding the leaf. How about my comments regarding the orange flower? Also the reflections in the water look a bit strange - a little like paint brush strokes from an impressionist painter. Anything unusual regarding the postprocessing worth mentioning? I think sharpness is OK. --Slaunger (talk) 14:55, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your advise. The orange flower is natural, there is no additional saturation.--XRay talk 15:23, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
* Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition, although I think the technical quality of the orange flower is not so convincing. --Slaunger (talk) 19:10, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I like the composition (including the leaf), but sharpness lets it down, sadly. Kleuske (talk) 12:56, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

File:MS Hilligenlei Abend.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2014 at 15:15:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ferry MS Hilligenlei at dawn moored in the port of Langeness in the german wadden sea
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dirtsc - uploaded by Dirtsc - nominated by Dirtsc
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dirtsc (talk) 15:15, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice ! -- Jiel (talk) 18:49, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There are a few minor problems, for example some CA on the right and a lack of sharpness (which is hard to avoid with ships and long exposures, I know). But the main reason why I don't think this deserves FP status is that the main subject is quite obstructed. Together with the long focal length, this weakens the composition in my opinion. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 17:49, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Julian. Daniel Case (talk) 03:28, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice mood, light and exposure control, but I think the main subject is too obstructed by the pillars in front. --Slaunger (talk) 19:07, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

File:View from Col d'Izoard.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2014 at 10:52:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The view from the top of Col d'Izoard
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominatored by NickGibson3900 -- NickGibson3900 (talk) 10:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- NickGibson3900 (talk) 10:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry Nick, but the image you have nominated has been overprocessed to death. Strong yellow cast, very artificial looking background. I would propose that you try to nominate a few photos at COM:QIC to get some feedback on the technical aspects of your photos prior to nominating at FPC. Less than one in a thousand images on Commons becomes featured. At QIC you are likely to get qualified feedback which will help you improve your photography. --Slaunger (talk) 11:43, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, bit this is an color accident and full posterized. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 13:17, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
    • Much better now, but now too noisy and too soft = unsharp. I think your camera (iPod touch) isn't perfect for this kind of FP-shoots. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 11:08, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above -- Jiel (talk) 18:49, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above. At first I thought the point of this image was to demonstrate the dangers of overprocessing. Daniel Case (talk) 19:35, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
@Slaunger:@Alchemist-hp:@Jiel:@Daniel Case: I completely understand all of you and I have uploaded the original photo which isn't over processed. NickGibson3900 (talk) 04:54, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The new version is much better and good for many uses. Unfortunately, it is still not at the quality level expected for a FP, but that is admittedly very hard to achieve with a mobile phone/ipod camera. --DXR (talk) 11:41, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

View from Col d'Izoard Remix.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Remix from original - View from Col d'Izoard by NickGibson3900. Please dear NickGibson3900 evaluate this alternative, I liked the picture and I think this might be useful. If you do not agree please comment that I remove this alternative. Partial fix noise and intensified colors. Thank you -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 00:09, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
I like it Lauro Sirgado, lets go with this one. NickGibson3900 (talk) 06:09, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose better, but still posterized. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 06:28, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It has improved a lot from the first version now, but I am afraid that the technical quality is just not good enough for FP. Sorry, but it is very challenging to reach FP status with such a very compact camera as in the iPod touch. Quite nice view, but it does not stand out in particular as compared to the many other excellent mountain views we have. --Slaunger (talk) 19:04, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Deer Stag AdF.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2014 at 07:51:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A frontal closeup of a big Red Deer (Cervus elaphus) stag bellowing during the rutThe antlers have lots of character. The detail around the open mouth is quite interesting too.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Arturo de Frias Marques - uploaded by Arturo de Frias Marques - nominated by Arturo de Frias Marques -- Arturo de Frias Marques (talk) 07:51, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arturo de Frias Marques (talk) 07:51, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeExpression of the deer is good, but DOF is bad. –Makele-90 (talk) 14:59, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Resolution is at the low side, it is not so sharp and the DOF is low, but for me it is mitigated by a very good composition and timing. Like the details such as the leaf in the antlers and that part of the antlers are broken. You feel the testosterone and aggression. --Slaunger (talk) 18:50, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It found it beneficial to elaborate a bit on the description on the file page, especially to indicate the location (I propose that you acquint yourself with geocoding your wildlife images in general) and whether it is a true wild life shot or of a captive individual. There are also some strange empty categories on the file page, which I do not understand. Are those vernacular names in Spanish? Please avoid those, just categorize to the latin species name as you have done and the location as you have already done. --Slaunger (talk) 18:56, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dman41689 (talk) 07:19, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Dauwnetel (Galeopsis speciosa). Locatie De Kruidhof.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2014 at 05:20:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Thanks, very nice image and plant however the crop is a bit tight at right (cut leaf) and at bottom -- Christian Ferrer Talk 06:43, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

✓ Done Correction crop. If you find it more beautiful, I can plant any center.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:08, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Mallorca - Leuchtturm am Kap Formentor4.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2014 at 13:56:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lighthouse at Cap Formentor, Majorca
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 13:56, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The image shows Cap Formentor, the most nothern point of Majorca and the beautifull landscape, the nice und interessting routeing to the lighthouse. -- Wladyslaw (talk) 13:56, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice compo, but also ... several dust spots (at least 5), CW tilt (horizon is not horizontal), sharpness could be a bit better and I'm not impressed with the light (midday sunlight in the summer makes the image flat). --Ivar (talk) 14:53, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
dustspots removed, bit sharper, horizon is horizontal IMO (see note), I like the light --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:37, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Would have preferred less harsh light. On the other hand light is harsh a lot of the time in this location at that time of year. The horizon is wonderfull, and the composition is good. Quite striking. --Slaunger (talk) 18:38, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 05:28, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Torreón de la presa del lago Mavrovo, Macedonia, 2014-04-17, DD 06.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2014 at 10:08:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Winter scene of the watching tower, dam and Mavrovo Lake, Mavrovo National Park, Republic of Macedonia.  The park, founded in 1949, is the largest (of the three existing) in the country with 780 km2, while the lake has a length of 10 km and a width of 5 km.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Winter scene of the watching tower, dam and Mavrovo Lake, Mavrovo National Park, Republic of Macedonia. The park, founded in 1949, is the largest (of the three existing) in the country with 780 km2, while the lake has a length of 10 km and a width of 5 km. All by me, Poco2 10:08, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 10:08, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kadellar (talk) 13:02, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice but too much predominant of the watching tower IMO. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 17:03, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the nice curved lines of the watching tower gives an interesting and refreshing framing of the landscape. Good DOF, and interesting place. --Slaunger (talk) 20:48, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Caecilius Mauß (talk) 14:44, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Christian Ferrer -- Jiel (talk) 18:47, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:52, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
    Wladyslaw: if you don't mind it would help me to know what problem you see with this picture, that make you oppose. Poco2 18:39, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
    I think the composition isn't successful. There are too many elements (upper and lower part of the tower, several coast lines) that are interfere and do not make the picture very harmonic. --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:30, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
    Ok, thanks, Poco2 07:39, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dman41689 (talk) 07:19, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Terraza de los Elefantes, Angkor Thom, Camboya, 2013-08-16, DD 10.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2014 at 10:10:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bas-relief in the Terrace of the Elephants, Angkor Thom, last and most enduring capital city of the Khmer empire, today Cambodia. The 350m-long terrace was used by Angkor's king Jayavarman VII (1125-1218) as a giant reviewing stand for public ceremonies and served as a base for the king's grand audience hall.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Bas-relief in the Terrace of the Elephants, Angkor Thom, last and most enduring capital city of the Khmer empire, today Cambodia. The 350m-long terrace was used by Angkor's king Jayavarman VII (1125-1218) as a giant reviewing stand for public ceremonies and served as a base for the king's grand audience hall. All by me, Poco2 10:10, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 10:10, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:03, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Arturo de Frias Marques (talk) 10:13, 16 August 2014
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 21:32, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:05, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I apologize in advance because I know this will sound rude, but FP has to be special in some way. Though of good quality and probably very useful in a wiki article, anyone can reach similar result with basically pressing the shutter in auto mode on a < $500 DSLR. - Benh (talk) 10:24, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
    Yes, that sounds rude, does it have to? Poco2 23:28, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
    Not sure I get it right, but of course it needn't be rude if that's what you meant. I just go straight to the point, so it sounds harsh, but I didn't use any offensive word, and I have nothing against you. Put in another way, it doesn't require any special skill, equipement, or even luck to catch this candidate. When I look at a candidate, if I don't ask myself "How did she/he do that?", "when was this taken?", "How long must have she/he waited?", "what kind of pocessing?", "what kind of rare equipment", "How fortunate she/he could catch this!", "How did she/he have the idea to take it from that point of view", "wow this must have demanded a long preparation"... then it's not FP. Otherwise, we might as well give away high end DSLR to everyone, and promote every pictures taken with them to FP. Again, just my opinion, and again my apologizes if it reads as too harsh. - Benh (talk) 12:25, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
    Benh: I didn't accused you of anything towards my person, no feelings hurt, but just remind that behind each picture there is a photographer who gives his best to the project.
    Regarding this nomination, I can just just say that the picture does amaze me, that is the reason why I actually nominated it. The place all around, the khmer heritage and bas-relieves like this one are featurable to me.
    Yes, it wasn't a complicated execution to manage the picture, but I don't live in Siem Reap and just took a walk to Angkor Thom to take this shot. Rather, I needed 3 flights to get there. Please, don't underestimate that effort in terms of time and investment, at least as long as we don't have a bunch of Cambodian contributors here, what I unfortunately doubt in the near future. Poco2 20:24, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
    Case closed for the personal issues :) Just wanted to make it clear (and I as far as I can tell, you behave very elegantly on Commons, anyways ;) ). For the picture, and criterias to FP in general, it takes me a lot of time and ressources to travel to South East Asia as well, but that doesn't mean every picture I took there is FP worthy. But you're right that feelings can be hurt in such situation, and it's always a struggle to find a balance between telling all the facts, and not hurting people. It's much easier to support than oppose, and I feel I'm the bad guy when I do so (and not to mention I can "make enemies" for my self nominations in the future!). - Benh (talk) 08:15, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ю. Данилевский (talk) 12:02, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Pilot ships in Vlissingen.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2014 at 07:15:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pilot schip in the harbor of the Dutch town of Vlissingen.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by [[User:|User:]] - uploaded by Uberprutser - nominated by Uberprutser -- Uberprutser (talk) 07:15, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uberprutser (talk) 07:15, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not bad but also not outstanding IMO -- Christian Ferrer Talk 17:04, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose So, so light, and somewhat arbitrary composition. Has some interesting elements, but not good enough for FP IMO, sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 20:50, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the atmosphere -- Jiel (talk) 18:45, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Skógafoss July 2014.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2014 at 06:19:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Skógafoss is a southern Icelandic waterfall with a width of 25m and a drop of 60m.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Skógafoss is a southern Icelandic waterfall with a width of 25m and a drop of 60m. I took the exposure of 3s using a 64x ND filter. At first I was a bit disappointed that the sky wasn't as clear as I had hoped. But I've actually started to really like the special, very "northern" mood the cloudy sky evokes in combination with the misty, humid air caused by the waterfall's spray. All by-- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:19, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:19, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 09:29, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 18:53, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tamba52 (talk) 05:57, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jiel (talk) 18:45, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 19:42, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice --Rjcastillo (talk) 21:32, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aswirthm (talk) 10:00, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks almost unearthly. Daniel Case (talk) 05:13, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Iris mariae 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Aug 2014 at 11:11:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Iris mariae 1.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Gidip (talk) 11:11, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Gidip (talk) 11:11, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 16:18, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This is a nice photo, but the background seems a little distracting, or maybe there's just too much space on the sides of the irises, but this isn't quite the case at full resolution. Fredlyfish4 (talk) 01:02, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 11:01, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 16:57, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ю. Данилевский (talk) 15:53, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jiel (talk) 18:43, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It is amazing how these flowers can grow in the sand --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:00, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
In the sands grow many beautiful flowers (for example, most kinds of tulips in wild), but not for long, at least 2 weeks to a month in the spring :) Ю. Данилевский (talk) 06:21, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Centered boring composition, distracting background (but I guess giving good clue on what kind of environment these flowers grow in), harsh light coming from behind, washed out colours. Maybe it has encyclopedic value, but not a Commons FP IMO. - Benh (talk) 10:33, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I have to agree with Benh. This isn't en-FP where a specimen photo might be appreciated. There's nothing extraordinary here. -- Colin (talk) 17:52, 17 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /— TintoMeches, 13:45, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Plants

File:1 toledo spain evening sunset 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Aug 2014 at 09:45:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Evening view of Toledo
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info c/u by Chensiyuan - nominated by DXR (talk) 09:45, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ArionEstar has made us aware of the panoramas of this user who doesn't seem too active here. I think this is quite an impressive image that would fit well into our FPano gallery. The street in the lower left corner is not quite ideal, but apart from this, I like the image. -- DXR (talk) 09:45, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very nice compo, but it has color banding issue all over the sky. --Ivar (talk) 15:04, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
    • Oh, you are right. That's a bit of a shame. I have notified them on their enwiki talk page, perhaps they will react. --DXR (talk) 15:31, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
      • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Until the sky is fixed. --Ivar (talk) 05:43, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'm very jealous of that one. Sunset, night lighting scheme, scenery. Colour banding is an issue, as is noise (less annoying), but fixed or not, this is too good for me to not support. - Benh (talk) 18:58, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very nice - I would cut off the building on the right --Böhringer (talk) 21:59, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (for now) per Ivar. I'd also crop away the railing in the bottom left corner --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:55, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Chensiyuan has given me access to the raw files. I will try my own luck at stiching tomorrow, I hope that I can address your comments. --DXR (talk) 15:20, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Evening view of Toledo
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I have tried to rebuild the panorama based on the raw files while incorporating your comments. Size is slightly reduced, but IMO 15MP is still within an acceptable range. Colors are a little bit less intense and I do no longer see any banding issues. --DXR (talk) 18:04, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DXR (talk) 18:04, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jiel (talk) 18:43, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kbh3rd (talk) 03:34, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:56, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg weak support Very good now, but the size has been strongly reduced (from 34 to 15 MP). --Ivar (talk) 05:58, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:29, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice, but I think you killed the mood with the cold WB. And why the downsampling? - Benh (talk) 10:36, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Benh, I disagree about the WB. IMO it is not colder than the original, which is oversaturated and thus shows stronger colours in both shadows and lights (at least, I'm not too keen to go +25 sat in Lightroom, which would give me the same colors as seen in the original nomination, because that rarely is faithful to reality) some might like that, though... I can of course upload a higher res version, but two of the frames at the left are blurred quite a bit, unfortunately. --DXR (talk) 11:29, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
  • You may be right. But it still has the cold mood and I don't connect sunsets with cold mood, so I don't agree with you regarding to faithfulness to reality (just because you go +25 on saturation doesn't really mean anything if we don't talk about where we start from). The original was pretty good, with only the banding issue and noise, why altering the author's artistic choices? - Benh (talk) 18:58, 19 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /— TintoMeches, 13:41, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
The chosen alternative is: File:1 toledo spain evening sunset 2014 DXR edit.jpg


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]

Mon 18 Aug → Sat 23 Aug
Tue 19 Aug → Sun 24 Aug
Wed 20 Aug → Mon 25 Aug
Thu 21 Aug → Tue 26 Aug
Fri 22 Aug → Wed 27 Aug
Sat 23 Aug → Thu 28 Aug

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

Thu 14 Aug → Sat 23 Aug
Fri 15 Aug → Sun 24 Aug
Sat 16 Aug → Mon 25 Aug
Sun 17 Aug → Tue 26 Aug
Mon 18 Aug → Wed 27 Aug
Tue 19 Aug → Thu 28 Aug
Wed 20 Aug → Fri 29 Aug
Thu 21 Aug → Sat 30 Aug
Fri 22 Aug → Sun 31 Aug
Sat 23 Aug → Mon 01 Sep

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/August 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/August 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.