Commons:निर्वाचित चित्र उम्मीदवार

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
सीधे वर्तमान उम्मीदवार पर पहुँचें। सीधे वर्तमान उम्मीदवार पर पहुँचें।

निर्वाचित चित्र उम्मीदवार


FPCandiateicon.svg

निर्वाचित चित्र उम्मीदवार वो चित्र (छवियाँ) हैं जिनके कॉमन्स पर सर्वोत्तम चित्रों में से एक होने के लिए समुदाय के लोग मतदान करेंगे। यह सूची उन उम्मीदवारों की है जो निर्वाचित चित्र हो सकते हैं। आज का चित्र निर्वाचित्र चित्रों में से चुनी हुई एक छवि होगी।

निर्वाचित्र चित्रों के पूर्व उम्मीदवारों को यहाँ सूचीबद्ध किया गया है। यहाँ निर्वाचित चित्रों के कालानुक्रमिक सूची भी है: २००४, २००५, २००६, २००७, २००८, २००९, २०१०, २०११, २०१२, और वर्तमान माह

हमारे उत्कृष्ट चित्रों के अन्य अवलोकन के लिए कृपया वार्षिक चित्र चुनाव को देखें।

Contents

आम बातें[edit]

नामांकन[edit]

नामांकन करने वालों के लिए दिशानिर्देश[edit]

दिशा निर्देश यहाँ देखें।

नया नामांकन जोड़ें[edit]

यदि आपको लगता है कि आपने एक महत्वपूर्ण चित्र प्राप्त अथवा निर्मित किया है जो उपयुक्त चित्र विवरण और मुद्राधिकार के साथ है, तब निम्न कार्य करें।

प्रथम चरण: चित्र का नाम निम्न खाने में उपस्थित पाठ के आगे लिखें, उदाहरण के लिए, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:आपके चित्र का नाम.jpg लिखें और "नया नामांकन आरम्भ करें।" बटन पर क्लिक करें।

सभी एकल फाइलें:

पुनः नामांकन के लिए चित्र के नाम 'के बाद केवल /2 लिखें। जैसे:– Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2


Set nominations ONLY

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

द्वितीय चरण: आप जिस पृष्ठ पर पहुँचे हैं वहाँ के निर्देशों का पालन करें और पृष्ठ को संरक्षित करें।

तृतीय चरण: Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list में सबसे उपर आपके द्वारा निर्मित पृष्ठ की कड़ी डालें: यहाँ क्लिक करें और नामांकन सूची में सबसे उपर निम्न पंक्तियाँ लिखें:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:आपके चित्र का नाम.jpg}}

स्वैच्छिक: यदि आप चित्र के निर्माता नहीं हैं तो कृपया {{subst:FPC-notice}} से चित्र निर्माता को सूचित करें।

मतदान[edit]

वो सम्पादक जिनका खाता कम से कम १० दिन पुराना है और ५० सम्पादन कर चुके हैं, अपना मत दे सकते हैं। अपने नामांकन के लिए कोई भी मतदान कर सकता है। अज्ञात (आईपी) मतों की अनुमति नहीं है।

आप निम्न साँचे काम में ले सकते हो:

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

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

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:VeronicaBrunati-HackatonMundialIgualdad.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2018 at 01:20:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Entzia - Paisaje -BT- 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2018 at 17:09:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landscape of the Entzia mountain range; a beech, haze. Álava, Basque Country, Spain
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Spain
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. -- Basotxerri (talk) 17:09, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I've chosen B&W for this because lack of interesting colours, the sun was already quite high and it was hazy. --Basotxerri (talk) 17:09, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basotxerri (talk) 17:09, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice atmosphere. Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:42, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 19:53, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:52, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Quite good, very nice undulating landscape. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:24, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I understand the situation, but nonetheless: B&W for this kind of landscape doesn't work for me, sorry. --A.Savin 23:22, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:13, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support It could be stronger if you lost that cloud from the upper left. Daniel Case (talk) 02:39, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Theatinerkirche Munich, March 2018.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2018 at 07:55:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Theatine Church, Munich
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ahhh... clear skies. :) --Cart (talk) 14:50, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Great composition and mood, but could something be done about the oversharpening? Daniel Case (talk) 20:17, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks, Daniel. I honestly don't think the image is oversharpened, though. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:51, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Onça do Pantanal.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2018 at 21:26:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • I've got this lens and know how better it can be at 400mm, handheld with the stabilization. But the subject is interesting enough to strike my vote -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:56, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support a great, possibly iconic shot that just shouldn't be overly pixelpeeped... honestly, I don't know what could have been done better. Equipment and exif look perfectly fine to me. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:41, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • I've seen jaguars in the Pantanal and they are not that colour. Charles (talk) 07:47, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • I disagree the sharpness is an issue. The technical quality seems fine for a 400mm telephoto. At 6MP it looks completely sharp and would print A4 just fine. Charles, what specifically is wrong with the colour? Do you think the white balance is wrong? Surely the colour will change somewhat depending on ambient light. -- Colin (talk) 09:02, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Colour is too orange - check out the colour of the eyes - no other images on Google show this colour. Charles (talk) 12:56, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • If you take away the ambient soft yellow light and make the WB totally neutral (I did that in PS), you can see that there is something orange reflected in the jaguar's eyes. Orange is a preferred color to wear among some game keepers (and hunters) since many animals are color blind and they perceive it as grey while we humans can see each other even in dense foliage. This might be something like that reflecting. --Cart (talk) 15:02, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • No it's not a reflection. 400mm lens. It's a false colour. Charles (talk) 20:55, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, along similar lines as Martin. This reminds me of an illustration from "Where the Wild Things Are", except that it's a real wild thing and a real photo. Also reminds me of paintings by Le Douanier Rousseau. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:10, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is a picture more than a photo (and those are rare here at FPC) so composition and wow overrules technical pixel-peep-perfection. The overall light in the pic is warm, creating an ambiance, so it's normal that the jaguar gets a hint of that tone too. --Cart (talk) 11:26, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above. -- Colin (talk) 11:39, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per others. --El Grafo (talk) 12:02, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 12:44, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 14:41, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Harlock81 (talk) 17:04, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cart -- P999 (talk) 18:28, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cart. Mood makes me think of the cover of Fleetwood Mac's Tango in the Night. It has imperfections, yes, but those imperfections are what gives it its impact. Daniel Case (talk) 20:15, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:16, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not perfect, yet close to it --A.Savin 23:18, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

File:AllSaintsChurchFleet GableAfterFile.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2018 at 20:23:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

West end gable of All Saints Church, Fleet after the fire of 22 June 2015

File:Vieux Crabe (ship, 1951), Sète.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2018 at 18:48:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vieux Crabe (ship, 1951)

File:Western jackdaw (Coloeus monedula spermologus).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2018 at 16:54:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Western jackdaw (Coloeus monedula spermologus)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info John Gay, in his Beggar's Opera, notes that 'A covetous fellow, like a jackdaw, steals what he was never made to enjoy, for the sake of hiding it'. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 16:54, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Charles (talk) 16:54, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support for the claws, but especially that face. Nice quote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:02, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For some reason I get an old children's song from When the Robbers Came to Cardamom Town in my head when I see this. :) --Cart (talk) 21:31, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not sharp enough. Lack of details of the feathers on the main part of the body. Also quite a banal shot. Bird in a garden. I'm afraid this is the kind of images we might delist in a few years -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:09, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:35, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Basile. Quite a lot of chroma noise on the bird too. I don't see enough character or behaviour here to offset the negatives. If he was looking straight at me, with evil intent, then that might be something, but here it is just going about its business. -- Colin (talk) 11:50, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Colin. --El Grafo (talk) 12:06, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination not evil enough my friend. Charles (talk) 12:57, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Image:Vistas Alcazaba Almería.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2018 at 14:53:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Views of Almería, Spain, from the Alcazaba de Almeria.

File:Colorful face painting, 2696947.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2018 at 03:17:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Colorful face painting
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by ivanovgood, uploaded and nominated by Yann (talk) 03:17, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Yann (talk) 03:17, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looks good in small size, but too grainy in full size IMO --Llez (talk) 10:39, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yeah, and the slight lack of sharpness on the nose - it's pretty minor, but in this image it makes the paint look smudgy.--Peulle (talk) 19:45, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • @Peulle: Please sign to make your vote legit. --Cart (talk) 14:51, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks.--Peulle (talk) 19:45, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Llez. Daniel Case (talk) 16:14, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Why is the nose so blurry? The nostrils are in the same plane as the fingers next to them – but they are so much more blurry that I have to assume the nose was blurred on purpose. The picture looked cool at first and I was about to forgive some graininess that would only be visible when inspected closely anyway. And I like how you can see the photographer's silhouette in her eyes. But I just can't un-see that weird blury nose. --El Grafo (talk) 05:40, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:11, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination This is state of art photography. :(( Yann (talk) 11:53, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Retrato de una niña, Mahdia, Túnez, 2016-09-03, DD 06.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2018 at 18:43:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Portrait of a young girl, Mahdia, Tunisia
  • Charles: yes, of course, I explicitly asked the father of the girl, who was present, for permission. We were actually in the middle of a Wiki Takes and the girl was photographed by many of us. Poco2 17:27, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Many thanks. Charles (talk) 20:57, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's a good child portrait, but not much more. --A.Savin 23:57, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 03:20, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:48, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per A. Savin. Daniel Case (talk) 05:11, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The WB is too blue. When you do a portrait where the light is not a special feature, you should try to get that right so she gets her right skin tone (as well as the whites of her eyes). --Cart (talk) 13:48, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
    Cart, ok, I see, there was some room for improvement, I just uploaded a new version with a "warmer" WB, thanks! --Poco2 17:26, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Paisaje cerca de la mina de Collahuasi, Chile, 2016-02-10, DD 16-21 PAN.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2018 at 18:41:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landscape near Collahuasi Mine, Chile
@Poco a poco: Which makes this image all the more extraordinary ... Daniel Case (talk) 16:08, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - How many degrees is this panorama? It would be good to include that in the file description, too, I think. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:22, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
    Ikan, it is aprox. 200 degrees (the road on left and right side is the same), I added it to the file description, along with the geodata (middle of nowhere) Poco2 07:50, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Helleborus orientalis, Zaaddozen zwellen, Locatie, Tuinreservaat Jonkervallei 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2018 at 05:00:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Barbara Bush at LBJ Presidential Library.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2018 at 03:08:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Barbara Bush
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Lauren Gerson - uploaded by Blazoaustin - nominated by Shizhao -- shizhao (talk) 03:08, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- shizhao (talk) 03:08, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but that isn't working for me; it's a profile so you can't really see her complete facial expression, and there's not much going on that would give me a "wow" feeling. I don't think the technical quality is quite up to FP level either.--Peulle (talk) 14:02, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not a good photo, and if the intent is to memorialize the late Mrs. Bush, I think a) a better image could probably be found and b) we should wait. Daniel Case (talk) 18:05, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I don't think I agree that it's not a good photo, but I do agree that it's not an outstanding one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:25, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Canis mesomelas.jpg (delist)[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2018 at 16:58:27
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Head is not in focus (Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist -- Charles (talk) 16:58, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist . Barely passed in 2007. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:11, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Focus is on the rear end, head somewhat oversharpened. Contrast could be better. --Basotxerri (talk) 17:47, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist I agree. Considering the resolution, lighting and general detail, this is surely no longer one of the best images on Commons.--Peulle (talk) 19:06, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:40, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Good shot, but way below FP quality today. --El Grafo (talk) 11:57, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Purple fringing to a degree unacceptable in an FP. Daniel Case (talk) 18:02, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

File:PIA22349 – Gullies of Matara Crater.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2018 at 02:06:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gullies in sand dunes on Mars

File:Peak-in-kuh-e-genu-mountain-range-iran.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2018 at 21:20:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Peak of Kuh-e Genu

File:Dromedar on Queshm island in southern Iran.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2018 at 20:37:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dromedaries in the desert
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 of the above opposes. Daniel Case (talk) 15:24, 18 April 2018 (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.


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 23:28, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Hypomeces squamosus.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2018 at 13:37:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hypomeces squamosus on a green leaf

File:Straßburg Pöckstein 1 Schlosspark Monopteros 11102016 4827.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2018 at 13:25:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Monopteros at the park of castle Pöckstein, Straßburg, Carinthia, Austria

File:HarryTruman.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Apr 2018 at 08:37:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Harry Truman

File:Superfície não orientável - Bordo trifólio.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2018 at 19:23:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mathematical non-orientable surface which the boundaries are the trefoil knot in different angles.
It's quite bizarre to see this kind speech ^ in an open and collaborative community that has educational as its principals.
Charles I renamed the file as the Professor responsible for museum requested. It's a renomination, it's quite clearing that's a renomination, as we have access to history, but as I had to change the name of the file, put a /2 on it was wrong, and I didn't find documentation to how to proceed.
-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 03:17, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Apologies if my response sounded harsh. Without judging the actual quality of the image, I am going to formally Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose this nomination since 1) the image has previously (and fairly recently) failed to reach featured status, 2) there seems to have been no change to the image since then, 3) the nominator has not specified any reason for the renomination. Please accept my submission that without good reason, failed nominations should not be renominated. --Peulle (talk) 08:45, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment AFAICS, simply changing the name of a file is not sufficient grounds for a renomination, the image itself needs to be improved or changed in some significant way. That is not the case here, it is exactly the same image. I will not vote since I consider this nomination invalid. The community reached a decision about this image a year ago and that still stands. --Cart (talk) 09:13, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
    • While it is disappointing to fail through lack of support, vs clear oppose votes, the result is the same. Many people dislike opposing, and so when they fail to turn up and support, it still counts as a failure. For renoms, in addition to improving an image, or cases where a previous nomination got complicated or disrupted (such as too many alternatives proposed), I would support a renom in it was felt that there had been long enough duration (years) between noms that the community attitude towards a type of image may have changed. Doing it again merely to get another spin at the roulette wheel is not fair IMO. -- Colin (talk) 11:58, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • I reopen the vote, as a volunteer created an unhealthy environment in previously discussion, and by one vote didn't pass by false allegations, not because the lack of quality.
And them, well we have a new unwelcoming environment to discuss about this image again.
This kind of environment move away votes, contributions, more than low quality, a lot volunteers deviate harsh speech, but I think that you know that.
Again your are prioritising your political views than the evaluation of image...
.
Just one point, this seems to be a wiki community, and the one of the beauty of wiki is the possibility to change - as we have the possibility to remove a FP badge, rediscuss one image is not harmful, harmful is this what you are creating.
-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 12:38, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
RTA, the only volunteer who "created an unhealthy environment in previously discussion" was you. I don't know which "false allegations" you refer to, but sounds a bit like saying lies, which isn't very friendly. One supporter's only contributions to FPC in 2017 were to support your nominations. Another hadn't contributed to FPC for four months and would not vote again for another eight months. Both Brazilian. So some pretty clear canvassing going on there. -- Colin (talk) 13:32, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
q.e.d. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 13:36, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Charles (talk) 15:27, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per all discussion above. Daniel Case (talk) 05:29, 17 April 2018 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 23:26, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Vieux-Québec 05.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2018 at 16:33:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vieux-Québec
It is a subjetive factor, I find interesting the 50s building facade and aspect --The Photographer 23:00, 16 April 2018 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 23:25, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

File:River Cuckmere April 2018 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2018 at 09:34:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

River Cuckmere
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United Kingdom
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Pastoral English landscape with the river Cuckmere. East Sussex, England. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 09:34, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 09:34, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely landscape. The image might seem fairly ordinary, but it captures a certain mood. There's just something about it that makes me want to sit down by that stream and relax.--Peulle (talk) 12:05, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes, it is a peaceful moment but I still miss something here, a more pano view could help, there is definitely too much grass in the foreground and also a bit too much sky IMHO Poco2 12:50, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Missing nothing for me. It's beautiful and reminds me of really good 19th-century English landscapes by people like Constable. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:42, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but see note: a tighter crop might be even better --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:09, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Turneresque. Daniel Case (talk) 01:22, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support But a bit more "panorama-crop" would be even better --Llez (talk) 12:05, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:08, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Techelsberg Sankt Martin Winterwald 31012015 750.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2018 at 07:29:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Winterly forest in Techelsberg, Carinthia, Austria
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Still oppose for me; it's nice, but just not very ... "niiiice".--Peulle (talk) 14:23, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • I preferred the original version with the different trees and the shades of tones -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:40, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • The current version is better but I still miss more image on the top Poco2 18:18, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support now. Thanks Martin! --Cart (talk) 09:56, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't see anything really interesting in this and the tree bottom right (see note) doesn't help. Charles (talk) 12:36, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support Sharpest part seems to have been cropped out, but overall it makes a nice texture. Daniel Case (talk) 15:14, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Beautiful composition, and the crop resulted in a big improvement. I frankly don't care about the degree of sharpness of the trees in a photo that's so based on the rhythm of the eyes moving around the picture frame that that abstract element is much more important than the details on the individual trees. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:18, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special, no wow for me, per Puelle. --Karelj (talk) 20:31, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:57, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 11:56, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Hermione (ship, 2014), Sète 2018 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2018 at 07:25:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hermione (ship, 2014)
  • Unfortunately even very small things can disturb a photo. Might be hard to clone these out though. --Cart (talk) 14:14, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice blue hour shot. --Code (talk) 10:26, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Cart. The yellow flag looking like a ghost is more disturbing than the garbage bins, but both attract the eyes immediately after the ship. They're located in front, just in the middle. Also I wonder if this saturated blue is not overprocessed -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:54, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above, the subject is though FP-worthy. I wonder whether it would have been possible to take the image from the front Poco2 12:39, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose per Cart. Once you see those, you can't unsee them. Daniel Case (talk) 15:10, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Caecum vitreum 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2018 at 03:09:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A shell of Caecum vitreum from Tenerife, Canary Islands, Spain;
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Bones, shells and fossils
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info : No, it is NOT what you think it is on the first sight! 😉 It is a 1.9 millimetre long shell of a tiny sea snail.
    Created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 03:09, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 03:09, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Impressive for a photo of such a small shell. How did you even see this to collect it? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:23, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info For such small shells I take a handful of sand at the beach and then I search under a binocular microscope sand grain for sand grain for several hours. --Llez (talk) 05:00, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:23, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 05:27, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:30, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cart (talk) 08:19, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The quality is not there, but the similarity with the "object" is amazing and very funny. Nice find -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:58, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Basile, this one is far below the quality you usually present here. Clearly it is more challeging to get there for tiny objects but I believe that there is room for improvement, sorry Poco2 12:35, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree that the quality of the shell photos I usually present here is better. But I please you to note, that such tiny objects can not be photographed with a normal camera. All my photos of tiny shells, see for example the Caecidae or Rissoidae photos, are made with a binocular microscope, which does never reach (and is also not comparable with) the quality of pictures of a good "normal" camera. --Llez (talk) 13:16, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
      • Ok, I strike through my vote as I've no experience in this kind of photography, and therefore I don't really feel qualified to judge the result Poco2 18:21, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
Actually I've that lens (and in that cat there are a few QIs of mine) but so far I just used it outdoors, which is really hard. I'll try to take some studio images of tiny objects with my 5DS R, I didn't try that yet. Poco2 18:04, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info For the shell photos I normally use a 60mm Tamron Macro objective, which is comparable to the Canon lens mentioned above. This objective is useful for objects (e.g. shells) down to 6 mm (of course I made this photo with the 60mm Macro). All objects, which are smaller can't be photographed picture-filling any more, for you can't go closer to the object. This means, the smaller the object, the smaller is the object on the photo and the more empty space you have (and the more quality loss you have). Therefore I use for objects smaller than 6 mm not a normal camera with macro lens but an UCMOS 14000KPA camera (4096 x 3288 px) in combination with a microscope or a binocular mircoscope respectively, which allows picture filling photos of objects from 6 mm down to 10 μm (!), an object size, which is impossible to photograph with a normal macro lens. All my photos of shells, of which the size is below 7 mm, are made with the UCMOS 14000KPA. --Llez (talk) 14:56, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Interesting. I've added two categories : Pareidolias and Condoms. If not in the description, what makes this picture special should be mentioned somewhere on the file page, I think -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:27, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  • I question adding category:condoms, since this is not a condom. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:32, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support per Llez's response to Poco. Daniel Case (talk) 04:55, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Guéthary - Port -BT- 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2018 at 21:30:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Scene at the port of Guéthary. Pyrénées-Atlantiques, France

File:Three buffaloes heads above water in Si Phan Don.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2018 at 15:37:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Three buffaloes heads above water in Si Phan Don
  • Yes, these water buffaloes got their name from this particular behavior. They're often cooling themselves in the water (or in the mud), when the weather is hot -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:19, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Very strong oppose These working animals have ropes inserted through their noses and we should not be celebrating this abusive (though traditional) practice. Charles (talk) 20:58, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
  • OK, that's a point. It seems that I'm too urban to see this. Charles, did you notice that you've put 'support' in your oppose? --Basotxerri (talk) 21:19, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
  • For now this vote is more a green support than a strong oppose Face-smile.svg but to answer your comment, Charles, these domestic buffaloes are not enclosed and then free to graze and move where they want. I think such practices are more respectful than to park them in a small enclosure like in other areas in the world. But these are not wild animals, contrary to what it seems ! And concerning the rope in their noses, Wikipedia says "Bulls, especially, are powerful and sometimes unpredictable animals which, if uncontrolled, can kill or severely injure a human handler". Also I don't encourage any practice just taking this picture, I was passing by this river bank, and met these animals starring at me like big sharks, that made me shoot -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:19, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
Sometimes an innocently-taken image can reveal animal cruelty. Could I suggest you have a look at these online comments on what's behind this photo: one; two
  • Charles, are you ok? You vote with the wrong symbol, you confuse wiki-link code with external link code and you don't sign your comment. I have fixed the links for you though. Hope you are taking care of yourself, --Cart (talk) 19:55, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes, I'm just committed to animal welfare and I hope we all are. When I'm cross, I make more mistakes! Sorry. Charles (talk) 21:55, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Good to hear, you had me worried there for a while. The Wiki-project needs good photos of everything. Remaining neutral when judging good photos or good text in articles can sometimes be very hard when the content goes against our own feelings on the subject. Good photos are supposed to extract emotions from us and make us think. --Cart (talk) 22:07, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • You are right, but this well-composed image was taken in good faith just to be an interesting shot, which it is. A close-up of the ropes piercing the animals' heads would be very acceptable if the caption described what was being depicted. To give another example, it would not be acceptable (in my view) to nominate a pretty picture of very young children sewing colourful carpets without mentioning the abusive practice of child labour. Charles (talk) 07:22, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Well then, the solution would be to add neutral information about this part of the photo, since it is possible to extract closeups from this photo (one of the reasons why FPs are in hi-res). Let's see if I can fix that so that all parties will be satisfied. My edit can of course be removed or tweaked. --Cart (talk) 09:23, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Totally agree to mention this nose rope in the description. I also added a link to the Bubalus bubalis, which is the main subject. However, I don't think this picture is the right place to debate about the nose ring, the Wikipedia article is much more appropriate to the discussion (in favor or against), and a link to the page might be enough, I think. Then I changed the description accordingly to the vision I have about this image. Thanks for the contributions -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:29, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • That's ok, but in the new edit you instead inserted a personal comment and veiwpoint ("At this bank, starring at the camera like three sharks, or like three attentive observers, they're rather funny to look at, as if they were expecting something from their group photograph.") That should be removed since it doesn't belong in a neutral image description, please do so. Let the viewer form their own oppinion about the photo. Like if this photo was to be used in an article about nose ropes, that's not the sort of comment you'd want accompanying the picture. --Cart (talk) 12:47, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes, I took the liberty to write it's funny because I'm not the only one to find so, reading the others. And concerning your idea about nose ropes, reading the Wikipedia page, there is not (yet) people against -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:07, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Just because there are at least two people finding something funny, does not mean it is so for everyone. I for one don't find this funny at all. But it's a good picture. Image descriptions should be neutral, that's how encyclopedic material works. If you don't like to have other people's values in an image text, you should not impose your values either. --Cart (talk) 14:54, 16 April 2018 (UTC)~
  • No problem, I'm fine with the description now -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:01, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Basile, it would be best to add the new descriptions in French, too, when you have the chance. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:21, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes, slowly, slowly... First get a consensus on the text in English, then translate -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:01, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I saw once one water buffalo gone berserk... and out of control. In this case, better not to stay close... The rope in the nose is a necessary security feature for every one. Regards, Yann (talk) 03:32, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Camaleão - Polychrus marmoratus.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Apr 2018 at 12:27:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Caerphilly Castle south.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Apr 2018 at 21:10:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Caerphilly Castle, Wales
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#United_Kingdom
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by DeFacto - uploaded by DeFacto - nominated by DeFacto -- -- DeFacto (talk). 21:10, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -- DeFacto (talk). 21:10, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tozina (talk) 22:07, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support High quality, but I would crop a little off the bottom (keeping all the reflection) and get rid off the remaining grass bottom right. Charles (talk) 22:08, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good for QI, but not that good light, harsh shadows, sorry --A.Savin 00:46, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I actually like the harsh shadows... they help accentuate the function/character of a fortress --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:45, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like the light either, it almost looks overexposed.--Peulle (talk) 09:16, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Peulle. Further, I'm wondering if a long exposure could have created a better reflection of the building. Or a shot on a less windy day. --Basotxerri (talk) 13:19, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Tempered support Basotxerri has a point, but until we get that picture I'm OK with this one. Daniel Case (talk) 17:39, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A possible FP-composition, but the light does not impressed me --Michielverbeek (talk) 23:18, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 21:28, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Powerlines at the crossroads.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Apr 2018 at 21:46:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Powerlines at the crossroads