Commons:Кандидати у вибрані зображення

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Кандидати у вибрані зображення на інших мовах:

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

Shortcut: COM:FPC Якщо ви вважаєте, що знайшли або створили зображення, гідне стати вибраним, - будь ласка, додайте його в нижченаведений розділ кандидати. Якщо протягом 15-ти днів ваша пропозиція буде прийнята спільнотою, то зображенню буде присвоєно звання вибраного. Будь ласка, зверніть увагу: вибрані зображення не мають прямого відношення до Зображень дня (проте вибір зображень дня проводиться переважно з «вибраних зображень»).

Contents

Кандидати[edit]

Для того, щоб проголосувати або додати нове зображення-кандидат, перейдіть за цим посиланням

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Golden Gate Bridge during blue hour (16 x 10).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 May 2019 at 01:58:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Golden Gate Bridge as seen from the Marin Headlands during blue hour in April 2019

File:Joy & Heron - Animated CGI Spot by Passion Pictures.webm[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2019 at 19:06:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Vihorlat (v zime) 006.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2019 at 18:30:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vihorlat v zime

File:France 1793-A 24 Livres.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2019 at 14:54:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gold coin of the French First Republic, 1793
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Money_&_Seals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by National Museum of American History, uploaded by Godot13, nominated by Yann -- Yann (talk) 14:54, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gold coin of the French First Republic, 1793. High resolution and quality. -- Yann (talk) 14:54, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, It's great. The first thing that came to mind was the french revolution, I don't know why -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 16:48, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ahmed Najji Talk 18:00, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support High quality. Charles (talk) 18:29, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support But I see that on the English WP it was nominated in a set with three other images showing the 'winged genius' design on other coins. Would it be better to do the same here? Personally I think all four have what it takes to be FP and are even more impressive as a set. Cmao20 (talk) 19:22, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes, it has a lot of value as a set, but that's not a primary criteria here. Usually the gold coins get the star, others much less. --Yann (talk) 20:45, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMartin Falbisoner (talk) 20:32, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Seven Pandas (talk) 21:26, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --BoothSift 21:36, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - Are my eyes playing tricks with me? It looks to me like, judging from the "24 LIVRES" text, the back of the coin is rotated noticeably down to the left, rather than straight. If I'm right, that would require a difficult correction, as that portion of the picture would have to be separately rotated counterclockwise, then recombined with the picture of the coin's head, with the black background edited as needed to keep the rectangular shape. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:51, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes, it may be slightly rotated, but I don't think it is significant enough to warrant a correction. Regards, Yann (talk) 03:41, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support despite the small tilt -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:45, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Centaur mosaic - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2019 at 14:43:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Centaur mosaic from the Villa Hadriana, Roman art
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - On the face of it, at least when looking at file pages, the retouched version seems to look better. Please discuss. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:05, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --BoothSift 21:36, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Moving to Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose due to how dark it is--BoothSift 02:13, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Retouched: color balance, cropped

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree it is better. --Yann (talk) 03:52, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yeah, I too agree with yann -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 04:05, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I have a problem with the 592 MB. I think, the maximum upload size should not exeed 100 MB, as it is said on the upload page? --Llez (talk) 04:29, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
I agree--BoothSift 04:32, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
ZoomViewer is not currently working here either. From the source and considering the resolution I suppose of course a professional quality, but what about the access to the file ? Impossible to display it larger than 4000 px width. What can we do ? -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:40, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Fortunately, we can have files bigger than 100 MB. This bug is phab:T218089. Should we stop promoting images because MediaWiki software is broken? I don't think so... Yann (talk) 04:59, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Ok -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:05, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Flèche en feu - Spire on Fire.jpeg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2019 at 12:32:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

burning spire of Notre-Dame
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by LEVRIER Guillaume - uploaded by LEVRIER Guillaume - nominated by Habitator terrae -- Habitator terrae 🌍 12:32, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A perspective correction could be wrong here... Habitator terrae 🌍 12:32, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info See also Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Flèche en feu - Spire on Fire.png, problems solved. Habitator terrae 🌍 12:34, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support Wow! A well-detailed image of a tragic fire. Basically this one would have my vote as Picture of the Year (Obs.: category changed to Historical, seems to be more coherent). 😄 ArionEstar 😜 12:45, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great shot from great distance. The subject matter is very much of the moment, unlike more general shots of the cathedral.--Peulle (talk) 14:21, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 14:30, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not exactly perfect technical quality, but still an outstanding shot. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 14:33, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 14:56, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support What it lacks in technical quality, it makes up for in drama and historic significance. --Cart (talk) 15:18, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Amazing view, very striking. A bit of noise but high resolution and quite sharp considering the distance. The arrow could be more vertical (and maybe the tilt corrected), but this is less architecture than reporter photography, and we know that this arrow was leaning at this stage to collapse soon. I think this work is almost professional level (see at 6 Mpx), since it's rare to be so close of such a big fire (and as the author says on twitter a few minutes later the police asked the people to keep outside the security perimeter). Shot at the right time, when the flames are huge and the smoke intense. Great archive -- Basile Morin (talk) 16:00, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Unique I assume. Charles (talk) 16:36, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 16:49, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support We are fortunate to get this quality of free photo of such an event. -- Colin (talk) 18:33, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support An horrific sight. I thought we might see this one again once authorship concerns were resolved. Cmao20 (talk) 19:17, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ermell (talk) 20:12, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMartin Falbisoner (talk) 20:29, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Seven Pandas (talk) 21:27, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --BoothSift 21:34, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 04:23, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

File:RhB Ge 6-6 II Versam-Safien.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2019 at 10:48:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

RegioExpress in the Ruinaulta
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Switzerland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Kabelleger -- Kabelleger (talk) 10:48, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A Ge 6/6 II hauls a RegioExpress from Chur to Disentis through the Ruinaulta near Versam-Safien station, Switzerland.
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain as author -- Kabelleger (talk) 10:48, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support Great! A typical Swiss landscape (Switzerland = Featured picture). 😄 ArionEstar 😜 10:56, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:10, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Brilliant. Must have taken some planning to get this shot when the train was there. Cmao20 (talk) 12:24, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • You have no idea of the lengths this expert train photographer will go to to get his shots! Face-smile.svg What he does is outstanding, just take a look at his user page and be amazed. Also read about one of the shots here. --Cart (talk) 13:55, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Wow, these shots are truly extraordinary! Thanks Kabelleger for making these available on Commons. Cmao20 (talk) 14:11, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Речная церковь.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2019 at 10:32:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church of the Intercession on the Nerl, Summer 2015

File:Stouffville Reservoir.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2019 at 02:49:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Stouffville Reservoir (Ontario, Canada) before a storm.

File:Eastern chanting goshawk (Melierax poliopterus).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2019 at 23:06:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Eastern chanting goshawk in Ethiopia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 23:06, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Charles (talk) 23:06, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Interesting shoot view, however, the view from below is not very beneficial to appreciate the bird completely, the quality of the photo is quite low compared to other photos of birds. The composition makes it seem that the bird is falling and he has only has one leg. --Wilfredor (talk) 23:35, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting composition, though I agree with Wilfredor. The bird looks as if it is about to fall any minute now, from that angle. Next, the quality here isn't as good as your other pictures and it isn't as good as the other bird FPs. --BoothSift 02:06, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks for spotting this mistake Wilfredor and BoothSift. I had corrected the tilt of the post, but the post was actually leaning. New version uploaded. Charles (talk) 09:26, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Now--BoothSift 21:34, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Looks good to me, and I like the hawk's tough-looking (to me) facial expression. I feel that the hawk has quite a firm grip on the post and would have a firm grip on any prey as well. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:49, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good for me, too. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 10:43, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Ikan. The quality looks just as good as your usual FPs to me. Cmao20 (talk) 12:20, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, your Images are very sharp as one can deduce from your account name 😄 -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 16:52, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 20:16, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Podzemnik (talk) 22:31, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good bird shot as usual, Charles. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 02:55, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 04:18, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Windmolen Oude Zeedijkmolen (DSCF9628).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2019 at 19:46:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Oude Zeedijkmolen, Veurne
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Industry#Belgium
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info by User:Trougnouf
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Trougnouf (talk) 19:46, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sharp photo, but no wow for me --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:50, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In terms of quality, this is good enough. In terms of wow, it is lacking. --BoothSift 02:07, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I like the windmill, but I don't like the lighting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:50, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unfortunately I agree with the above, the lighting is not there really. Cmao20 (talk) 20:39, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I really like the idea and I'd happily support this in a different light. In the best case you'd move a bit to the right to get rid of the tree at the right bottom :) --Podzemnik (talk) 22:34, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Webysther 20190304151621 - Parque da Independência.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2019 at 17:22:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Parque da Independência

File:Moscow Hotel National stairway asv2018-09.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2019 at 13:22:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Stairway of Hotel National, Moscow

File:Leptoglossus occidentalis MHNT.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2019 at 06:29:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Leptoglossus occidentalis or the Western conifer seed bug
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Archaeodontosaurus - nominated by Boothsift -- BoothSift 06:29, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- BoothSift 06:29, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Remarkably clear, considering that per w:Western conifer seed bug, "the average length is 16-20 millimeters". -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:01, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The bug did what she wanted, I was very happy that she let me take three pictures before flying off. I have not seen this species in my garden since. Thanks to Boothsift for this nomination. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:58, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A good QI/VI. Unfortunately, the focus is not on the head, there are many reflections from the flash and the leaf is overexposed. I'm guessing, but it looks as is the bug is on a leaf that has been turned upside down. Archaeodontosaurus can correct me. Charles (talk) 08:57, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good depth of field! Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:20, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 13:17, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree with Charles but I feel the slightly out-of-focus head is less important given the resolution, it's sharp at lower but still high resolution. Cmao20 (talk) 16:05, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 17:30, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Hundreds of white dots is the result of excessive use of the flash --Wilfredor (talk) 00:02, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
@Wilfredor: Hundreds of white dots is the result of biology. The species has white dots, take a closer look at other images of the species--BoothSift 02:01, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
@Wilfredor: is right BoothSift Charles (talk) 08:04, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
The white flash points are the product of the overexposure of the flash, here a correctly exposed photo where the surface is observed without white flash points of reflection --Wilfredor (talk) 20:32, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
@Wilfredor: Ah, you meant those dots. I mistook you, my bad--BoothSift 21:31, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
User:Boothsift Sorry it could be maybe because english is not my mother language --Wilfredor (talk) 21:33, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not a pretty guy, but a pretty shot :) --Poco2 17:06, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Llano del Jable - Panorama 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2019 at 05:42:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from the Llano del Jable to the Montaña Enrique (left) and the Montaña Quemada (right), in the background the Caldera de Taburiente, La Pama
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 05:42, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 05:42, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 06:28, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question I feel you needed to be 100m forward of where you were to see more of the valley. The foreground doesn't add anything.Charles (talk) 09:05, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info It is a "Llano" (= Plain) there is no valley, there are only flat depressions witch look like the parts of the Llano you see in the foreground. The valley is behind the trees, some kiometers away. The foreground adds much in my opinion, for it shows the typical landscape of the Llano del Jable (= Plain of sand), which is formed by lapilli. --Llez (talk) 13:27, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for the explanation. Charles (talk) 15:16, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:00, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Almost an abstract with three undulating parts: sky, greenery and dirt. Good balance between the three makes it interesting --Cart (talk) 11:31, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 13:18, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cmao20 (talk) 16:04, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 17:30, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --BoothSift 17:36, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --СССР (talk) 02:51, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:57, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 17:08, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cart. I like the foreground ... it gives the landscape an earthy feel we usually don't see. Daniel Case (talk) 03:41, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Les Glissades de la Terrasse during a Freezing rain day in Quebec city 13.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2019 at 23:15:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Les Glissades de la Terrasse during a Freezing rain day in Quebec city
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I like the composition and the lighting but it's quite small and not very sharp. If it was at least a bit sharper / resolution was higher, I'd support. --Podzemnik (talk) 03:43, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @Boothsift How this image "does not fall within the Guidelines"? Please explain. --Podzemnik (talk) 03:43, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
@Podzemnik: Oops, my bad, can you contest it? I misread--BoothSift 03:46, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
@Boothsift: If I was you, I'd rather remove the template. Wilfredor is an experienced photographer and a long time Commons contributor. I think that template is intended to be used for images that are not within our image guidelines or for pictures of really poor quality. I think this is not the case. In general, I'd use the template very carefully and rather not at all for images of experienced contributors. They can take it personally you know and we don't want that :) All the best, --Podzemnik (talk) 03:54, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Québec city 0001 05.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2019 at 23:16:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Québec city
  • Thanks. That's not the photo I'm thinking of, though. Someone nominated a big panorama, taken from much higher up, of Quebec with a big ship in it, but also IIRC showing the Chateau Frontenac and much of the rest of the city. Maybe it wasn't Wilfredor, or maybe it didn't actually pass FPC. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:29, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Ikan oh yes I remember :). I will try add more saturation with lightroom (just joking). I did not have time to go down to take a picture during the same golden hour. Thanks --Wilfredor (talk) 17:15, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 06:28, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Time of day. Charles (talk) 09:03, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 13:25, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's a good photo but I much prefer the existing FP that Ikan links to. Cmao20 (talk) 16:01, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In favor of the existing FP--BoothSift 17:39, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others Poco2 17:09, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like this photo. Nice composition in blue hour. --Rbrechko (talk) 21:41, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I actually like the lighting. Though, It'd be good to have a better name of the file, this one is not very descriptive. --Podzemnik (talk) 22:41, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Weird posterized purple globs on the structure at the back of the top deck. Plus I think it would have worked better compositionally if it were more just the ship. Daniel Case (talk) 03:36, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Mural na Catedral da Sé.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2019 at 22:47:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wall Mural in the Sé Cathedral. The mosaic was designed in 1953 by the Italian painter Avenali, Marcello. - Born in Rome on November 16, 1912 - son of Luigi and Elena Terziani, died in Rome on 11 November 1981, and was ridden by Gruppo Mosaiciste Ravenna (Ravenna Mosaicist Group). Portrays the patron saint of the city of São Paulo (St. Paul) in Brazil, himself the apostle St. Paul holding the sword symbol of the decapitation of his death in his right hand; the book symbol of word that brings us teachings in his left hand; wears a white robe symbol of purity and dedication to the work of God; and red cover the symbol of his martyrdom. Made with gold and precious stones.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Even after three failed nominations, I think it deserves a star. Created and uploaded by Wilfredor - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 22:47, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 22:47, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment As you've nominated it before and there's been no support, why do you try again with the identical image? Charles (talk) 10:55, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Good points - very beautiful mural; clear QI; nice composition. Bad points - resolution isn't very high for an image that isn't very difficult to capture; the figure on the top right is distorted. I don't think there's enough either way for me to support or oppose overall. Cmao20 (talk) 15:58, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Changing to Symbol support vote.svg Weak support. The more I think about it, although the resolution isn't the best, it is nice and sharp at full size. I think the beauty of the mural has enough for me to vote to feature. Anyway it deserves a better hearing than it got in some of those previous nominations, so I'll cast a support to keep the debate open on this one. Cmao20 (talk) 16:19, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support FP for me -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 18:56, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The past stays in the past, this is good enough for FP--BoothSift 22:06, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks Arion for this nomination --Wilfredor (talk) 23:39, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:54, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 09:34, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I don't think this small a photo, with not very sharp sculptures on the sides, is an FP in 2019. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:33, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Ikan Poco2 17:11, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 20:05, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others.--Ermell (talk) 20:23, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but the photo is quite small and not that sharp for relatively an easy-to-take shot. --Podzemnik (talk) 03:45, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

File:46-101-0548 Lviv Latin Cathedral RB 18.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2019 at 19:57:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cathedral Basilica of the Assumption, Lviv, Ukraine.
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Ukraine
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Rbrechko (talk) 19:58, 19 April 2019 (UTC) - uploaded by Rbrechko (talk) 19:58, 19 April 2019 (UTC) - nominated by Rbrechko -- Rbrechko (talk) 19:57, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Rbrechko (talk) 19:57, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support because of the interesting weather and the good composition. Cmao20 (talk) 22:00, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Strong noise, light and cut on top --Wilfredor (talk) 22:38, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Wilfredor --BoothSift 22:48, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question How did you make the photo? Is there a taller tower than the cathedral? --Podzemnik (talk) 23:00, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 06:38, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose technical quality. Charles (talk) 09:07, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 13:22, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support While it's not pixel-perfect sharp smooth noiseless it is very well within FP category in my humblest opinion. -- KennyOMG (talk) 09:12, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 09:33, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Cmao20. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 10:40, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support Support because the color contrast and the view is really nice, weak because of the quality Poco2 17:14, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose for the same reasons as Poco's weak support. Daniel Case (talk) 20:03, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The image is just working for me really well. If you take a tripod next time, you'll manage to do miracles from up there! --Podzemnik (talk) 22:44, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Notre Dame at night on a cold night.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2019 at 16:31:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 16:31, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In honor not of the buiding itself, but in honor of all the people who dedicated their life and willed us this great work of art. Many thanks to my friend Jebulon who took the time and showed me his beautiful city on a cold february night. -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 16:31, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Sorry, I like the composition very much but I'm not sure the detail is quite there. In addition there seems to be quite a bit of JPEG artifacting in the sky. Cmao20 (talk) 17:44, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Cmao20 --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:45, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - agree Seven Pandas (talk) 21:23, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good comp, details not so good--BoothSift 22:51, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too noisy, many CAs --Llez (talk) 02:39, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because its poor quality as noted by all the opposes. Daniel Case (talk) 15:04, 21 April 2019 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Fine-art-nude-downtown.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2019 at 11:45:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Image is NSFW, click expand to view.
Fine art nude photgraphy with gobo lightsNSFWTAG
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment That is not a good or friendly way to present your nomination and it makes me wonder why you make your nominations. --Cart (talk) 12:03, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Adding an Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose to my comment due to sock nom. --Cart (talk) 09:54, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Not good by nominator. Charles (talk) 12:37, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I would vote for it, and maybe I should, but I'm a bit weirded out by the attitude the nominator is presenting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:07, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Since the {{Nsfw}} template is not working at present, I've replaced the thumb with a link. Prior consensus of Commons FP community is that readers of this forum wish to have control over when, where and whether to view images that are or may be NSFW. -- Colin (talk) 17:24, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • This very similar picture was POTD, which means displayed hundred of thousands times on the home page. I've reduced the size of this thumbnail to 132x132 px like in QIC, but please do not completely hide the image because otherwise these votes and comments seem to belong to the following nomination above. Maybe it's time to fix {{nsfw}} -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:15, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @Colin, Basile Morin: added the cot and cob template, hope this solves the issue? ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 14:43, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I already asked for help with fixing {{nsfw}} here. Your POTD argument doesn't mean anything other than there are people who lack the first clue to be found anywhere, and indeed when such an image does appear on the front page, there are female editors who complain or who form the opinion that Commons is for boys with too much testosterone and not enough brains. "Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should". -- Colin (talk) 18:26, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Testosterone, like adrenaline, is excellent for the brain. This sex hormone stimulates Eros, and contrary to a widespread thought, intelligence has absolutely no link with a lack of testosterone (or progestogen). Women have estradiol and naturally many of them, feminist or not, would appreciate chippendales FPs on the Wikimedia home page (or more sophisticated works involving sensual contents stimulating consciously or unconsciously their libido). In File:Fine-art-nudesunpine.jpg, the posture is artistic (like dance) and the model as pretty as a blooming flower, thus I assume the pleasure of watching is equally shared between males and females. There are also women photographers like Sally Mann who include nudity in their personal works. All kind of photographies should have a chance to get rewarded here when they deserve. I can't imagine stopping cathedral nominations just because the number of Christian buildings on Commons is disproportionate compared to other religions. {{nsfw}} was tested on my computer and is currently working well on Chrome, Edge and Firefox -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:25, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree with Ikan, but I don't think this should stop me voting for a good photo. I don’t know a great deal about this genre, but the composition and quality seem pretty good to me. Cmao20 (talk) 17:47, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Moving to Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan, also I must say I'm glad we won't be getting more of this nominator's very odd antics at FP. Cmao20 (talk) 12:31, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This the best Image that you nominated, but why are you getting mad ? If you don't want us to judge then why are you nominating these ? And please remove that comment -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 19:11, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per others and my comments above, but please examine your attitude! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:51, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not FP technical quality. And I don't like the suggestive pose. Charles (talk) 19:59, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - agree Seven Pandas (talk) 21:24, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Different, I like the composition and I was tired with the building nominations --Wilfredor (talk) 22:44, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 22:50, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Charles--BoothSift 22:51, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Despite the nominator's comments, please stop. --BoothSift 23:31, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
Moving back to Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose after another look at the image and the comments--BoothSift 06:58, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose blancs brulés et flou sur le visage. --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 06:36, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Support vote removed for now. S. DÉNIEL has a point. Please dial back the highlights a bit. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:30, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Nominator indef blocked, COM:ANU#Websteralive. --Cart (talk) 09:12, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nomination by sock account evading block. -- Colin (talk) 09:24, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as per Colin. --Yann (talk) 12:46, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose 'nuff said above ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 14:40, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because the nominator has been blocked as a sock. Daniel Case (talk) 15:03, 21 April 2019 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Weingarten Basilika Kuppel 1080038-PSD.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2019 at 07:10:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dome of the monastery basilica St. Martin in Weingarten
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Great. Please add that information to the file description. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:10, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --BoothSift 22:52, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 22:53, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:47, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 16:47, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support The dome windows could look better, but they're a small part of an otherwise excellent image. Daniel Case (talk) 18:54, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, but is it just me or does the image look a slight bit tilted CW? ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 14:41, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but per Gerifalte, it is slightly tilted Poco2 17:16, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Fine-art-nudepicture.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2019 at 04:17:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Erotic image
Nude kneeling womanNSFWTAG
  • Move to Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose due to sock nom. --Cart (talk) 09:53, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose left arm, piercing, scar, composition, background. Charles (talk) 09:27, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Small note: The scar looks like it was from a caesarean section. I don't think having gone through a difficult birth should be grounds for dismissal. --Cart (talk) 10:05, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose basically per Charles --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:02, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Since the {{Nsfw}} template is not working at present, I've replaced the thumb with a link. Prior consensus of Commons FP community is that readers of this forum wish to have control over when, where and whether to view images that are or may be NSFW. -- Colin (talk) 17:24, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Dear lord :-) Thumbnail reduced to 132x132 px like in QIC, otherwise these votes and comments seem to belong to the following nomination above. Also {{nsfw}} added -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:27, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • That link/comment was totally uncalled for, Basile. Please respect that some people have a different view that you. Being a Swede and more used to nudity than most Europeans, I can play nice on a few of these noms, but on the whole I'm not a fan of a genre that is essentially just a way of justifying men looking at and objectifying naked women. --Cart (talk) 10:43, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • À chacun son goût. --Cart (talk) 11:04, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Ok prude people :-) Sexy lady gone with {{Collapse top}} {{Collapse bottom}}. Wish this solves the problem for everyone, those who don't like erotic photography and those who appreciate a visible thumbnail at normal size while writing their reviews. Now it is "safe for work", very safe to work fruitfully on Wikimedia Face-grin.svg Of course not everybody need to be involved in every fields of the project (especially those they have aversion for), but Commons is not censored and unfortunately no pics = no visibility for creative artists like Jean-Christophe Destailleur, Dani Olivier or Spencer Tunick -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:06, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Basile, we've had these tired arguments long before you came here. Nothing you say is new and all dismissed many times before. The "NOT CENSORED" phrase gets bandied about by people utterly ignorant of what censorship really is and the limited scope of those policies. Commons does not censor what files it hosts in case someone should be upset (though it certainly censors material that is illegal or uploaded to harass). Wikipedia does not censor its articles content in case someone should be upset. But as WP:GRATUITOUS explains, we also try to avoid deliberately offending others, and find alternative ways to present information or images if possible. If you think for a minute that hiding an "erotic image" behind a link saying "NSFW" or "Erotic image" will cause fewer people to look and reduced "visibility" of those images, you don't understand how the mind works.
The censorship policies on both projects do not extend beyond File space on Commons and Article space on Wikipedia. Forums, user and talk pages and community newspapers are all subject to what grown-ups call "editorial restraint". It was clear to anyone watching Websteralive's account that they were here to provoke and cause trouble, and were likely a sock account. They have now been blocked indef.
Basile, even people who are quite comfortable with such images appreciate that readers should have control over when, where and whether to view them. It is not acceptable to view nude imagery in the office, on public transport, or a library or study hall, for example. Further one does not have to be a "prude", as you put it, to regard such images as problematic. Most feminist opinion regards such images as objectification of women, designed to reward the "male gaze": women are reduced to sexual objects for the pleasure of a male viewer, and often where the image is created/photographed by a man. This is modern mainstream opinion: nobody sticks a Pirelli calendar in the office these days. Wikipedia and Commons already have a problem with being considered hostile and unwelcoming to women. Repeatedly nominating such images here is simply an act of male aggression. -- Colin (talk) 09:20, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
This user, Websteralive, is probably a standard teenager who enjoys smoking weed while watching erotic programs. Well, not the best manner to seduce attractive ladies in the real world, but there's an age for that, and in my view the current disruption is not absolutely harmful. This is more touching and funny than inadmissible "male aggression" Face-grin.svg See at least six regular reviewers and respectable photographers supporting this nomination. Several of his QI candidates, reviewed by experienced users, will be promoted soon, some others have passed already. These nude photographs taken by Destailleur are not that bad in reality. This one for example arrived 4th position in the picture of the year.
Now the thumbnails of these QIs are in the archives, and trying to hide them because "they have been nominated by a terrible sock-puppet" would be even more pathetic than the wrong edits this person did.
Youth is nice in general. Young people make mistakes but they also bring new things, new materials, modern ideas. I understand teenagers get bored with repetitive churches, deserted landscapes and austere ceilings. Everybody, males and females, feel usually concerned with eroticism, feminists and machos too Face-grin.svg. There's no consensus now to say this image for example is not featurable. So why hiding it ? Several users just vote "oppose" because of the (very bad) nominator, but imagine if this work was promoted ? Now the question of the censorship becomes a real problem. Because such promoted works usually go straight among the other POTY candidates, and should not be hidden.
"Not safe for work" ? Of course this text replacing an image is totally safe for work, because these are just words, not representation. As when we read "cock" or "pussy", nobody sees what is behind these alphabet letters. And when you work at the university, or at the bank, or anywhere, you just don't click on a link saying "erotic image here" Face-grin.svg This is how the mind works.
Back to the picture, she really shows sumptuous curves Frankly, after a caesarean (means after pregnancy), such a wonderful body is impressive. Charm photography, very instructive -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:38, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I understand the above opinions but to me imperfections like a scar should not necessarily be grounds to dismiss a picture. Human beings don't fit a perfect ideal, that's to be celebrated not airbrushed I think. Also am I the only one who thinks she looks like a young Chrissie Hynde? Cmao20 (talk) 17:39, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Of course voters may oppose any image for any imperfections. Beauty is subjective. Charles (talk) 20:03, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I'm not saying you can't oppose it for imperfections, Charles, it was only my opinion that the imperfections don't matter to me. Cmao20 (talk) 20:31, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose scar does not matter, but tattoo distracting, don't like lighting, and she looks bored. Seven Pandas (talk) 21:27, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bored expression, tatoo, etc--BoothSift 22:50, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Podzemnik (talk) 23:02, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 16:36, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Small size, and frankly I think we can do better in the area of artistic nudes. Daniel Case (talk) 18:52, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Nominator indef blocked, COM:ANU#Websteralive. --Cart (talk) 09:11, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nomination by sock account evading block. -- Colin (talk) 09:25, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per colin. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 14:47, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because Nominator was a sock evading block and is blocked--BoothSift 21:40, 21 April 2019 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Koppie foam grasshopper (Dictyophorus spumans spumans) nymph.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2019 at 22:58:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Koppie foam grasshopper (Dictyophorus spumans spumans) nymph
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Oh Basile! I CAN SEE YOU... Charles (talk) 09:29, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Schwetzingen - Schlossgarten - Chinesische Brücke von NO 1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2019 at 17:17:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Schwetzingen, Schlossgarten: Chinese bridge, seen from north-northeast over the canal.

File:2017.05.26.-19-Kirnsulzbach--Blaufluegel-Prachtlibelle-Maennchen.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2019 at 15:28:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Beautiful demoiselle - Calopteryx virgo, male
  • Not really tricky; this species is less likely to fly off than many. The lighting is important though. Charles (talk) 09:34, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Can't help thinking they must have done a special damselfly-rich version for the Swedish market! Charles (talk) 10:50, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

File:La vallée de Mont-Dore.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2019 at 14:42:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

La vallée de Mont-Dore et le Puy de Sancy
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places#France
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by S. DÉNIEL - uploaded by S. DÉNIEL - nominated by S. DÉNIEL
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- S. DÉNIEL (talk) 14:42, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A very beautiful panorama. Resolution isn't the highest but it meets the standard. Cmao20 (talk) 17:10, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support Per the resolution and per Cmao--BoothSift 01:11, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 05:35, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 11:08, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quality soso, disturbing trees in the foreground and not a real wowing element in the background that compensates it, just a bunch of houses spread randomly. IMHO not one of our finest panos. Poco2 11:19, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Poco --Christof46 (talk) 15:19, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Nice photo, but on the whole, I agree with Poco. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:57, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 13:52, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 07:23, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Sunrise at TaniJubbar Lake.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2019 at 09:52:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunrise at TaniJubbar Lake
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural_phenomena#Reflections
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by Eatcha -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 09:52, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 15:18, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The contrail is a shame. Charles (talk) 16:20, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A beautiful motif but I think it lacks detail, there's almost no detail in the trees (probably because of noise reduction going too far). Perhaps have another go with less noise reduction applied? Again, the composition and motif are lovely. Cmao20 (talk) 17:06, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is lacking in detail --BoothSift 01:12, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Tempered Symbol support vote.svg Support - We're looking into the mist at sunrise. This is the kind of photo that's all about light, shade and composition, not detail. Compare File:Monet - Impression, Sunrise.jpg. Would you complain about a "lack of detail" in that painting? I'm guessing you wouldn't, because the artist is so famous now. Eatcha may be pretty unknown at this point, but that doesn't mean we should dismiss a photo that is intentionally about a mood, an impression, and the beauty of the play of light, shadow and fog on sky, land and water, and not about the smaller details that would represent a different style. The only reason my support is currently tempered is that the subtle striations in the sky aren't an effect of nature, but of mild posterization. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:47, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Ikan makes a fair point. I have struck my oppose. Cmao20 (talk) 17:59, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 07:42, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christof46 (talk) 15:21, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
    • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The reflection and colours are nice and I don't care about detail in the trees. But the contrail is a shame. It is so noticeable and distracting. Perhaps some careful Photoshopping could remove it. I think the almost centred composition isn't great and there's too much height. I'll suggest a crop that I think makes a better image. -- Colin (talk) 18:09, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I'm OK with this change, though I'm not sure I prefer it. But when you make a change, you should ping everybody who's voted or commented. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:22, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks for notifying me. I do prefer this crop, but the image, although very beautiful, doesn't say a lot to me personally. Maybe I've seen too many trees-reflected-in-water shots recently but for me it would need to be really extra special for me to vote for it with the limited detail in the trees, which does still bother me. Anyway, as it stands now it'll become FP so congratulations. Cmao20 (talk) 16:14, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • We don't get to choose when aircraft cross the sky to spoil a clean view, and contrails can hang about for a very long time. They are quite commonly removed in photos, as are dust spots, Charles. -- Colin (talk) 19:20, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support now. -- Colin (talk) 19:20, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 21:05, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Seven Pandas (talk) 21:29, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 22:57, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan Daniel Case (talk) 01:29, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 02:33, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 08:35, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:42, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 16:49, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support breathetaking — althought slightly lurid; FPC's let worse through though. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 14:49, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great compo and light Poco2 17:17, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Münster, Schlossplatz, Frühjahrssend -- 2019 -- 4145.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2019 at 06:05:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ferris wheel at the funfair “Send” in Münster, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany

File:Ripon Cathedral Nave 1, Nth Yorkshire, UK - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2019 at 15:00:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The nave of Ripon Cathedral looking east from the entrance in North Yorkshire, England.

File:Carl Sandburg's Rootabaga Stories (1922), Frontispiece.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2019 at 11:47:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Having dealt with scanners and printers most of my life, I know just how much a scan can ruin a good original. The most common thing is that it desaturates the original, sometimes rather heavily. This is because the very stong light of the scanner reflects on the paper and drowns out some of the color of the scanned original. I usually never use a scanner for copying art pictures since the scan requires so much post-editing. A camera is mostly better since it saves a lot of work. However, here the scan has been restored by Adam Cuerden, who I have come to know as one of our best restorers. If he has the original to compare with and says that this is a good likeness, I trust him. The image deserves another chance. -- Cart (talk) 11:47, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Wilkin River close to its confluence with Makarora River, New Zealand.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2019 at 10:01:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wilkin River close to its confluence with Makarora River, New Zealand
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural#New_Zealand
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. -- Podzemnik (talk) 10:01, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain as author. -- Podzemnik (talk) 10:01, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
    You may support too. --A.Savin 13:09, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
    @A.Savin You think so? When I started nominated pictures here, I think I wasn't confident enough to support my own nominations. Now I still don't support but I'm on a fence if do so. It seems to be pretty standard practice here. --Podzemnik (talk) 20:09, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very pretty --A.Savin 13:09, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 14:15, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great one! Cmao20 (talk) 15:12, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 15:17, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Milan Bališin (talk) 17:46, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:05, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - It's pretty good, I guess someone may oppose it for the branch at border-top-left; but I do not have any problem with it -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 19:57, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
    I had a version without the branch but I decided to upload this one. I just find the composition better balanced. --Podzemnik (talk) 20:09, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Seven Pandas (talk) 21:30, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--BoothSift 23:15, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:34, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. The branch at the top left is not great but overall a very nice photo. -- King of ♠ 01:46, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nice one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:15, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:57, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 12:18, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:43, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:00, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:23, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:56, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rbrechko (talk) 20:06, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 22:59, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 02:30, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hockei (talk) 05:00, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:45, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --СССР (talk) 03:06, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ach, that damn branch! ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 14:50, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Palazzo Grimani Castello affresco Stanza di Apollo variant.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2019 at 07:16:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Palazzo Grimani (Castello) a Venezia. Lunetta con affresco di Francesco Salviati "Origini e fasti della famiglia Grimani",
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Italy
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 07:16, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 07:16, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice detail but it is clear you weren't standing in the centre of the room, so the ceiling central lines are at an angle. I see this was a result of stitching two photos. It might be possible to get stitching software (Hugin or PtGui) to adjust the image to make it look centred. -- Colin (talk) 08:56, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Adding to Colin's comment: You can use Perspective Warp in Photoshop for adjusting perspective. I used it on this photo which was no where near centered to begin with. It's a great tool, although it commands a lot of power from your computer to work properly so shut down anything you don't need. Tutorial (or just search for "Perspective Warp Photoshop" on YouTube for many more). --Cart (talk) 10:49, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, with regret - the building is beautiful and the resolution is phenomenal as ever from your pictures, but the asymmetry does bother me. Perhaps something was stopping you standing in the centre. Cmao20 (talk) 15:10, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Cmao--BoothSift 23:15, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Asymmetrical composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:38, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 21:56, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Vicugna vicugna Salar de Chalviri.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2019 at 06:37:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vicugna vicugna in Salar de Chalviri, Bolivia.

File:Sunrise over Benmore Range, New Zealand.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2019 at 08:04:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunrise over Benmore Range, New Zealand
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural#New_Zealand
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. I like that the image shows rising sun in the middle and yellow / red on the side. -- Podzemnik (talk) 08:04, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain as author. -- Podzemnik (talk) 08:04, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support on your journey to Mordor? Face-wink.svg --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:53, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Martin, complete with Eye of Sauron black hole lurking behind the mountains. --Cart (talk) 09:08, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 09:47, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 🇪🅰〒©🇭🅰- 💬 10:23, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Peulle (talk) 14:45, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Lovely composition, as ever from your photos, but I'm not convinced by the amount of detail preserved at full-res. I'm not sure it matches up to some recent FPs in terms of sharpness. Cmao20 (talk) 14:47, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Will cast an unpopular Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose because there is a very visible halo over (parts of) the mountain and also the light levels of the field/mountain is just off. Too light, too washed out. (eta: cmao20 is also correct about lack of details full size) -- KennyOMG (talk) 14:51, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
@KennyOMG No worries for the oppose. I think people should be encouraged to oppose more :)
The halo was caused by sharpening. Even though I think it was acceptable, I've reduce it a bit. The mountains might have been too light, I reduced shadows. Sharpness - I honestly think it's sharp enough. It's a dark mountain at night basically, there was no source of light. If it was taken during the day then yes, I'd say that it's totally unsharp. But I respect that you think the opposite. Regards, --Podzemnik (talk) 20:40, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
It's more like a halo that's usually introduced by Clarity in PS (or equivalents). More visible on the left side than other parts. Overal levels still bother me in ways I have difficulty expressing, it almost feels like an "uncanny valley" sort of situation. Sorry but will keep my vote; only thing it will do is delay the FP confirmation anyway. -- KennyOMG (talk) 17:43, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support Stunning composition, but some technical issues (the halo, and there is some lack of detail) ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 01:25, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support Per the halo--BoothSift 04:12, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, that kind of sharpening halo in landscapes is a huge turn-off for me (even after reducing it). --El Grafo (talk) 08:43, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
@El Grafo It's pretty much gone now. --Podzemnik (talk) 09:11, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
That's something I can definitely live with. --El Grafo (talk) 10:01, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment@Podzemnik: Not an oppose or anything, but the new version makes the halo a bit more visible in the thumbnail? Might be just me. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 14:53, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Notre-Dame de Paris roof apostels evangelists.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2019 at 07:58:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of roof with transepts and base of spire and 16 statues of apostels and evangelists of Notre-Dame de Paris in France.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#France
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All this has gone with the 14 April 2019 blaze - Photo by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 07:58, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 07:58, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I was wondering when a nom of Notre-Dame would show up. This is of course a very good and detailed photo of the roof, but for many people, emotions are running high right now and I think this might interfere with how we vote. It could simply be too soon to judge this kind of photos in a normal analyzing way and for that reason I will Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain from voting on this. --Cart (talk) 08:50, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for your comment. I had this recent photo (there is already the scaffolding installed) which I wanted to share to see what we lost in the blaze --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 09:13, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 09:49, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Cart. This high resolution picture is indeed valuable, but I don't think it would even have been nominated last week. The spire is cropped, the scaffolding unfortunate, and the light very ordinary. At a later time we can perhaps judge better, and worth comparing fairly with other photos of this very highly-photographed building. -- Colin (talk) 09:57, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • IMO, the whole point is that we won't see that part of the cathedrale again for years, if ever, i.e. how similar it is going to be after reconstruction... --Yann (talk) 10:57, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • That makes it a very valuable mage, not automatically an FP. It's too soon to decide things like this, IMO. --Cart (talk) 12:27, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin, sorry. --A.Savin 13:21, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I am probably guilty, as Cart says, of voting based on my emotions about this beautiful building. But I believe it's FP nonetheless. Of course the image is not perfect technically - it's distorted a little at the edges - and I quite agree that it wouldn't have been nominated last week. But it now has value as a historical shot as well as a documentation of an extraordinary piece of architecture. When Our Lady of Paris is rebuilt, there's no guarantee it will look exactly the same, and I think an FP of the cathedral as it was before the fire is a good idea - to document what we've lost in the fire. Thanks for the lovely picture. Cmao20 (talk) 14:45, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
    Here you go: Category:Featured pictures of Cathédrale Notre-Dame de Paris. --A.Savin 16:19, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
    Thanks for pointing me to the category. Many of those are lovely, but I stand by a support for this one. To me, the point of this image is that it specifically depicts the spire and roof, the parts of the cathedral most severely damaged or destroyed by fire. Cmao20 (talk) 18:08, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
    • "Thanks for pointing me to the category". You should have already looked, though it doesn't help that category link is to Italy! We are judging "the finest on Commons" which requires researching the existing category of Featured Pictures of this (and/or similar buildings) and our existing extensive collection of images which may not yet have been nominated here. While some images that are not photographically/artistically good have other merits that make them superb, the main things going for this one is the great detail of the 50MP image and recentism. Regulars here will have seen this many times after tragic events, and nearly every time the nomination is rejected without prejudicing a later nomination. This building is one of the most photographed subjects in the world. So, the standard required for FP is high. -- Colin (talk) 18:56, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
      • I do try to look for existing FPs, Colin, I had already found some using the FP galleries, it's just the category I hadn't come across before until A. Savin showed me. But, looking in that category, I see five generic shots of the outside of the cathedral, one of the interior, one of the ceiling, one of some stained glass, one of the towers, two of a façade, and three historical shots from the C19th. Nothing that depicts the exact parts of the cathedral that were destroyed in the fire, and certainly not at the resolution of this picture. And regretfully, we’re not likely to get anything better until the cathedral has been rebuilt – which could take 15 years, and may not look the same as it did before. Maybe it’s a better argument for VI than for FP, but that’s my rationale anyway. Cmao20 (talk) 20:48, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others -- Ryan Hodnett (talk) 18:39, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- the fire is truly sad but this is not an FP. Seven Pandas (talk) 00:47, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. I have great affection for this cathedral and felt sick yesterday, but this is a VI, not IMO an FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:10, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others--BoothSift 04:14, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others: possibly a VI, but no FP. --El Grafo (talk) 08:47, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Shows much of what was destroyed in the fire. More of Viollet-le-Duc's spire would have made photo better, but now this photo is historical as it's very unlikely the spire replacement will follow Viollet-le-Duc's design. Abzeronow (talk) 22:19, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
@Abzeronow: Such reasoning usually indicates a VI but not necessarily a FP. --BoothSift 22:35, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A VI perhaps but not an FP. Daniel Case (talk) 02:50, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Private Michael McNamara - 5th Dragoon Guards.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2019 at 15:37:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rough Rider Michael McNamara, 5th Dragoon Guards
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Hughes & Mullins after Cundall & Howlett - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:37, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:37, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I'm touched by his brooding facial expression, and his costume is very interesting. Because this photo from 1856 is so striking, a degree of unsharpness is acceptable. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:49, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not good enough despite the historical value, IMO. Back then, photographers used various techniques in order to avoid motion blur. In this case, those measures failed.--Peulle (talk) 17:53, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The motion blur is present here. --BoothSift 23:53, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
It's from 1856. It's quite good for the period, especially given the circumstances. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:11, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Small resolution, underexposed and blurry -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:43, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I don't think this is your best restoration - not your fault, of course, but the fault of the material you had to work with. But I'm not convinced all old photographs like this should be made FP, as interesting as they are. Cmao20 (talk) 14:35, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:43, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 07:15, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Тикварник 3.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2019 at 14:47:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tikvarnik flavoured with cinnamon and cocoa beans
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Food
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by MadMona - uploaded by MadMona - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:47, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:47, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I prefer this to the other one. Again, the composition is very creative. Cmao20 (talk) 16:15, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not quite good enough in my opinion. Halos between the yellow and the blue, as well as lack of detail.--Peulle (talk) 17:54, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - [Edit conflict:] There seems to be a bit of a halo on the far side of the dessert. If that's edited out, I'd be happy to support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:55, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I disagree with Peulle on this one. --BoothSift 23:53, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Strange crop which aims to include the small cloves on the right -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:39, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looks too much like a snapshot without any wow effect.--Ermell (talk) 08:24, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per the halo on the top of the dessert noted by Peulle and Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 22:39, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It just doesn't wow me and I don't find it very appetizing either. For a food FP, you should really be tempted by what you see in the photo. --Cart (talk) 07:43, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Крем супа од тиквички 1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2019 at 14:37:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Courgette soup with yogurt
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Food
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by MadMona - uploaded by MadMona - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:37, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:37, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support Interesting. Food photography is a genre we're lacking in, I think, so this is a nice find. I'm not convinced the quality is brilliant, but it's a good composition and attractively shot, so I think there's enough to support. Cmao20 (talk) 16:14, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - This should be nominated to QIC, as I think it deserves the QI designation, but I find the sharpness a bit disappointing and I'm in no way overwhelmed by the picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:07, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Cmao. --BoothSift 23:54, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan.--Ermell (talk) 08:26, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Love the composition and coloring, and I think the details are sufficient. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 01:27, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:54, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 20:19, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg weak support The longer I look at it, the more I like it. I love the simple yet effective arrangement and the soft, natural lighting (looks like indirect sunlight from a window). It has a nice fall-off in sharpness towards the edges, while the subject itself is reasonably sharp. The editing is minimal, with a very natural look. It looks almost under-processed, and I think I would be tempted to give it a tiny little bit more "punch" in terms of saturation, brighten it up a bit and maybe shift the WB half a notch towards the warmer end. But that's all about style and taste and I certainly wouldn't dare to suggest that that would be any better than the current version. --El Grafo (talk) 09:38, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan. Just avergade quality -- George Chernilevsky talk 12:15, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice composition but for such a still shot I expect better quality. --Cart (talk) 07:41, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 23:15, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Cart --Llez (talk) 02:22, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 07:14, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Bosanemoon (Anemone nemorosa) (d.j.b.).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2019 at 16:47:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants Anemone nemorosa #Family Ranunculaceae
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info (Anemone nemorosa) Inflorescence. A happy spring flower.
    All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:47, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:47, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 17:25, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely! Cmao20 (talk) 18:11, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 🇪🅰〒©🇭🅰- 💬 19:35, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 19:45, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:58, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:21, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cart (talk) 12:16, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hockei (talk) 16:03, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:19, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Standard photo of flower. QI, but FP for me. --Rbrechko (talk) 13:55, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lighting is not suberb and the subject is not unsual, I'd have expected here at least a crispy sharpness, but it isn't, sorry --Poco2 17:23, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Slightly noisy background, but here that actually sort of helps. Daniel Case (talk) 01:09, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support mediocre lighting ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 01:28, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--BoothSift 04:15, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It’s not as easy as it may look, have tried this myself. --Aristeas (talk) 14:59, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good sharpness overall, but it misses the something for me. I prefer my own work which failed here some time ago. --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:57, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 23:22, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 02:19, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- P999 (talk) 20:12, 20 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Piotr Bart (talk) 01:40, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Red and white tulip at Myddelton House, Enfield, London.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2019 at 16:08:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A red and white tulip cultivar in Myddelton House garden, a garden developed by Edward Augustus Bowles (1865 – 1954), botanist, horticulturalist and Vice President of the Royal Horticultural Society, in Bulls Cross, Enfield, London, England.

File:Acorazado España (en 1923).svg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2019 at 13:40:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Perfil del acorazado español "España" con su aspecto en 1923
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Merci, c'est bon maintenant. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:07, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 7. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 23:23, 19 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Julia Margaret Cameron MET DP114480 - Restoration.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2019 at 07:57:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Julia Margaret Cameron