Commons:特色图片评选

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Skip to current candidates 跳转至评选区
此处的图片评选区交流主要使用英语,如果需要中文交流区,请前往中文维基百科的本地评选区

特色图片评选


FPCandiateicon.svg

欢迎来到特色图片评选!社群将在此投票决定图片是否会被选为维基共享资源最优秀的图片之一,即特色图片每日图片的图像便是从特色图片中选取的。特色图片是中文维基百科最令人感到印象深刻,也是最具百科性的图片或图表。谚语有云:“一画胜千言。”特色图片能够让条目的内容更加清楚丰富。如果你认为你已经创作或找到了一张可能有价值的图像,请把它加到“提名”部分。如果在10天后达成了共识,图像就会成功入选。

这里列出了特色图片的评选记录,你也可以在下方查看按时间顺序列出的图片:2004年2005, 2006年2007年2008年2009年2010年2011年2012年2013年2014年2015年2016以及本月

关于我们最好的照片的另一个概述,请参阅我们的年度评选

规范[edit]

  • 投票周期为10天,之后的投票将无效。
  • 欢迎匿名用户提名并参与讨论。
  • 提名者可以随时撤回提名。
  • 每个注册用户都可以投票,匿名用户的票将不统计。
  • 如果提名5天后没有支持票,该提名将提前结束。
  • 通过的标准:至少5个支持票,支持票与反对票比例大于2/1。
  • 完成的投票保存在存档
  • 参见投票结束后操作指引

提名[edit]

如果您认为您已经找到或拍摄了一张可能符合标准的图像,并使用了适当的图像描述和版权标记许可,那么请按照如下步骤操作:

1. 按照括号内的格式(Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:提名图像名称.jpg)在下方的文本框输入图像名称,然后点击“创建新提名”按钮。

如果本次提名为第n次提名,请按照括号内的格式(Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:提名图像名称.jpg/2)展开操作。

所有的新图片集提名页面都应按照括号内的格式(Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/My nomination)进行。


2. 按照编辑页面上的说明进行操作并保存页面。(注:打开编辑页面后,您在上方看到的“LIST OF NOMINATIONS (Put your nominations to the TOP of this section (after this comment))”大意为“这里是候选图片列表,请将您的提名提交到本节的顶部(在本行后)”;您在下方看到的“DO NOT ADD NEW NOMINATIONS ABOVE THIS LINE, BUT ON TOP”大意为“不要在本行上方添加新的贴士(除了顶部)”。 )

3. 点击此处并按如下格式在图片候选区顶端加入新内容:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:提名图像名称.jpg}}

推荐操作:COM:FP的列表处添加一个分类。

可选操作:如果您不是图像的创建者,请通知在他/她的讨论页添入“{{subst:FPC-notice|Your image filename.jpg}} -- ~~~~”(不含括号)。

注意,你的荧光屏可能未调校妥当![edit]

光暗度[edit]

Shadowtest.jpg

在讨论图像的光暗度的时候,投票者有必要知道他们的屏幕显示有否被适当地调整。不同的屏幕显示,它们显示阴影细节的能力亦大有不同。旁边为一幅画了四个暗灰色的圆圈的图片。如果您能辨明其中三个(甚至四个)圈子,那表示你的的屏幕可以正确地显示阴影细节。如果你只能够看到三个以下的圈子,你可能需要调整你的屏幕以及/或者电脑显示设置。一些显示设备可能无法被调整至观察阴影细节的最理想度数,故此请在投票的时候考虑这点。如果可行的话,也可以考虑把它打印出来。

色彩度[edit]

Colortest.png

在伽玛调整的屏幕显示上从几尺之外观看右图,图中四个不同颜色的圈子会自然混入背景之中。如果他们完全跟背景混合,你则须要调校你的伽玛设置(在电脑的输出设置上,而不在于屏幕显示),直到它们能彼此融合。调校的过程也许会非常困难,然而轻微的偏差并不是致命伤。未能更正的个人电脑显示通常会显示出比背景深色的圈子。请注意,在液晶显示(无论膝上电脑或者平面屏幕)上观看图片,你的观看角度有很大可能影响屏幕上的图像质素。如有需要,请点击图像以获得更多技术信息。

Contents

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Iris Calderhead.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2019 at 15:16:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Iris Calderhead

File:Bergtocht van Lavin door Val Lavinuoz naar Alp dÍmmez (2025m.) 11-09-2019. (d.j.b) 18.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2019 at 15:11:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Switzerland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A beautifully drawn gneis. The brown color was probably already on the stone before it fell. It is rust, iron, therefore, that probably formed in a crack in the rock when air and / or water could be added. The apparent layering is a characteristic of gneiss. Due to the pressure, the minerals have fallen into parallel paths.
    All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:11, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:11, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry for the early oppose – its nice but I am not at all sure about the composition. Is it meant to show a) the stone’s surface as such? Then, there’s too much surrounding, too little detail on the stone and too much noise. Why not fill the entire frame with it? Or is it b) the stone within its surrounding? Then, there’s too little surrounding, no depth. In either case, this is not the best possible image that could have been taken IMHO. --Kreuzschnabel 19:00, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Framing doesn't match description. If the subject is the layers, then the framing should be tighter, or even show just the layers IMO. - Benh (talk) 19:59, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too ordinary -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:19, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Hate to say this, but it's too ordinary: there are many more impressive rocks along the trails here in Switzerland -- Axel (talk) 06:21, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thank you for your comment. This photo is specifically about a gneiss.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:41, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Bergtocht van Lavin door Val Lavinuoz naar Alp dÍmmez (2025m.) 11-09-2019. (d.j.b) 18b.jpg

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As I said above, this is too poor in detail for an FP on the stone surface. Too small as well (only 4 megapixels now). Nevertheless it’s VI for sure. --Kreuzschnabel 07:11, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Phyllidia elegans (23806633304).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2019 at 14:21:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Phyllidia elegans

File:Gymnadenia odoratissima alba - Niitvälja.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2019 at 08:29:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gymnadenia odoratissima
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by Ivar (talk) 08:29, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 08:29, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - It's quite an excellent photo of buds and flowers, but what caused the background to be so dark? Just shadow? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:26, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes, it's the shadow of a tree. Imho it gives nice contrast. --Ivar (talk) 09:48, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Maybe greater than ideal contrast, but that's a bit nitpicky. Fine photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:54, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Peulle (talk) 10:00, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The background is good for me. Very sharp and well composed. Cmao20 (talk) 12:10, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Sorry, but this plant somehow doesn't wow me. --A.Savin 13:32, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:23, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quality is great but it lacks wow to me Poco2 18:44, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful specimen, sharp image and good light -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:13, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 04:10, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Ragondin (Myocastor coypus) (animal) (3).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2019 at 02:49:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Myocastor coypus (coypu, nutria) in Colmar (Haut-Rhin, France)
Yes that was it. But it was not me, I only give bread to attract them. Gzen92 [discuter] 07:58, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:25, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Poco2 18:46, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 04:10, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral pending revision: There are suspiciously round light gray spots in the water that seem to be dust spots rather than drift. -- Axel (talk) 06:24, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Nyckelviken July 2019 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2019 at 22:48:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Stora Nyckelviken in Sweden

File:Cannon (11851198935).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2019 at 22:24:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cannon at the main entrance of the Hôtel des Invalides, Paris, France
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dino Quinzani - uploaded by FlickreviewR - nominated by Sting -- Sting (talk) 22:24, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nice light and composition, good IQ, good use of DoF; the impacts on that specific cannon are what makes the difference and brings drama to the picture. Sting (talk) 22:24, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Nice photo but IMO too small to be an FP in 2019. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:05, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quite small, and the composition is off; roomy on the left and tight on the right.--Peulle (talk) 06:29, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Smallness and composition, plus the large dark shadow at left, sorry. --Cayambe (talk) 09:53, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I beleive FPs must be the work of Commons users themselves, so this is not eligible anyway. Kestreltail (talk) 10:57, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above, although, no, FPs don't have to be the work of Commons users. I think you're thinking of QI. Cmao20 (talk) 12:08, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others.--Vulphere 04:10, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

File:La Mont y l bosch de Resciesa d'inviërn Gherdëina.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2019 at 19:21:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Winter on the alpine pasture Resciesa in Gherdëina, South Tyrol - Unesco World Heritage Dolomites, Puez-Geisler Nature Park
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Italy
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 19:21, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 19:21, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not wowed by the lighting or colors. In terms of composition, zigzags are a nice idea in general but here it doesn't really lead anywhere and there is no foreground interest. -- King of ♠ 22:57, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose somewhat along the lines of KoH. Too much of the composition feels rather static to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:09, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above. Sorry, it's very scenic and great quality as ever with you, but I don't see too much in the way of composition. Probably one of these sights that's really beautiful in real life but is hard to translate to a good snap. Cmao20 (talk) 12:07, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose washed out colors, and unsharp. - Benh (talk) 19:57, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:19, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others.--Vulphere 04:10, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Östen, die Wallfahrtskirche Maria Schnee Dm13585 IMG 0800 2019-07-31 10.52.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2019 at 19:03:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

the Wallfahrtskirche Maria Schnee in Östen-Tyrol-Austria
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info the Wallfahrtskirche in Östen-Tyrol-Austria All by --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:10, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Michielverbeek (talk) 19:03, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dark clouds can be dramatic with the right light but the light is just not there in this image. Also not very sharp. -- King of ♠ 22:58, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Needs to be lightened and a little closer cropping to the church would help. OK on QI but enough wow for FP. --GRDN711 (talk) 00:23, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I basically agree with the others, not necessarily that this photo should be brightened but that if it had been brightened by a sunshower or lightning, it would have been more interesting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:47, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 06:29, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I dissent. I like the dark mood, and the quality seems fine. However, I think the composition would be improved if a bit of the foreground were cropped out. Cmao20 (talk) 12:06, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bland composition and underexposed. - Benh (talk) 19:54, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I have made it a bit brighter and I did a bottom and left crop --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:35, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Now it’s getting noisy, sorry. I see your idea, and it’s a nice one, but it got just too dark overall. I think this would work perfectly in HDR. --Kreuzschnabel 08:37, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. I’d prefer a slightly higher viewing angle, too, to gain a bit on the top at the expense of unimportant foreground. Nice scene and image but not one of the very best we’ve got on Commons. --Kreuzschnabel 08:37, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Plaza del Comercio, Lisboa, Portugal, 2012-05-12, DD 01-03 PAN.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2019 at 18:09:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of Commerce Square, Lisbon, Portugal
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Portugal
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Panoramic view of Praça do Comércio ("Commerce Square"), Lisbon, Portugal. The square was destroyed by the great 1755 Lisbon earthquake. After the earthquake, the square was completely remodeled as part of the rebuilding of the Pombaline Downtown, ordered by Sebastião José de Carvalho e Melo, 1st Marquis of Pombal, who was the Minister of the Kingdom of Portugal from 1750 to 1777. c/u/n by me, Poco2 18:09, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 18:09, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I don't know. The placement of the people feels random and not helpful to the composition, and I'm somewhat disappointed by the not very great sharpness and light. Useful for sure, but FP? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:48, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Unsharp areas and partly leaning verticals, see note --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:27, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's certainly a useful pano, but the very grey and dull light, the distortions on the buildings and the lots of people make this some way from FP. Also the criticisms about variable sharpness and leaning verticals are true. You have so many potential candidates that are much better photos than this one. Cmao20 (talk) 12:04, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination I don't find people so disturbing. This square is very busy, showing it empty would look a bit awkward. But, yes, probably lacks sharpness. --Poco2 18:41, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Catedral de María Reina del Mundo, Montreal, Canadá, 2017-08-11, DD 37-39 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2019 at 18:03:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cathedral-Basilica of Mary, Queen of the World, Montreal, Canada.

File:Ivanovo asv2018-08 img05 Railway station.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2019 at 12:01:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ceiling detail of Ivanovo Railway Station

File:Peau de serpent apreès mue deposeé sur une feuille au dans champ au Bénin.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2019 at 07:55:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Snake skin molt
  • Category: [[Commons:Featured pictures/<add the category here>]]
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Adoscam - uploaded by Adoscam - nominated by Adoscam -- Adoscam (talk) 07:55, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adoscam (talk) 07:55, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting but the left crop ruins it for me. --Dinkum (talk) 14:36, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Dinkum, plus focus problem: the underlying leaf is sharper than the skin itself. --Kreuzschnabel 16:59, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others but per Dinkum, there are interesting elements. Keep working on your technique. --GRDN711 (talk) 00:37, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment … right, and consider to get some better equipment, such as a small µFT or APS-C camera, which will give you both better image resolution and better control on things like focus. You can’t expect to get an FP out of a phonecam (though it’s possible but needs loads of wow). --Kreuzschnabel 10:45, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, but if you submit a photo like this that isn't cut off this way and is sharper, it sure could be an FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:54, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

File:2019 - Pshav-Khevsureti National Park - Khidotani ridge and Tebulosmta.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2019 at 06:56:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Blossoming of white rhododendron on the Khidotani ridge with mountain Tebulosmta on the background, Pshav-Khevsureti National Park, Mtskheta-Mtianeti region, Georgia.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Georgia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Moahim - uploaded by Moahim - nominated by Moahim -- Moahim (talk) 06:56, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Moahim (talk) 06:56, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support although the composition looks a bit unbalanced to me --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:35, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose unfortunately per Uoaei1. It's a nice landscape, but there's a bit too much foreground for me, and that makes it good not great. Cmao20 (talk) 15:30, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Basotxerri (talk) 17:21, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 22:59, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose per Cmao20 --GRDN711 (talk) 01:08, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Really good to me. I really enjoy moving my eyes around the picture frame and love the variations of light, sharpness, texture and color. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:56, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice, but the shadowed hills is a bit too protuberant. Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:29, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support At first, I also thought the foreground was too dominant. Then I realised what a perfect contrast the (perfectly sharp) flowers make to the green slopes in the background. Then I noticed the purple ones … then the sunlight playing with the flowers on the right … this is masterful handling of the given lighting. --Kreuzschnabel 19:09, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Besides the above, the foreground and background make for a VERY encyclopedic image. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:20, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 04:12, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

The main altar of St. Georg, Mundelfingen[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2019 at 05:09:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 05:09, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 05:09, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:02, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:29, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 20:18, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The ceiling painting of the ascension would also be a good addition to the gallery --GRDN711 (talk) 00:58, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment File:St. Georg - Mundelfingen - Chancel.jpg doesn't seem quite an FP to me, as I find it a little unsharp and a little grainy. The rest are FPs. Do you see what I'm getting at? I'm not so sure how much I like the light in that photo, either, but I don't think you can do anything about that. If you could get more definition and keep it looking natural, perhaps I could support. At this point, I'd be inclined to oppose the set, as I should support every photo in it for FP in order to support the set nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:02, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • For what it's worth, I definitely see Ikan's point, I thought the same when I looked at it first-off. It seems to me that the focus might have been slightly missed on the chancel and that the sharpness has been increased to compensate. It looks better when downsized to around 6.5 mpx, but it's definitely the weakest of the set. I wasn't sure whether I'd support after only having looked at that one, but decided after viewing the others that overall the set together makes it to FP. Cmao20 (talk) 12:15, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:15, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:50, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment For me, FPs of artwork require an outstanding artistic quality. For me, neither the paintings nor the statues reach this quality. Thus, I would support the first image only. --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:55, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
    • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for the reasons stated above --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:25, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 04:12, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per my comment above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:48, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Tad Hang waterfalls at sunset, Tad Lo village, Bolaven Plateau, Laos.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2019 at 00:31:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tad Hang waterfalls at sunset, Bolaven Plateau, Laos
  • Thanks, GRDN711. Agree but there is a rock in the foreground below and this framing is really the last limit I could reach with my tripod -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:09, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Beautiful photo. But the waterfall is too unnatural for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:21, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • This is a 3 seconds photograph. The water is frozen yes, due to the long exposure. I like it like this personally, but even if I had preferred it fluid like moving, at this late sunset that would not have been possible at low ISO (here 50) -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:56, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • actually I do agree, somehow, with the criticisms. 3 sec is maybe a tad too long. Half a second gives a vert nice motion already without "smearing" everything. It's a matter of tastes, but I'm not getting your iso50 comment? you could have made it shorter by bumping ISO up. - Benh (talk) 20:07, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:32, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 18:49, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Benh (talk) 19:52, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 21:22, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 04:12, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support Daniel Case (talk) 06:43, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Yasaka-dori early morning with street lanterns and the Tower of Yasaka (Hokan-ji Temple), Kyoto, Japan.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2019 at 00:35:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Yasaka-dori early morning with street lanterns and the Tower of Yasaka (Hokan-ji Temple), Kyoto, Japan

File:Klonglan waterfall 03.jpg (delist)[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2019 at 01:07:46
Khlong Lan Waterfall

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Misleadingly fake colours. Even with the retouched image template, inattentive viewers will be misled to think that the trees look like this. See user's other upload File:Klonglan waterfall 01.jpg for what the place actually looks like. (Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist -- Paul_012 (talk) 01:07, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - Should this be a delist and replace? I think the other photo is an FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:08, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist And I wouldn't touch their other photos with a barge pole. If they are this dishonest with the photo, who knows what other dishonesty is involved with the others (e.g., not their photos). -- Colin (talk) 07:16, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Replace doesn't work here, the other one is totally different. --Ivar (talk) 07:38, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question This was awarded the star only 3 years ago. Should a delist discussion take place so soon?--Peulle (talk) 07:48, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @Peulle: I think it's clear from the original nomination that at the time nobody noticed the fake. Afair, we don't really have any rules for when a delist can take place, but I think in cases like this it would be ridiculous to wait a single day. --El Grafo (talk) 07:57, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Fake and misleading. Given that Khlong Lan National Park lies well in the tropical zone I'd like to question whether this kind of autumn colors would even be possible there. I think I'm going to slap a {{Factual accuracy}} on this and #7. Anyway, as soon as you zoom in a bit, the fake is quite obvious. --El Grafo (talk) 07:57, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist , preferrably speedy. --A.Savin 11:43, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Commons:Deletion requests/File:Klonglan waterfall 03.jpg -- Colin (talk) 11:47, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist absolutely per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:52, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Clearly very much altered. Cmao20 (talk) 15:28, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist per above. -- King of ♠ 23:05, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist - I'm a bit embarrassed that I suspended belief, figuring during the original nomination that maybe it was high up in the mountains in northern Thailand and there was a fall season there. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:49, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Unnatural -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:59, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Clear case of a too much altered image. --Cart (talk) 08:35, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Speedy delist; my support !vote in the original nomination is now deeply embarrassing. Daniel Case (talk) 03:01, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist .--Vulphere 04:12, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Jules Verne by Étienne Carjat.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2019 at 20:35:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jules Verne
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:35, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:58, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - Very good portrait, but should what looks like a diagonal scratch on his right sleeve near the lower left corner of the picture not be eliminated? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:14, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I see. Maybe it is. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:57, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Gymnadenia densiflora - Keila3.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2019 at 14:38:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gymnadenia densiflora

File:Oljaytu mihrab.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2019 at 09:23:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Oljaytu mihrab in Jameh mosque of Isfahan

File:Aquamarine water pool at Bumpass Hell-8882.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2019 at 03:30:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

An aquamarine-colored water pool in the Bumpass Hell hydrothermal area, Lassen Volcanic National Park
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United States#California
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Last weekend, I went to Lassen Volcanic National Park, four hours north of San Francisco. I took this shot at a place called "Bumpass Hell", named after the early settler Kendall Bumpass who broke through the thin crust and burned his leg, which consequently had to be amputated. As I'm eager to get more people to share their images on Wikimedia Commons, I also shot a YouTube video (English subtitles available) explaining how I find subjects for my photography subjects. It's kind of a making-off as well as a way to show what I'm most passionate about – Taking photos for Wikipedia. c/u/n by --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:30, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:30, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:04, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - Do you have any more room to the right that you could show us? I'd love to see more of that rock. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:46, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Ikan, I've increased the room on the left and on the right. It's not a rock btw, it's sand. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:59, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isiwal (talk) 07:06, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support An excellent photo, but right crop is unfortunately not perfect --Michielverbeek (talk) 07:36, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 04:55, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:33, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:25, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hanooz 21:19, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The colors are very interesting, but I wish there was more space to breathe on the sides of the pool. -- King of ♠ 23:07, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Like King says, quite an interesting photo. I think that sometimes, a clear photo of something of scientific interest is enough reason for a photo to be an FP. Did it smell sulphurous there? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:04, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:22, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 04:13, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Alexei Leonov.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2019 at 12:47:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Alexei Leonov in April 1974, the year before the launch of Apollo–Soyuz Test Project

File:Languedoc (frégate), Sète.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2019 at 09:50:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

D653 Languedoc (ship, 2016)

File:2017.06.17.-10-Reinheimer Teich-Reinheim--Knollen-Platterbse.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2019 at 07:20:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tuberous pea - Lathyrus tuberosus

File:Dome of Panthéon de Paris - 2012-05-28.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2019 at 05:04:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by PierreSelim - nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 05:04, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 05:04, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well-framed, dramatic background. Cmao20 (talk) 09:14, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hanooz 12:57, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: the pediment cut off on three sides is rather unfortunate. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:36, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The asymmetry is bothering me. Either it should be perfectly symmetrical, or it should be clearly and artistically positioned off-center. -- King of ♠ 00:03, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per King, nothing special. -- Karelj (talk) 10:42, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Cut-off pediment per Cosmo, plus I am not fond of the dark-grey background, making the left part almost invisible. --Kreuzschnabel 11:43, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The light is okay, but not too special.--Peulle (talk) 07:50, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 04:54, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Faloria Cortina d'Ampezzo 13.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2019 at 20:27:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of Cristallo mountain from Faloria, Cortina d'Ampezzo, Italy.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Italy#Belluno
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by kallerna| - nominated by KennyOMG -- KennyOMG (talk) 20:27, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I know, the trees, the trees. First off I think they help bring the monumentality in perspective. Second, and more importantly, the tree on the left closes the view that would otherwise be a boring roll off of the hillside, or worse, a cut into the rocks like in the panorama version. My only gripe is the clouds don't cast a shadow on one of the peaks. Can't have 'em all. -- KennyOMG (talk) 20:27, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
Funny how when I put them next to each other I feel like the trees in the foreground add more to the picture than the shadow that I was missing. Also funny how all of us (assumed) are always hunting vantage points where nothing impedes the view but sometimes it works out better with a bit of distraction in the frame. In any case thank you for the link but I'm even happier with my pick for this FP nom than I was before. :) -- KennyOMG (talk) 14:21, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 21:38, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Is the gap I marked really there?--Ermell (talk) 07:07, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Definitely a stiching error. I made a new merge, should be fixed now. —kallerna (talk) 16:22, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As far as I can tell, this is a single frame not a stitched panorama, so the gap is presumably there in reality. I actually like the panorama version better, but yes, this is FP to me. Cmao20 (talk) 09:13, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Ah. Fair enough. Better resolution now, too. Cmao20 (talk) 07:06, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support-- Seven Pandas (talk) 21:26, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 04:52, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I'm liking the composition, but in this one, too, I think you could smooth out the gradations in the sky somewhat. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:20, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Smoothened the sky a bit, maybe better now? —kallerna (talk) 11:55, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes. So sorry for being indecisive. I will definitely look again in the coming days. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:06, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This time's the charm. Daniel Case (talk) 04:54, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 06:05, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 21:29, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 04:14, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

File:ESTADOS UNIDOS LEVAM OURO NA GINÁSTICA FEMININA POR EQUIPES DOS JOGOS OLÍMPICOS RIO 2016 (28849586476).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2019 at 10:48:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • It doesn't look like it needs my vote to pass, but FWIW I'd support cart's version. The issue wasn't so much the background/shadows but the whites/highlights in the foreground. — Rhododendrites talk |  05:19, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 04:51, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cmao20 (talk) 06:33, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 00:04, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but it's dark and a tighter crop would make the picture more striking (note added) -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:38, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 04:14, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hands and face --Axel (talk) 06:30, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Mariä Geburt, Höchberg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2019 at 10:05:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

  • True, I've struck it through. Guess you must know the area pretty well :) Cmao20 (talk) 10:59, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

File:A small loch in the saddle between Beinn an Dothaidh and Beinn Dorain, Scotland 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2019 at 09:59:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/United_Kingdom#Scotland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Podzemnik - uploaded by Podzemnik - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 09:59, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 09:59, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:51, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cart (talk) 12:03, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Beautiful, and I feel the cold, looking at this. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:45, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 15:36, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks Cmao20 for the nomination. That morning was magical but really windy and cold. Just for the record, soon after I took this nominated picture, I took this FP. --Podzemnik (talk) 16:48, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For the atmosphere and ligthing, the sharpness is though not really good Poco2 17:01, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dinkum (talk) 17:44, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 17:48, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support Nice sunrise athmosphere and colours, but a bit disappointing on technical side. --A.Savin 21:43, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support per A.Savin. -- King of ♠ 00:47, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Colors and composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:09, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Bijay chaurasia (talk) 04:51, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 07:22, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 09:37, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Btw, a "small loch" is a "lochan". -- Colin (talk) 09:46, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:39, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:09, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:06, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:46, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Usual special mood from author. - Benh (talk) 19:02, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 04:49, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice colors and mood. --Moahim (talk) 06:34, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Evokes some of your New Zealand winter photos ... Daniel Case (talk) 21:30, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Boothsift 23:57, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Entrée principale de l’église protestante méthodiste du Bénin à Porto novo.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2019 at 09:41:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Entrée ancienne église
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Doors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Adoscam - uploaded by Adoscam - nominated by Adoscam -- Adoscam (talk) 09:41, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adoscam (talk) 09:41, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting place, but I'm not keen on that huge area of blown-out pavement in the foreground. Overall it's a nice sharp shot, but the blown-out area is pretty distracting, and I think it would be much better if it focussed entirely on the entranceway and if it was a symmetrical, face-on view of the doorway. As it is, the composition looks a little bit random. Cmao20 (talk) 10:18, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Totally agreed. Get a head-on view of the door with no blown areas in your picture, and then it might have a chance at FP. It is a nice motif. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:47, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - As per Ikan --Bijay chaurasia (talk) 04:53, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - per Ikan. -- Karelj (talk) 10:44, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 21:23, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Ālī Qāpū;s roof.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2019 at 09:21:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The ornate ceiling of Ālī Qāpū palace porch in Isfahan, Iran.

File:Waxing half moon over Brofjorden 1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2019 at 08:56:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Waxing half moon over Brofjorden
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy#Sky
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I had read about the conjunction of the moon and Jupiter on September 5 and I was hoping to catch them over water for some nice reflections. Thankfully it was a mostly clear and calm night when I came down to the fjord. Sure enough, there was a very bright planet close to the moon so I think I got it right. Please correct me otherwise. I also like that the moon is this one major sizzling bright light it so often is for us living here in the countryside, and not that bleak 'face' with features you usually see in photos. Even so, you can make out the ragged line, created by the moon mountains, between the bright and dark side of the moon. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 08:56, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cart (talk) 08:56, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's certainly impressive to see the reflection of Jupiter as well as that of the moon. Cmao20 (talk) 10:15, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:50, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I do enjoy the compo but there is some cw tilt and it's quite noisy. I'd support if fixed. Poco2 17:08, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I'll have to get back to you on that. Right now we have a power blackout for all of Lysekil Municipality. Only batteries and backup generators for powering the mobile phone network. I'm writing this sitting by a kerosene lamp. Rather cosy. No moon though since it's raining. :-) --Cart (talk) 17:55, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Ok, I'm back in the 21th century. The small tilt is fixed and a very, very, light NR is in place. I don't want to give it too much and lose the detail in the photo. With small sensor cameras it is so easy to overdo the NR, so I'm usually very restrained when it comes to that. I'll rather keep some noise than make it all plastic looking. --Cart (talk) 19:23, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 17:50, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Bijay chaurasia (talk) 04:54, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Podzemnik (talk) 07:51, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 09:37, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:40, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:07, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:43, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 04:47, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:02, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sorry Cart, I have doubts that this is Jupiter. My feeling is that it should be closer than this to the moon (hard to tell, is 23mm from the EXIF the FF equiv?). It is quite possible that we're looking at Saturn here. And Jupiter could well be behind the clouds, closer to the moon, to its left, and slightly under. - Benh (talk) 21:11, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • added note to pinpoint supposedly location of Jupiter. - Benh (talk) 21:13, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • It's 64mm in FF equiv. So probably it is Jupiter (would have been to close to be Saturn anyways in 23mm). Sorry sorry. - Benh (talk)
  • I have 44 shots of this scene taken during a 30 minutes timeframe with the clouds moving rather rapidly over the sky (plus a bunch of other shots in other directions). During all that time, this was the only really bright planet in the sky. Had any other planet been hidden behind these clouds, it would have been visible in some of the other shots. This is a straight from camera (I haven't processed them all yet, hence the rather blue tone the camera's internal image processor loves to add) taken later when the cloud had moved a bit. It's from a slightly different position so a light is seen here that was obscured by a cliff in the first shots. I was playing around with framing, time, format, etc. Did you really think I would go on a shoot like this and take only one photo? :-) --Cart (talk) 21:44, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Kefermarkt Schloss Weinberg Schwandtendorf-4910.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2019 at 07:53:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Castle Weinberg in Kefermarkt with surrounding area
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Castle Weinberg in Kefermarkt with surrounding area, created by Isiwal - uploaded by Isiwal - nominated by Isiwal -- Isiwal (talk) 07:53, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Isiwal (talk) 07:53, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I like this, but it seems tilted to me (the horizon seems to slope to the right); is that worth checking? I also think it could be a tiny bit oversharpened. But it's a nice composition, and flaws should be fixable. Cmao20 (talk) 10:14, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • The terrain is sloping, this is the natural prospect of this landscape, please take a look on the verticals of the castle. Sharpness mainly comes from wide-angle-lens, taken on tripod, but I reduced as proposed.
  • Honestly, the sharpness looks way less over the top now. Explanation understood, Symbol support vote.svg Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:55, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Really excellent composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:53, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral There is definitely FP potential. The subject and the landscape in the background are really nice, but the piece of road and the wires in the foreground don't help, probably it wasn't the best POV. Poco2 17:06, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition doesn't come together for me as a whole. There is nothing connecting the foreground with the road in the background, with the castle in the middle acting as a barrier unfortunately. -- King of ♠ 00:47, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Karelj (talk) 10:45, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It misses something in my opinion. I do agree with the King, and I'd add that this landscape seems just about perfect for a horizontal light. - Benh (talk) 19:30, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per King. Daniel Case (talk) 14:20, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

File:2019 - Parc national des Pyrenees - Vallée de Gavarnie.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2019 at 07:08:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Pyrénées National Park, view on the Gavarnie valley, Hautes-Pyrénées, France.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Moahim - uploaded by Moahim - nominated by Moahim -- Moahim (talk) 07:08, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Moahim (talk) 07:08, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really good. Cmao20 (talk) 10:12, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - You were blessed with a great sky, and the shadows and areas with trees of different colors really help, too. All the elements in this photo are in symbiosis. I agree with Cmao20: it's a really special photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:57, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The sky is indeed nice, but I am not sure about the bottom crop and the sharpness Poco2 17:11, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dinkum (talk) 17:42, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 17:51, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 00:45, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:07, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:23, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Strangely enough, the area in the middle is around blurred. But the picture is still good.--Ermell (talk) 07:20, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 09:37, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Axel (talk) 14:58, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:07, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:42, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:19, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:15, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Impatiens glandulifera.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2019 at 05:17:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Impatiens glandulifera
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Order_:_Ericales
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info: Himalayan balsam (Impatiens glandulifera) blooming at the rare Charitable Research Reserve, Ontario, Canada-- The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:17, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:17, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Like the previous one, I think this is too dark. For me, this is a better light for these flowers. --Cart (talk) 09:08, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose per Cart. I see in the EXIF that the flash fired, which explains the quite harsh light. Still good, but the bar for flower FPs is quite high. Cmao20 (talk) 10:12, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose that's clearly underexposed --El Grafo (talk) 13:39, 11 October 2019 (UTC) (Might be fixable in post. If so, please ping me when a new version is uploaded)
  • ✓ Done: redeveloped from RAW and brightened Cart, Cmao20, El Grafo. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:47, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment much better now, but still not quite FP level (per Cmao20). --El Grafo (talk) 13:44, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support No longer underexposed. --Axel (talk) 15:02, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Regardless of the light, those two buds or whatever at left are too much of a distraction. Daniel Case (talk) 06:14, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: the seed pods were included intentionally to avoid the same boring dead-centered composition. They are a part of the plant, so to call them a great distraction is a bit baffling. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:50, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Support for this view: less boring, non-centered, and also good to have another sharp detail of the plant. --Axel (talk) 06:36, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Rouge park trail panorama.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2019 at 01:01:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rouge park trail panorama
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info: golden hour on a recently opened trail in the Rouge National Urban Park. The area consists of active agricultural land (soybean cultivation) and a restored meadow ecosystem. I think the colours make it a worthy candidate. All by me. -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:01, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:01, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 04:54, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The stitching error at the upper edge of the field in the middle should be fixed.--Ermell (talk) 07:06, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
Good catch, thanks, will get to it later today. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 11:38, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
✓ Done, Ermell --The Cosmonaut (talk) 22:02, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very well composed. Cmao20 (talk) 12:53, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Good, sensitive picture, but I find that the dark areas to the right of the path hog too much attention, and the overall composition doesn't quite work for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:01, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --GRDN711 (talk) 17:32, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan, sorry. --A.Savin 21:54, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I also think, if you made the picture at the begin of the asphalt trail without the wooden path, it would be better. -- -donald- (talk) 11:00, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think the right third of the image doesn't really contribute to the composition, and would be better cropped off. -- King of ♠ 00:44, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice now, love the clouds. -- King of ♠ 00:02, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done: cropped the less interesting part on the right Ikan Kekek, A.Savin, King of Hearts. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:16, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Definitely better, but still not quite working for me so far. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:29, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan. -- Karelj (talk) 10:47, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I really like the light, and the fact the trail and line of clouds meet on the far left. Just, how sad it is so close to the border. I think I also agree the wooden part might be too much. It's hard to tell for sure, but the panorama might be slightly bended (upward curvature horizon) - Benh (talk) 19:26, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
Regarding your last point, the area is on a glacial moraine, resulting in undulating topography, so you wouldn't get a perfectly straight horizon there. It was more obvious before I cropped a big chunk on the right. The Cosmonaut (talk) 20:52, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 01:18, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Per Ikan and King of Hearts --Boothsift 06:03, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral pending revision: Why not crop to 2/3 sky vs 1/3 land to get rid of the dark right side (cf. note); the sky is best anyhow -- Axel (talk) 06:43, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Bubo scandiacus - Karlsruhe Zoo 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2019 at 06:48:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bubo scandiacus (Linnaeus, 1758), Snowy owl; Zoologischer Stadtgarten Karlsruhe
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely and interesting lively image of owl eyes. I don't understand the everything-must-be-front-and-center thing this forum has. This view from a slight angle gives us a more pensive "hmm, who are you and what are you doing" look from the owl as opposed to the startled "deer in headlights" centered front view. From an encyclopedic point of view, it also gives a better "3D" look at the feathers (not sure owls have eyelashes) around the eye area. When looking at a human, this or this is often preferred over this, for me it's the same with animals. --Cart (talk) 10:44, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support +1 to that. --El Grafo (talk) 13:38, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I suppose the feathers could be sharper, but it's a very striking picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:20, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:03, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 19:59, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Karelj (talk) 20:55, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Peulle. And while I also agree with Cart, her examples don't convince me at all. For a start, this is a close up, focused on the eye, and it just annoys me that one eye is smaller than the other here. When I look at a living thing in the eye this intensely, I'd rather do it in front of it. - Benh (talk) 21:21, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:03, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mesmerizing --Dinkum (talk) 08:18, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:51, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I suppose I just find owl eyes to always be mesmerizing, so would need something more special to support just a close-up of the eyes. For me the level of detail and light isn't working sufficient to justify supporting the tight framing. — Rhododendrites talk |  13:38, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:57, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cart --GRDN711 (talk) 17:35, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Rhododendrites. -- B2Belgium (talk) 20:29, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition --Wilfredor (talk) 00:05, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Reminds me a bit to this FP but I am not convinced by the sharpness/DoF and POV, either Poco2 17:19, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:38, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support: Interesting shot. The focus is imho just a negligible issue; it's difficult to expect deeper DoF for a closeup shot with such an active bird. As long as the eyes are sharp, it's fine for me. ― Gerifalte Del Sabana 09:29, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cart. Looks like the graphics used with some fantasy franchise ... I suppose given the subject I'm probably thinking Harry Potter, but I seem to be being tugged by Game of Thrones/A Song of Ice and Fire (in which case it would be wolf's eyes). Daniel Case (talk) 22:43, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 17:43, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Boothsift 06:04, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Estonian Museum of Natural History - Brown algae.png[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2019 at 08:34:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

3D model of a Brown algae

File:Diana September 2019 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2019 at 20:31:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

M/S Diana
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water transport
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Night view of the historic passenger ship Diana in Gothenburg habour. March 15, 1931, the Göta Canal Steamship Company’s new passenger and cargo ship, the M/S Diana was delivered from the Finnboda shipyard in Stockholm. The ship was designed to travel the Göta Canal between Gothenburg and Stockholm and is still in regular service between Gothenburg and Stockholm. The ship played an important role in the 1965 crime novel Roseanna by Swedish writers Maj Sjöwall and Per Wahlöö. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 20:31, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 20:31, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Really beautiful, but just a small question about licenses. To me it looks like this is the same photo you have posted on Flickr. If so, that photo has "copyright all rights reserved" and here it is published under {{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}}. I don't think one photo (if it is the same photo and size) can be published under two licences. Can you and/or someone who knows stuff about licenses sort this out, please. --Cart (talk) 21:25, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
    • I changed the license on Flickr. However, I am convinced that as a creator I have the right to make the images available under a free license.--ArildV (talk) 04:08, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • As author, you are absolutely free to do whatever you want with the license; you just can't do two different things to the same image. :) --Peulle (talk) 06:45, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Is that right Peulle? I did release some of my photos under different licences before (typically when CC was inappropriate license for a publication/book and I was asked by authors for a different license.). I don't know so I'm genuinely interested. --Podzemnik (talk) 07:22, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Well, copyright laws may differ from country to country, so I'm not sure it applies everywhere, but the isue here is that an image that has been released with a free license can't have a restricted license somewhere else. When uploading to Commons, note that the release form says that you irrevocably release it under that license. Meaning you have given up the copyright (under certain conditions); the point is that you cannot then claim copyright over that same image anywhere else. :) --Peulle (talk) 16:05, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Peulle, sorry but what you wrote is just totally wrong. See Commons:Multi-licensing. Your argument is a bit like saying that because you are selling a book for £9.99 at one shop, you can't sell it for £12.99 at another. The licence document is just a generous offer to the re-user. You can make different offers elsewhere, just like you can sell a book for different amounts in different places. You have never given up the copyright unless you use a CC0 declaration to do so. You haven't "given up copyright (under certain conditions)" with a CC licence and yes you can claim copyright elsewhere because your copyright still exists. The CC BY SA licence has in big shouty letters: "THE WORK IS PROTECTED BY COPYRIGHT AND/OR OTHER APPLICABLE LAW. ANY USE OF THE WORK OTHER THAN AS AUTHORIZED UNDER THIS LICENSE OR COPYRIGHT LAW IS PROHIBITED." Indeed the "perpetual" aspect of the licence is actually constrained because when copyright no longer applies (XX years after you have died) the licence is void and no longer required. So the licence only exists while it is under copyright and can only be offered because the licensor owns the copyright. Any re-user is also required to publish your copyright notices, to remind everyone it is under copyright and merely licensed. Flickr doesn't offer many options for users to pick from. For example, they are still stuck at V2.0 of CC BY-SA. The folk on Commons who scrape photos off the internet, rather than uploading their own, face this issue all the time: one website claims "(c) all rights reserved" and another claims "(c) some rights reserved CC BY-SA 4.0".
The TLDR version is just chill. People are allowed to be inconsistent. -- Colin (talk) 10:04, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Agree, you can publish under multiple licences, though technically "(c) all rights reserved" isn't a licence and is an inconsistent declaration when you have conditionally waived some rights elsewhere. Though some admins on Commons do need reminding that our images still do belong to us and are fully under copyright protection when licence conditions are not met. But I don't think there is anything legally wrong with it. You are simply telling one audience (Flickr) a different message to another (Commons). Diliff published all his cathedrals on Flickr with a -NC licence. Podzemnik you can offer as many licences as you like. Many older images on Commons are multiply licensed with GFDL and CC BY-SA. Any re-user has to pick one licence, though. (Just to be clear, the "(c)" bit isn't inconsistent and I put it on all my photos) -- Colin (talk) 07:32, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Little bit noisy in the darks and there is a dustspot in the bottom right corner. --Moahim (talk) 08:05, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The comments about licensing did not make things any clearer to me, but I think the photo is great so I'll focus on that. Getting rid of the dust spot would be nice though. --Cart (talk) 10:07, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Dust spot removed, some noise reduction.--ArildV (talk) 19:41, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cart. I even like the (almost) empty space of the dark water: it emphasizes the lights and the ship. --Aristeas (talk) 15:17, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't think the night shot does justice to the boat. It's a lot of dark on more than 2/3 of the picture, and the main subject is a bit lost in there. - Benh (talk) 16:40, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It is quite a lot of dark, but, well...the night is dark. Beautiful image overall, could be a painting. Cmao20 (talk) 23:45, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Like this one, mainly night and black areas. Also small subject, not extraordinary -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:05, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Benh. —kallerna (talk) 19:17, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Benh. -- Karelj (talk) 20:58, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As others previously mentioned, too blackish. -- Pofka (talk) 16:20, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral due to the rights issue. Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support Sorry, ArildV, I hadn't realized you'd changed the license on Flickr as well until after I !voted ... that used to be a lot harder to do. My only comment now is that maybe you could crop some of the dark empty sky at the top off. Daniel Case (talk) 17:57, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Not bad, but for FP I miss something. --A.Savin 21:58, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Piccadilly Circus Dawn BLS.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2019 at 17:18:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Picadilly Circus 2015
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#United_Kingdom
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Benh (talk) 17:18, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral That one is only 4 years old. It's 47mpix, sharp and detailed. Not the most artistic shot, but shows that iconic area very well IMO. And it's almost void of people here (usually insanely crowded)... -- Benh (talk) 17:18, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info same picture taken 8 years before, in the middle of the day. I don't think it shows how much more crowded this has gotten though. But Londoners can tell better. - Benh (talk) 17:28, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Just about deserted at 7 AM? How did that happen? A Monday morning, yet! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:44, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
Two possibilities: hundreds of photos, or long exposure. But according to the traffic lights I guess the first one. -- -donald- (talk) 06:18, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
Many photos (more dozens than hundreds for sure), be a little patient when there are people. It is very easy to pick the empty version of overlapping area when you have carefully shot the raw source photos. But there's no secret: the hardest part is to get there early. - Benh (talk) 16:36, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:42, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The overcast makes for good encyclopedic photos but it's a bit boring. I also find it rather creepy to see this busy place so deserted. I know it does happen, I've walked through a totally deserted downtown London on a Christmas Day, but still slightly unnatural. --Cart (talk) 11:00, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • I'm afraid what you think is an "overcast" was due to my processing. I think it was sunny. You can see shadows, that I have mitigated. Overcast would have made it much easier to shoot. - Benh (talk) 17:42, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Relatively good image, but I do not see any reason for FP nomination here. -- Karelj (talk) 21:07, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Karelj --Christof46 (talk) 21:37, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support You know, I think the blah light actually helps here, because it accentuates how mundane this typically very busy place looks without its crowds (see also Times Square in a similar situation in Vanilla Sky. Daniel Case (talk) 04:49, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 17:35, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

File:New York state geographic map-en.svg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2019 at 12:44:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Geographic map of the state of New York
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Maps
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by ikonact - uploaded by ikonact - nominated by Ikonact -- Ikonact (talk) 12:44, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikonact (talk) 12:44, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Great map, very close to excellent. Data sources are listed and finally somebody remembered to specify CRS/projection information! I have some minor points, though, regarding the labeling: 1) "CANADA" has the same font specifications as "Vermont", making it look like just another US state until you realize it's all caps. Maybe make it a bit larger? 2) Automatic label placement rarely leads to satisfying solutions. Especially the labels for "Long Island Sound", "Fishers Island", "Long Island" and "Staten Island" intersect with the state border in an ugly manner. "Oneida Lake" would look much better if it was rotated by a few degrees clock-wise. Most of the smaller city names are difficult to read, as they intersect with roads and other line features. Manual placement of the labels could help in many cases (alternatively, maybe consider using label halos). 3) General layout: The placement of the zoomed-out map between the two legends is a bit awkward. The frame of the elevational scale is thinner than the one of the other two boxes. The distance scale looks a bit lost so far away from the corner – generally distances of the legend boxes to the map borders and each other need adjustments. I'd probably cut away much more non-NY territory at the west, north and east – The state is so awkwardly shaped that you still should have plenty of space for your legend boxes. 4) Weird: Canada looks exactly like non-NY US states with mountains and the same kind of half-opaque masking, but it has no roads, rivers or settlements. Maybe just make it plain grey then? Lots of little things and none of them reason enough to oppose, but that's the kind of attention to detail that I'd like to see in a featured map. I guess I'll stay neutral for the moment, hoping that some of them may be addressed … --El Grafo (talk) 14:51, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
@El Grafo:Thanks. I have updated the map taking onto accounts most of your comments. 1) Increased the font for "Canada" 2) Tried to improve the labeling 3) Moved the legends. I prefer not to cut the map as the map limits are fixed and if I cut by hand I will loose the precision 4) Added roads and cities. I deliberately avoided to put this data as it adds 3-4 MB of data but it is outside of the area of interest. Anyway, I agree that the map is nicer like this. --Ikonact (talk) 22:10, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Very good map, but I'd like to be able to blow it up to at least twice the full resolution of 2,811 × 2,000 pixels and see a lot more details, topographically, in terms of names of bodies of water (rivers, lakes, etc.), and in terms of towns. Long Island is very strangely devoid of towns, when several more would have fit easily. (How about Huntington, Port Jefferson and some on the South Shore?) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:54, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: Thanks for the comments. I would like to see also a higher resolution but Commons cannot handle the svg to pngs with higher than 2000-2500 pixels resolution. That's why I chose to use this resolution as optimal. I will try to add more details but I have to admit I find a bit difficult to understand the cities on Long Island. It looks like they are made of junction of several villages and this is not reflected in the geographical data I use for the map generation. I will try to work on this. --Ikonact (talk) 22:10, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
I understand what you mean about cities in Long Island. There are counties, then towns, which are really sub-county divisions, and then the towns can be divided into villages and hamlets. That said, the village of Hempstead (as opposed to the much larger town of Hempstead) had a population of 53,891 in the 2010 Census and should definitely be included on the map. The hamlet of Huntington had a population of 18,406 in the 2010 Census. So basically, the terms "village" and "hamlet" have nothing much at all to do with population in Long Island. I think it's a real problem that higher resolution isn't possible. Is there anything that can be done about that? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:33, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That looks like a nice map. I do agree with some point of El Grafo's thorough review, but I wonder if a fix wouldn't make it weirder. My complaint is that you should specify more widespread backup font for small labels (when I open the SVG in Chrome, the names are displayed using serif fonts, Times New Roman I believe). If you make it an SVG, I guess it's for people to use the SVG and not the PNG version rasterized on Wikimedia's servers, which has the proper fonts. I would also make "CANADA" bigger, to better emphasize the hierarchy. - Benh (talk) 16:53, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
@Benh: Thanks. all comments are welcome. I will change the back-up font to sans-serif.--Ikonact (talk) 22:10, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Much better now, thanks! --El Grafo (talk) 13:39, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I apologize for opposing this map on the basis that, apparently, this site doesn't permit higher resolution, but I think that for this to be justifiably an FP map, it needs a lot more detail. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:25, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes there's issue with using mediawiki's builtin rasterization process (I tried to render the map at 4000px width with no success), but the fact there's no prerendered output larger than 2000px has nothing to do with the map itself. Native 2811px width also available btw. If you use a decent browser, it should also render the svg properly for you to enjoy the tons of details in this map. - Benh (talk) 17:56, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
To be clear, I think the map is insufficiently detailed for FP. Very few names of lakes and rivers are given, for example. I expect those on any thorough relief map. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:36, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • That is just me, but if I want the names of every single item of a map and a zoom which reveals more actual details, I'd check Google Map (or OSM). That's what these are for. It would have been very cluttered at nominal size to label everything. This maps also focuses on NY state (as per its title). - Benh (talk) 18:53, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Well, this is also my standard for photos, but I'm still supporting the photos here. And, I'm not sure any of these topo maps are useful at some resolution without some details trimming. Totally not comparable. - Benh (talk) 21:10, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @Ikan Kekek: Could you please provide the link to the NY state map that you like on the USGS site? I tried to find the NY state topographic map but with no success--Ikonact (talk) 22:03, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • You're asking yourself the wrong question. Again this is no topo map. It serves different purpose. No one goes hiking with this, and no topographic map of the size of the whole state would illustrate an article about "NY State". - Benh (talk) 18:44, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • The question of how many details to include is always relevant in any map. As I said, the number of identified bodies of water is insufficient for me, and there should also be a few more towns. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:22, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @Ikan Kekek: I added the names of rivers and lakes. Hope you find now the map complete--Ikonact (talk) 23:33, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I would like to support this, as I have lived so much of my life in different areas of this map, including currently. But ... why does Interstate 86 disappear from the map east of Binghamton? NY Route 17 is now designated as I-86 all the way to the I-84 junction near Middletown? I can understand if the cartographer wants to highlight only interstate highways but ... Route 17 has existed as a limited-access route through the Catskills and Delaware Valley for years ... surely the map should reflect this? Symbol support vote.svg Support now Daniel Case (talk) 20:43, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @Daniel Case: Thanks. I used GIS data from the National atlas and presented the Interstate highways indicated there. I can add route 17. --Ikonact (talk) 22:07, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @Daniel Case: Interstate 86 corrected--Ikonact (talk) 23:33, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support - Thanks for contributing this to Commons. I want to err on the side of supporting, because it seems quite competently done and I don't think I've seen a user-created map at FPC before. I'm learning a bit from this thread (e.g. that svgs have fonts built in and that mediawiki has a hard time with larger svgs). My only comment is to ask why Jersey City, Stamford, and Elizabeth are in the same dark font as NY cities, while the other cities of NJ and CT are grayed out? — Rhododendrites talk |  13:57, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • To be accurate, SVG has no font built-in. We specify the font we want to use in the SVG (which is only a text file). If the computer rendering it has the font then it will be used. Otherwise, it uses a backup font (if specified) and resorts back to a default font of the renderer's choice, and amongst the ones present on the computer. The PNG of the description page are rendered on Wikimedia Foundation's servers and the text are outputted using the fonts there. If you look at the SVG directly, the fonts are chosen amongst the ones on your own computer. That is why it is always good practice to specify backup fonts which are widespread (Times New Roman, Arial, Courrier...) - Benh (talk) 18:44, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dinkum (talk) 17:55, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I still think you can add a few towns (technically, villages or hamlets) on the South Shore of Long Island (such as perhaps Patchogue) and a place like Oneonta upstate, but I think this is a very good map for the whole state now. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:47, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support This is the encyclopedic style of maps that have been really polishing off articles like en:New York (state), and have added there a level of professionalism and standardization that we were missing. The other state maps ikonact has made are also worthy of recognition here. My only comment/question with this specific file, is whether there is place or level of zoom to note the names to the two Canadian provinces, Quebec and Ontario. I ask just because the caption we use on New York (state) says "New York is bordered by five U.S. states, two Great Lakes, and the Canadian provinces of Ontario and Quebec." I'd be very happy to see this promoted.-- Patrick, oѺ 14:02, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice map. Having lived close to New York (Boston), I really miss the 6 hour drive to the Big Apple. --Boothsift 06:06, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Small detail: Between 2011 and 2015 Albany's population grew beyond 100.000. Therefore, it should have the same font as Syracuse, Rochester, Buffalo. Also, Newark and Jersey City deserve the bigger font, too. -- Axel (talk) 06:50, 16 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @Axel Tschentscher: Thanks for the comment. I used the 2010 US census as reference. This is the most recent official census. I can use estimates from the US Census Bureau, but the estimates data shows that Albany has never reached 100 000. I agree on the remark for Newark and Jersey City font but this is a choice I made. A smaller font allows better readability as these cities are outside of the area of interest. Otherwise I think the map will be overloaded around New York. --Ikonact (talk) 07:53, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Tour Corbieres Rodez.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2019 at 11:34:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tour Corbières – part of the battlements of the former bishopric in Rodez, Aveyron, France
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 11:34, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 11:34, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Surprising perspective which makes the tower more interesting – the compressed arcade (right) gives a good contrast to the vertical lines of the tower and emphasizes it. --Aristeas (talk) 15:28, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Breaks all the rules in terms of the narrow composition, but per Aristeas it works very well for this tower. Cmao20 (talk) 23:40, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:25, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Has grown on me. Gutsy. --Cart (talk) 10:52, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:12, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent vertorama (yes, there is apparently a word for this). Daniel Case (talk) 17:34, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The tight crop ruins it for me. Another viewpoint would be better. --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:57, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 04:43, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 09:06, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:13, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good light but the tight vertical framing produces a shrunk aspect. This angle also doesn't work in my view. The left part is cut as if there was no space available in that place -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:41, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too tight crop. -- Karelj (talk) 10:52, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 22:24, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

File:Little Venice in Colmar 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2019 at 11:32:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Little Venice in Colmar, Haut-Rhin, France
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#France
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 11:32, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 11:32, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Beautiful composition, nice reflection in the water, but sky is too dull for me. --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:14, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Love that! Gorgeos colors. Kruusamägi (talk) 08:30, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support A beautiful image in pastel shades that go very well together. Cmao20 (talk) 23:39, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:25, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Michiel. I just think this would be nicer with some sun. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:51, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, it's a shame about the sky, but the range of colors in the buildings compensates. — Rhododendrites talk |  02:15, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Like others I do think the colors pop more due to the cloudy sky. Daniel Case (talk) 17:28, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dull light. —kallerna (talk) 19:13, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 04:43, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Gnosis (talk) 05:24, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dull light. -- Karelj (talk) 10:57, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 18:30, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Light could be better --Boothsift 06:05, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm probably biased, but I miss wow here. This is very common sight in Colmar. I'm not sure this is the best composition and light. - Benh (talk) 20:12, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 22:22, 15 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gzen92 [discuter] 06:55, 16 October 2019 (UTC)