Commons:Кандидаты в избранные изображения

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Кандидаты в избранные изображения на других языках:

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 Если вы считаете, что нашли или создали изображение, достойное стать избранным,— пожалуйста, добавьте его в нижеследующий раздел Кандидаты. Если в течение 15 дней ваше предложение будет принято собществом, то изображению будет присвоено звание избранного. Пожалуйста, обратите внимание: избранные изображения не имеют прямого отношения к Изображениям дня (однако выбор изображений дня производится преимущественно из «избранных изображений»).

Contents

Кандидаты[edit]

Для того чтобы проголосовать или добавить новое изображение-кандидат, перейдите по этой ссылке

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Mary Jackson working 2 - Restoration.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 May 2019 at 09:14:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mary Jackson

File:Atomium sphere (DSCF1211).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 May 2019 at 08:55:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Atomium central sphere

File:Anemone pulsatilla subsp. grandis ÖBG Bayreuth.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 May 2019 at 08:39:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima by Joe Rosenthal.jpg (delist and replace)[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 May 2019 at 07:28:59
Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima Proposed replacement

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Better quality and larger frame. For such a historical picture, it is better to keep it as close to the original as possible. (Original nomination)
  • Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace -- Yann (talk) 07:28, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:12, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace I agree. Charles (talk) 08:35, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:14, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace Cmao20 (talk) 10:12, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Salinas de Fuencaliente - La Palma 03.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 May 2019 at 05:21:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Part of the Salinas de Fuencaliente, Fuencaliente, La Palma

File:Lukatgni9412.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 May 2019 at 05:04:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lukat Gni
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Gede wahyu - uploaded by Gede wahyu - nominated by Mimihitam -- Mimihitam (talk) 05:04, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mimihitam (talk) 05:04, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Exciting image! My Indonesian is not quite good enough to give a good translation of the file description into English unaided, but I do get that this is a spiritual purification ceremony for the Hindu new year in Klungkung, Bali and a few other things. I'll look up the translations of some words and try my hand at a translation eventually, if no-one else does. Should a category for Klungkung be included among the categories for this photo? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:23, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Indeed, a very dramatic shot. Cmao20 (talk) 06:35, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Is it downsized? (The full resolution of the camera is 6.000 x 4.000 pix.) --Berthold Werner (talk) 06:51, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:11, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The right side should be cut (see note) -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:15, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Tari Kebagh, 2017.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 May 2019 at 04:57:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kebagh Dance

File:Paraiba-Lajedo de Pai Mateus.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 May 2019 at 21:16:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by DlauriniJr - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 21:16, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 21:16, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question That's quite an impressive shot, but any idea what's with the foreground lighting? ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 23:48, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentSymbol oppose vote.svg Oppose To me it kind of looks like a bunch of pictures merged, maybe that's just me. --BoothSift 23:49, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Boothsift. Not a plausible single-exposure photo, IMO, nor a stitching of similarly-exposed photos. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:04, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above, it's very beautiful but I am not convinced this photo is really possible as a single exposure. I'm also not convinced by the composition, too much foreground for me. Cmao20 (talk) 06:32, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support so what if it's not a single exposure? The foreground lighting looks like flashlight to me... there are some technical issues but I really do like the picture and it's overall impression --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:09, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose @GerifalteDelSabana, Ikan Kekek, Cmao20: FWIW, It's definitely possible (and commonly done) to get this in a single shot with "light painting" (lots of examples like this on the Nightscape Images Youtube channel, among others). But I still don't like the way it was done in this case; especially the bright spot on the boulder in the upper left corner is distracting and makes no sense to me whatsoever. --El Grafo (talk) 08:27, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Light painting aside, I don't buy that orange post-sunset horizon with such a bright night sky. When the sky is orange from the sunset you can barely see the moon let alone stars. You might see a planet or two, but that's about it. It's a nice photo compilation though. --Cart (talk) 10:06, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Lama glama Laguna Colorada 1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 May 2019 at 06:41:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A female llama with her cria at Laguna Colorada.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by me. —kallerna (talk) 06:41, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support —kallerna (talk) 06:41, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 08:04, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks good to me. Cmao20 (talk) 08:09, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:52, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for now, as the background, especially the sky, is too noisy/posterized for FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:05, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose and composition. Charles (talk) 10:44, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There is a cw tilt, too --Poco2 12:44, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Tilt, noise and posterisation fixed. —kallerna (talk) 15:07, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 17:00, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I don't see a complete fix, as there are still some subtle striations in the sky, but that's good editing work. I've struck out my opposing vote. Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:47, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm sorry, regardless of quality, I just can't see any great composition in this, it's more or less a 'get-everything-in-frame' picture and it just doesn't wow me. --Cart (talk) 18:51, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful oppose I really wanted this to work, but the background is just too unsharp. Daniel Case (talk) 02:29, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Erlangen Altstädter Kirche Orgel 3100622efs.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 May 2019 at 20:58:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pipe organ of the old town parish church in Erlangen
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Looking up is one of the reasons. The organ was built in 1961. I assume that figures from that time were used for the decoration. The artist was probably not famous otherwise he would be mentioned.--Ermell (talk) 06:52, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

L'enfant et les sortilèges[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 May 2019 at 20:41:32 (UTC)

File:Scots' Church Interior 1, Melbourne, Australia - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 May 2019 at 18:09:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The interior of Scots' Church, Melbourne, Australia, as viewed from the rear of the church looking toward the altar.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The interior of Scots' Church, Melbourne, Australia, as viewed from the rear of the church looking toward the altar. The current church was constructed between 1871 and 1874, and was built with the intention of being the "most beautiful building in Australia". The interior features basalt aisle columns, a set of stained-glass windows depicting the Last Supper and other scenes, and a timber-beamed roof. Created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 18:09, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 18:09, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think the view from higher up, on the balcony, is superior: File:Scots' Church Interior 2, Melbourne, Australia - Diliff.jpg. Less vertical angle-of-view so less vertical perspective effects such as making the roof look stretched. You also see more from that position. -- Colin (talk) 18:56, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Fair enough - I know you tend not to like it when these pictures include too much vertical field of view, and I can understand. I did see that one as well but thought I'd go for this because I suspected some people might oppose the other because of the slight distortion of the bottom corners. We'll give it a go if this one doesn't pass. Cmao20 (talk) 19:34, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I know some people think an Alt should just be for a different crop/processing of same image, but I'd be tempted to try an Alt for the balcony view. Might be simpler to let folk choose which they prefer, and I don't think both should be featured. -- Colin (talk) 21:46, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Alternative

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As Colin suggests above, I have added the view from higher up on the balcony as an alternative. I agree that both images should not be featured as they essentially depict the same scene. Personally I actually prefer this one too - it has a bit more 'wow factor' and is a more unusual perspective than the classic shot - but let's see what people think. Cmao20 (talk) 22:18, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 02:01, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gerifalte Del Sabana 02:55, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 03:28, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 04:02, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 06:03, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I prefer the alternative because I feel like the light from the windows is better handled from this angle. I also mildly prefer the longer sightline down the nave and the greater perception of the overall form of the interior. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:31, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 07:05, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:51, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I prefer this version --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:25, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 12:48, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 13:52, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:14, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Different from David's usual angles. Daniel Case (talk) 18:56, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 19:13, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:31, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:40, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Lago Pippin, Copper Center, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-22, DD 115-118 PAN.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 May 2019 at 18:00:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landscape in Glennallen, Alaska, United States
  • It is very high-resolution though. Personally I don't think the noise is bad for this size. But I take your point, I guess. Cmao20 (talk) 22:26, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Peulle, Cmao20: I've reduced the noise level a bit along with other minor improvements (crop, WB, curves) Poco2 10:29, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is Alaska, not the Caribbean, so the light is fine. I like the place and the composition. --Yann (talk) 02:04, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 04:03, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per nom and Yann. Dramatic and beautiful. If you can find out the name of the lake, though, please add it to the file description. Also, is it possible to add geo coordinates? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:36, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
    Will investigate later today the exact location, about the name I cannot promise, as many lakes have none or this info is not accesible. In this part of the world it rains non-stop and you've millions of lakes Poco2 07:58, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
    ✓ Done, it was not really tricky in this case, Ikan, may I introduce you? this is Pippin Lake! :) I also added a new cat, desc and renamed the file Poco2 10:29, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice catch, thank you for the nom Cmao20! Poco2 07:58, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Yann. From my own experience in those latitudes, while I was fortunate to have sun and clear blue skies for a lot of the pictures I would like to have had them for, the landscape nevertheless has a different, peculiar beauty under clouds. Daniel Case (talk) 18:05, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Yann. --Aristeas (talk) 19:14, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 21:19, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:38, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hockei (talk) 10:19, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

File:2017.05.13.-06-Schwetzinger Wiesen-Edinger Ried--Zottiger Rosenkaefer.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 May 2019 at 16:43:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tropinota hirta
@Cmao20: Actually, it is closer to 13mm long for adults, 15mm for larvae. --BoothSift 06:38, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • You are quite right, Charles, although the focus isn't terrible for me, I can definitely see what you mean about the yellow 'painting' around the edge of the bug. Switching to Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose until this is fixed. Cmao20 (talk) 11:16, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment You're talking nonsense about the colour. First, I never change colours and second, insects don't have real colours. They are generated by light reflections. And that just is very yellow on this yellow flower. The only evidence that I see here is that you want to kick off alleged competitors. --Hockei (talk) 12:21, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I am happy to take your word. Apologies. And I often vote positive for your images. There is no competition. Charles (talk) 13:07, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Fair enough. I will take your assurance at face value, if it isn't a real issue but merely an artifact of light reflection then I am happy to reinstate my Symbol support vote.svg Support. Cmao20 (talk) 13:40, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I looked at that area where Charles suggested an editing and came to the conclusion that there is none. Hockei has been for a while here and cannot remember of any chapter like that. Quality could be higher but the composition and size of the bug is a plus for me Poco2 12:55, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:00, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 21:20, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:36, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Goingarijp. (actm) 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 May 2019 at 15:21:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentThe mill has been rebuilt. coordinates adjusted. Thank you for your comment.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:09, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Fortifications of Capdenac 04.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 May 2019 at 14:43:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Porte Gergovie – fortifications of Capdenac, Lot, France

File:Exterior of the Castle of Valencay 23.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 May 2019 at 14:42:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Exterior of the Castle of Valençay, Indre, France

File:Plate of chips at the Chalet Cafe, Cowfold, West Sussex, England.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 May 2019 at 14:29:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A plate of chips at the Chalet Cafe on the A281 Henfield Road in the Cowfold civil parish of West Sussex, England.

File:Eurygaster maura MHNT.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 May 2019 at 04:12:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Eurygaster maura on eyelet
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Archaeodontosaurus - nominated by Boothsift -- BoothSift 04:12, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- BoothSift 04:12, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I think some reviewers will probably object to the background, but I find the composition interesting, and this insect is only 8-11 mm fully grown, so the resolution is great. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:05, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 07:42, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I really like the soft colors and shapes of the background contrasting the hard exoskeleton of the bug exploring the flower. Works well. --Cart (talk) 08:45, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Indeed, I find the bottom of the flower just in front of its head too disturbing, otherwise the quality is great --Poco2 10:05, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Ikan - if it's that small, this is great quality. Cmao20 (talk) 10:14, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Cmao20 -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 10:49, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:49, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hockei (talk) 16:25, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 03:19, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 03:47, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thank you all and especially to Boothsift for this appointment. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:09, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:18, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:18, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 21:21, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:10, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

File:2017.07.03.-19-Glubig-Melang-Fliess Wendisch Rietz--Keilfleck-Mosaikjungfer-Maennchen.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 May 2019 at 19:18:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Green-eyed hawker - Aeshna isoceles, male

File:Münster, Schlossplatz, Frühjahrssend -- 2019 -- 4208.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 May 2019 at 08:14:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Others_2
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 08:14, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 08:14, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support What a trip! Must have been quite hard to get the exposure time and timing all right. Since it becomes almost an abstract, it is a perfect reason for not trying to correct the perspective, that would ruin the balance of the composition. Well done! --Cart (talk) 08:48, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Even people had the decency to stay still. When everything just... works! -- KennyOMG (talk) 08:53, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fear and Loathing in Münster Face-wink.svg --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:16, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 11:36, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Piotr Bart (talk) 11:50, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 11:54, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 12:04, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 13:23, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Pile-on support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 15:24, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rbrechko (talk) 15:25, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --BoothSift 23:56, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 05:35, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:21, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:32, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Worked out well. Charles (talk) 08:22, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:06, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely. Cmao20 (talk) 10:12, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! --Yann (talk) 17:20, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Almost hallucinatory, as other !voters have suggested. Daniel Case (talk) 17:54, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:20, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:48, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:12, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Cyprus donkeys, Karpaz, Northern Cyprus.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 May 2019 at 23:31:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cyprus donkeys, Karpaz, Northern Cyprus
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. -- Podzemnik (talk) 23:31, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Podzemnik (talk) 23:31, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg weak oppose If only the eyes were open :)--BoothSift 01:58, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Exactly. Charles (talk) 07:16, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. :) It's like the donkey is smiling in the sun, closing its eyes since it's too bright.--Peulle (talk) 14:19, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I fail to see the wow in this. One animal looks sleepy and the asphalt road doesn't bring much in the way of background. --Cart (talk) 15:59, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Sorry, I agree with the above, it's a good photo but the background is a bit distracting and it's a shame about the eye. Cmao20 (talk) 10:15, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Very weak oppose per the eyes. Daniel Case (talk) 17:52, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 04:05, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose composition --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 12:02, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Bahnhof-Mooskamp Werkshalle-innen.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 May 2019 at 16:45:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

spherical HDR panorama in a tram museum in Dortmund
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by DerMische - uploaded by DerMische - nominated by DerMische -- DerMische (talk) 16:45, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- DerMische (talk) 16:45, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info 360-view: panoviewer DerMische (talk) 16:51, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Peulle (talk) 17:41, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't really understand the choice of viewpoing. Nor sure the subject has high enough wow. Being inside a tram might be worth the 360 (though challenging). Or being inside a great museum hall with lots of vehicles of land and air all around. But sandwiched between two trams is not a great position. -- Colin (talk) 18:03, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:14, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the way this is treated like looking up and down the aisle in a church, a popular viewpoint in these panoramas and you can really get a good look at all the details of the trams. What I don't think is good is the way the highlights are treated in the photo. All lamps and big highlights have dull gray centers, it doesn't look good. --Cart (talk) 20:50, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Underexposition (white color look more like grey) and chromatic aberrations --Wilfredor (talk) 23:16, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above--BoothSift 00:32, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thanks for all your feedback! You are right! I have load up a new version with correctet highlights and reduced chromatic aberrations. DerMische (talk) 08:48, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin and Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 14:27, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Piotr Bart (talk) 14:50, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great work. -- -donald- (talk) 09:36, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Amberboom (Liquidambar styraciflua). Detail. (d.j.b.).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 May 2019 at 15:20:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants #Family Altingiaceae
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Two new leaf buds and below them a tangle of seeds from a Liquidambar styraciflua (American sweetgum).
    All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:20, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:20, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting combination, but the composition isn't working for me. Also the hard light and the postprocessing make it look unnatural. -- Colin (talk) 18:09, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Colin--BoothSift 00:32, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment New version. Softer light.--Famberhorst (talk) 04:50, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
@Famberhorst: It is a good picture, really, it deserves the QI and VI, but in terms of FP, that is debatable. --BoothSift 05:59, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think there's too much room around the subject.--Peulle (talk) 07:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support So do I, but that can be dealt with by cropping the top and bottom. Daniel Case (talk) 14:25, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done. I cropped the photo. If it is not enough. Like a note. Thanks for your comments.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:28, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I prefer the new cropped version, seems good enough to me now. Cmao20 (talk) 18:21, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Duomo nuovo di Brescia ingresso.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 May 2019 at 10:14:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Detail of the Entrance to the new Cathedral in Brescia - Bust of bishop Quirini by Antonio Calegari.

File:Panorámica esférica de San Andrés, Calatayud, España, 2014-12-29, DD 01-176 HDR PAN.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 May 2019 at 09:27:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Spherical panorama of San Andrés church, Calatayud, Spain.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Spherical panorama of San Andrés church, Calatayud, Spain. The Gothic-Mudéjar church was built in the 14th and 15th centuries and underwent some modifications in the 16th-century. This image is the result of 175 frames, most of them merged in one out of 5 HDR frames (3 rings of 5 x 10 frames at 0, +45 and -45 degrees + 1 x 5 on top and 2 x 5 at bottom). c/u/n by me, Poco2 09:27, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info To view this spherical panorama properly, click here (pano viewer on wmflabs). Poco2 09:27, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 09:27, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support FP for me, the panorama is very sharp. -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 09:56, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow for me --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 10:17, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sharp all the way around. The perspective warp is of course part of the composition.--Peulle (talk) 11:05, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
    • warp? did you use the pano viewer when assessing it? - Benh (talk) 20:07, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Amazing. Don't need to go there now. Does it render the typical church interior FPC obsolete? Charles (talk) 11:09, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support truly amazing! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:06, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg WOOOOOOOOOOW! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 13:16, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 15:12, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Of course, this is quite extraordinary. Cmao20 (talk) 18:10, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wilfredor (talk) 23:18, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --BoothSift 00:27, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:38, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 04:47, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 05:26, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:57, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 19:33, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:35, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great work! --Gnosis (talk) 05:08, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Piotr Bart (talk) 15:38, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Sorry but you might want to fix the heaps of stitching errors out there first... the arch in the right side of the transept (so when looking at the altar) renders particularly weird. Not sure what went on there. - Benh (talk) 20:05, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
    True, I can see them, I'll upload a new version later today with those stitching issues fixed. Poco2 11:25, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
    Benh: ✓ Fixed --Poco2 12:37, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 01:28, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Puente sobre el río Gerstle, Delta Junction, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-29, DD 41.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 May 2019 at 09:06:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Through truss bridge over Gerstle river, Delta Junction, Alaska, United States.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Through truss bridge over Gerstle river, Delta Junction, Alaska, United States. c/u/n by me, Poco2 09:06, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 09:06, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow for me.--Peulle (talk) 11:04, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose light. Charles (talk) 11:13, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support due to the symmetry. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 13:18, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That composition is borderline titillating... Unfortunate lighting though. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 15:26, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice and sharp, good composition. Cmao20 (talk) 18:09, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad lighting--BoothSift 00:31, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 04:45, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Charles, the light is not good. --Cart (talk) 07:27, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Measured support If the bridge members had been painted, I would agree with Cart and Charles. But ... the cloudy skies actually work well IMO with the bare metal here. Daniel Case (talk) 19:32, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree with Daniel, although I'd like to note that the metal is painted silver-grey ;-P --El Grafo (talk) 08:22, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:49, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 16:20, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 17:19, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Charles and Peulle -- Piotr Bart (talk) 20:41, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per other --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 12:01, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Mirador Llano de las Ventas - La Palma - Panorama 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 May 2019 at 06:39:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from the Mirador Llano de Las Ventas to Breña Baja, La Palma
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 06:39, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 06:39, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Before we can judge this photo, you need to fix some bad stitching on the bare branches of the tree on the left. I didn't look at the whole photo, so check for any other stitching errors. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:42, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Thanks for the hint --Llez (talk) 09:38, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:09, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 20:28, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition: the tree is distracting, and I do not like the map guide. Other than that it's 60 % sky, and the valley is covered by clouds. What is the subject? —kallerna (talk) 05:23, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 16:21, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- The map is distracting. -- Piotr Bart (talk) 19:28, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose The map, the map, the map!--BoothSift 06:35, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Too many distracting things Face-wink.svg --Llez (talk) 09:23, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Mongoose pile.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 May 2019 at 05:59:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pile of banded mongooses(Mungos mungo)
@Charlesjsharp:, @Daniel Case: Is this better?--BoothSift 23:39, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Yes. Daniel Case (talk) 03:34, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
Yes, but still not FP for me. Charles (talk) 08:18, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support although I wish the tail were in focus. Cmao20 (talk) 18:08, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wilfredor (talk) 23:19, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Although I could see squaring the image off to get rid of that blurred rock Charles is complaining about. Daniel Case (talk) 15:24, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 6. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 20:28, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:07, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Cute but I miss the tip of the tail and only one of the three mongooses' heads are good captured Poco2 10:08, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

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
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info We already have a similar shot from the same spot in the similar hour. We also have 19 FPs of the bridge. --Podzemnik (talk) 03:35, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose FP should have more diversity--BoothSift 05:56, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as per Podzemnik, great pic but I think with 19 FPs of the bridge needs to be a little more stunning and in focus, sorry --E.3 (Talk). 07:35, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per E.3.--Peulle (talk) 11:06, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above, not bad but not better than the existing 19 FPs. Cmao20 (talk) 18:07, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much unsharp. Daniel Case (talk) 15:22, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:11, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hockei (talk) 16:14, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

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.

  • We promote pictures all the time because we like the craftsmanship behind them, how the light falls on a tree, the curve of a bottle, the color of a flower, the lines in a slope, etc. All very subjective reasons and digital photography is hardly groundbreaking by now. I don't see why we can't promote some moving pictures on the same grounds. Educational? I don't care if it has the heron's feeding habits wrong, what I care about is that it teaches that unselfish generosity can be rewarding even if you don't expect it. A rather good thing to educate youngsters in IMO. (Sorry about the spoiler, but it has been viewed by a lot of people now.) In the old days, such morale was taught with the help of allegories and fables, now we have animations. I don't think that grapes are what foxes normally eat either, but people usually overlook that in favor of the fable.--Cart (talk) 19:50, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I don't see a problem. Herons eat worms. And excellent EV. Charles (talk) 21:55, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
@Colin: Fish are the main diet, however herons do eat worms. --BoothSift 00:34, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Don't get hung up on the worms. I only mentioned it as the only educational aspect I could find was heron diet, and that was wrong. They might eat worms occasionally, but they aren't its main diet and there is no way the chicks would refuse any food. While there is a moral story, that argument holds for many works of fiction.
Compare Elephants Dream which was created on open source software to demonstrate what it could do. It has its own wiki article so is notable itself. This is a commercially produced short film to promote a big Chinese company (though with a oddly American-looking fisherman). Since adverts and other promotional material are not typically sold (and I assume the dog remains trademarked) then giving this a free licence is just a clever way for the promoters to increase its footprint on the web. The Commons I like is free, independent and has an educational mission. This is Commons being abused as a platform for the commercial promotion of large corporations. Don't think that represents us at our "finest" at all. -- Colin (talk) 08:00, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) We are usually very happy when professional photographers with companies and other companies (like SpaceX) release their material to us via OTRS. Yes, it is beginning to dawn on marketeers that it is good to give out some free photos and media. That is why we these days have so many good free photos of politicians and other notable people, some of which are FPs. This is the same thing. --Cart (talk) 08:36, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Limited images from promotional material can be very useful to illustrate a product or people. SpaceX launches are notable so having material that documents them is great. I think this crosses the line too much. It isn't providing information about a product or the company. It is just brand promotion dressed up in a cartoon, and you can see from their Wiki article that the company is heavily investing in promoting its brand. There's nothing notable here. We seem to have a mindset with film/CGI that anything with a free licence is in scope. I don't think pure advertising/promotion is a valid use of Wikimedia servers. -- Colin (talk) 10:34, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
I think we are just as guilty of helping big brands ourselves when we promote gorgeous photos of cameras, watches, booze, airplanes and luxury cruise ships to FP. --Cart (talk) 10:52, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
No we aren't "just as guilty" as those have educational value, those illustrate real actual things and having a great picture of them hugely improves Wikipedia or WikiVoyage or someone's educational book on how best to use your camera, etc. On their own, the promotional value is low and they represent distinct products. We'd have more problems if the camera was obscured with a splash saying "World's fastest autofocus" or a ship had a banner saying "Live your dreams on a --- cruise". We don't currently have folk uploading promotional short films for luxury cruises, with voice-overs from famous actors, and beautiful models pretending to be captains and waiting staff. Or an advert where some Canon brand ambassador is standing in a breathtaking location and explaining why he chooses Canon to get the job done. I hope you'd think those were out-of-scope.
This film is totally about brand promotion, which is not concerned with getting across information but about establishing good emotions for the brand. We don't learning anything about JD.com at all, or about fishing or about herons. But that cute dog mascot is stuck in your neurons linked to positive emotions. Someone somewhere in a marketing meeting, dreamed this up solely as a way of getting "cute dog mascot" brand awareness up from X% to Y% and about ensuring that brand awareness is a positive one. "Generosity" is in the film not as a moral tale to improve society but because that's a positive social value we now link to "cute dog mascot" and will recall if we see the JD.com logo. -- Colin (talk) 11:49, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
If you are so opposed to this film, why don't you nominate it for deletion per out of scope, I think that would be a more appropriate place for such discussions. That way you will get a better response from the community on whether free material from Company A is good and free material from Company B is bad. Here where we should mainly discuss the quality of the film. Btw, personally I think the dog is ugly. --Cart (talk) 12:36, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
I've thought about it but "in-scope" deletions are notoriously difficult. There is a gap between "so obviously out-of-scope that the community wishes to delete the file and prevent any use on any project" and "so barely in-scope that it isn't an example of our finest educational media files". -- Colin (talk) 13:19, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I respectfully disagree with Colin on this. It's a cute film and very well done. It doesn't matter to me if it promotes a company (and if it does, not so well for anyone like me who still hasn't a clue which company it is). Hell, every Disney film promotes a product, if you think about it, even if the product was originally the Disney films themselves. I don't think that would ever make a Disney film unworthy of a feature in the alternate universe in which they decided to make one freely licensed. I can also definitely think of advertisements that if they ever became freely licensed would be great FPs. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • +1 ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 01:31, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I watched the film without knowing (or caring) if there was a hidden marketing objective. Colin has many FPs that prominently promote products made by Philips, Sony, Russell Hobbs etc. What's the difference? And should we investigate whether the Tower of London was secretly marketing itself through its gossipping ravens? Charles (talk) 20:09, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • My photos don't "promote" any products. They are neutral. They could be used to promote a product. They can also be (and are) used to illustrate a Wikipedia article about a shaver, camera or steam iron. And they do so at high level quality of illustration. That's the difference. This is a fictional cartoon created by a marketing agency. Yes you aren't supposed to spot the hidden marketing objective. And you aren't the target market (yet) because this is a huge Chinese brand. If you were Chinese, you'd recognise the dog. The film director wrote "we ... saw an opportunity to play with his [mascot dog Joy's] innocence, and connect the audience with the company’s ethos in a genuine and meaningful way". The film closes with title "Make Joy Happen" which is a current brand theme. JD asked the production company to make a short film to promote their brand. That's 100% what this is about and 0% about what Commons is about. -- Colin (talk) 20:39, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 08:38, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:23, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Gnosis (talk) 05:09, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 11:58, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support No after credit, but still good.--Claus 06:14, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

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
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Due to the shadow--BoothSift 23:50, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Podzemnik (talk) 22:23, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Shadow at the bottom right corner, harsh light, and I don't like the composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:13, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question What is that shadow at the bottom-right corner? ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 02:48, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This is the shadow of a tree. This tree, on the right. The sun in this period (in winter) is very low. The lowest altitude in the sky at all, around December 19th. --Milan Bališin (talk) 08:08, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Shadow distracted me from the rest of the image, possibly a better crop? --E.3 (Talk). 07:59, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Basile --Cart (talk) 11:42, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Basile and Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 14:18, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special IMO. —kallerna (talk) 05:25, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

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, during the French Revolution, 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)
  • It is from the French Revolution. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:34, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I didn't notice the tilt. Charles (talk) 07:57, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support gone, thanks. Charles (talk) 08:51, 22 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 oppose vote.svg Oppose - I usually don't notice these things. I think this imperfection is significant enough to oppose a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:51, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment "LIVRES" is now tilted noticeably up to the left, but I'll take your point and discontinue my opposition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:23, 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
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by unknown artist / Google Art Project, uploaded by Dcoetzee, nominated by Yann (talk) 14:43, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gigapixels reproduction of Roman art, by the Google Art Project. "One of most virtuoso works of Roman mosaic art", according to GAP. -- Yann (talk) 14:43, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow... I love it -- 🇪🅰〒ℂ🇭🅰- 💬 16:43, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent.--Peulle (talk) 17:43, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Incredible. Shame the full-res version crashes my computer. Cmao20 (talk) 19:19, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

*Symbol support vote.svg SupportMartin Falbisoner (talk) 20:30, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

  • 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)
  • "black frame is not necessary", I'm not so sure... see my comment below. --Cart (talk) 18:37, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Retouched: color balance, cropped

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree it is better. See 10 MPx thumbnail (4000 x 2585 pixels). --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)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:05, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'm just going to assume the quality. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 05:06, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Someone's getting desperate :)--BoothSift 05:55, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, better. Even though, usability is becoming an issue here. Resolution like this might be alright to display in many years ahead but now most of browsers just get frozen. It'd be nice to have like 20 megapixels version linked in the description or the section "Other versions" so people with standard hardware can enjoy the picture in a higher resolution than "1,280 × 827 pixels" offered by MediaWiki. --Podzemnik (talk) 07:03, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • IMO, the point to such a huge resolution is not to see the whole file in a browser, but to be able to crop out some details. You can still see the original resolution in the set of tiles. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:10, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Still doesn't work for me. The best thing is usually to "tile" the big image. The original is presented in four tiles, but they are of uneven size making two of them too large anyway. If this version (not the 50% jpeg) could be tiled into 6 or 8 tiles, I think anybody could view/download it and if necessary re-assemble the image in their computer. --Cart (talk) 11:24, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @Habitator terrae: The issue is not size in MB, but in pixels. So your new version doesn't help. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:34, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @Habitator terrae: Still too big. I think it has to be less than 100 Mpixels, but it can be of higher quality. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:42, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
80Mpixels Habitator terrae 🌍 18:21, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Good. Now the zoom works with that version. Thanks, Yann (talk) 18:36, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Habitator terrae 🌍 11:15, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
    Habitator terrae while I think the GAP original is a bit dark, you should not change the colour balance. You have no reference and can't just pick a grey tile and say "make that neutral grey". If the tiles have a warm hue then that may be quite natural: this isn't a computer image printed on Xerox copy paper. It is likely the GAP professionals had a colour checker card to ensure their equipment/process was calibrated. Also your file size seems a bit extreme at 592MB. Photoshop with maximum quality 12 gives 436MB but the original was only 207MB so there is little point in saving any higher quality than that. For example Photoshop level 10 is 198MB which is a considerable saving and likely to make the image more accessible. On my PC I have a version with a +1ev exposure increase, a slightly more generous crop (27993×18139), original colour balance (a little warmer) and an sRGB profile so folks all see the same colours. I can stick on Dropbox or upload here if there is interest. -- Colin (talk) 15:43, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
    @Colin: I don't change the clam; I look at the color levels and change for every RGB channel the max and min input to the real max an min color (defined by a minimun level with my eyes). So this wasn't real color balance. This all was done by GIMP, and saved with 100% JPEG quality, without using the original quality, because that remove data for future edits. Habitator terrae 🌍 17:22, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @Habitator terrae, Yann: I don't understand your first bit about "the clam"? But it sounds like what you've done is not really an acceptable adjustment. Most images not not reach min and max for RGB and many do not reach min and/or max at all. I would really not expect an old mosaic to be bright white and each colour saturated -- generally they have low contrast and saturation. I did suspect you had effectively increased the global contrast. I have to Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for now because this is an artwork scanned by professionals. Btw, the way to save a copy that avoids removing data for future edits is to save as PNG then generate any JPG copies you need from that. I can upload a version I mentioned above. If you both have no objections I could overwrite this "retouched" file and ping folk, or I could upload separately to a different file (but then need Yann's permission to create a third alt and it gets a bit messy). If folk really want the highest-quality version, I could download the four higher-resolution tiles and recreate this sized image from those. -- Colin (talk) 17:55, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
@Colin: You can upload a separate file, and I will eventually replace the alternative. Regards, Yann (talk) 18:41, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
Yann, ok, it will this evening before I can do this. -- Colin (talk) 07:41, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
Hopefully there is a size for everyone there. -- Colin (talk) 23:23, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
The ZoomViewer works for all sizes including the gigapixel one! (FYI when you first access ZoomViewer for a new image, it creates a cache of image tiles to use, which for very large images takes so long you get an error message. But if you are patient, the cache gets created eventually, and when you try again it works). Yann since the gigapixel version can be viewed with ZoomViewer and is the highest quality/resolution image we have, and is identical but for size with the two others, I would propose that we should feature as "finest" the gigapixel image.. -- Colin (talk) 09:34, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
This is very weird. The ZoomViewer works here, even for the biggest one, but not for the current nomination, and even for smaller ones. :oSSS Yann (talk) 17:05, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Gnosis (talk) 05:10, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks good now. Would be nice to identify all the stones used in the mosaic (jasper, feldspar, sandstone, malachite, olivine, turquoise, flint, quartz, carnelian, granite, etc.) :-) --Cart (talk) 09:11, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Ok, I admit, I was sloppy here. I was pinged by Colin (about the new versions) who now reprimanded me on my talk page. I looked at the versions he uploaded and assumed one of them had also been uploaded onto this alternative version as Yann indicated he would do once they were available. I hope that offer still stands and I will leave my support vote here in the meantime. --Cart (talk) 09:45, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure what Yann intends to do. Yann, please don't overwrite or delete files (for now). Hope we can agree on the optimal file to nominate. Perhaps it would be cleaner to start a new nom? -- Colin (talk) 10:15, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I think to let this one finish, and do a delist and replace. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:50, 24 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)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:41, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support the history speaks for itself, amazing capture --E.3 (Talk). 07:46, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:37, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 20:57, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 08:47, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Piotr Bart (talk) 16:00, 24 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: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)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Elegant in its simplicity. Daniel Case (talk) 18:22, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Valued image with good quality, but no wow for me. —kallerna (talk) 05:28, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:36, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 07:47, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support As it could be crispier and the background/angle is not the best Poco2 10:10, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:49, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

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: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)
    • Thanks. I had a tripod but it was difficult to use longer exposure with lower ISO because wooden deck is not stable here. So, any motion of many visitors makes unacceptable sharpness of the photo. This place is very popular tourist destination and it is really difficult to use a tripod here. Also you can catch blue hour just during two months (December and January) in year. In other time tower is closed for visitors in blue hour. One more thing. Winters were not so snowy last years and this place doesn't give nice mood on photo without snow due to dark roofs. I waited for two years to catch this moment :) --Rbrechko (talk) 12:08, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 15:09, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Piotr Bart (talk) 00:43, 25 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)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Piotr Bart (talk) 08:09, 23 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)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Poco a poco. —kallerna (talk) 05:30, 24 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)

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

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. 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.