Commons:Featured picture candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from Commons:FPC)
Jump to: navigation, search
Skip to current candidates Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates


FPCandiateicon.svg

Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures.

Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and current month.

For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election.

Formal things[edit]

Nominating[edit]

Guidelines for nominators[edit]

Please read the complete guidelines before nominating.

This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:

  • Licensing - Images licensed with solely "GFDL" or "GFDL and an NC-only license" are not acceptable due the restrictions placed on re-use by these licenses.
  • ResolutionImages (with the exception of animations, videos, and SVGs) of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are strong mitigating reasons.
Graphics on Commons are not only viewed on conventional computer screens. They may be used in high-resolution print versions, and the images may be cropped to focus on portions of the image. See Commons:Why we need high resolution media for more information.
  • Scans – While not official policy, Help:Scanning provides advice on the preparation of various types of images that may be useful.
  • General quality – pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality.
  • Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer. Digital manipulation for the purpose of correcting flaws in an image is generally acceptable, provided it is limited, well-done, and not intended to deceive.
    • For photographs, typical acceptable manipulations include cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and colour/exposure correction. More extensive manipulations, such as removal of distracting background elements, should be clearly described in the image text, by means of the {{Retouched picture}} template. Undescribed or mis-described manipulations which cause the main subject to be misrepresented are never acceptable.
    • For historic images, acceptable manipulations might include digitally fixing rips, removal of stains, cleanup of dirt, and, for mass-produced artworks such as engravings, removal of flaws inherent to the particular reproduction, such as over-inking. Careful colour adjustments may be used to bring out the original work from the signs of ageing, though care should be taken to restore a natural appearance. The original artistic intent should be considered when deciding whether it is appropriate to make a change. Edits to historic material should be documented in detail within the file description, and an unedited version should be uploaded and cross linked for comparison.
  • Valueour main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that:
    • almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others,
    • night-shots are pretty but normally more details can be shown on pictures taken at daytime,
    • beautiful does not always mean valuable.


Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents

There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolours, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject.

Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the original painting are generally not considered featurable.

Works that may be scanned include most works created by processes that allow for mass distribution—for instance, illustrations published with novels. For these, it is generally accepted that a certain amount of extra manipulation is permissible to remove flaws inherent to one copy of the work, since the particular copy – of which hundreds, or even thousands of copies also exist – is not so important as the work itself.

Works created to serve a purpose include diagrams, scientific illustrations, and demonstrations of contemporary artistic styles. For these, the main requirement is that they serve their purpose well.

Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable:

  • Notable in its own right: Works by major artists, or works that are otherwise notable, such as the subjects of a controversy.
  • Of high artistic merit: Works which, while not particularly well known, are nonetheless wonderful examples of their particular type or school of art.
  • Of high historic merit: The historical method values very early illustrations of scenes and events over later ones. Hence, a work of poor quality depicting a contemporaneous historical event can be nonetheless important, even if the artistic merit is relatively low. Likewise, scans or photographs of important documents – which may not be at all artistic – nonetheless may be highly valuable if the documents are historically significant. The reason for the image's historical importance should be briefly stated in the nomination, for those reviewers unfamiliar with the subject.
  • Of high illustrative merit: Works that illustrate or help explain notable subjects, for instance, illustrations of books, scientific subjects, or technical processes. The amount of artistic merit required for these will vary by subject, but, for instance, an illustration that makes the working of a complicated piece of machinery very clear need not be notable as a piece of artwork as well, whereas an illustration for a book might well be expected to reach much higher artistic standards.

Digital restorations must also be well documented. An unedited version of the image should be uploaded locally, when possible, and cross-linked from the file hosting page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced."

Photographs

On the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.

  • Focus – every important object in the picture should normally be sharp.
  • Exposure refers to the shutter diaphragm combination that renders an image with a tonal curve that ideally is able to represent in acceptable detail shadows and highlights within the image. This is called latitude. Images can be on the low side of the tonal curve (low range), the middle (middle range) or high side (upper range). Digital cameras (or images) have a narrower latitude than film. Lack of shadow detail is not necessarily a negative characteristic. In fact, it can be part of the desired effect. Burned highlights in large areas are a distracting element.
  • Composition refers to the arrangement of the elements within the image. The "Rule of Thirds" is a good guideline for composition and is an inheritance from the painting school. The idea is to divide the image with two imaginary horizontal and two vertical lines, thus dividing the image into thirds horizontally and vertically. Centering the subject is often less interesting than placing the subject in one of the "interest points", the 4 intersection between these horizontal and vertical lines intersect. Horizons should almost never be placed in the middle, where they "cut" the image in half. The upper or lower horizontal line is often a good choice. The main idea is to use space to create a dynamic image.
    • Foreground and background – foreground and background objects may be distracting. You should check that something in front of the subject doesn't hide important elements and that something in background doesn't spoil the composition (for example that the streetlight doesn't "stand" on someone's head).
  • Movement control refers to the manner in which motion is represented in the image. Motion can be frozen or blurred. Neither one is better than the other. It is the intention of representation. Movement is relative within the objects of the image. For example, photographing a race car that appears frozen in relation to the background does not give us a sense of speed or motion, so technique dictates to represent the car in a frozen manner but with a blurred background, thus creating the sense of motion, this is called "panning". On the other hand, representing a basketball player in a high jump frozen in relation to everything else, due to the "unnatural" nature of the pose would be a good photograph.
  • Depth of field (DOF) refers to the area in focus in front of and beyond main subject. Depth of field is chosen according to the specific needs of every picture. Large or small DOF can either way add or subtract to the quality of the image. Low depth of field can be used to bring attention to the main subject, separating it from the general environment. High depth of field can be used to emphasize space. Short focal length lenses (wide angles) yield large DOF, and vice versa, long focal lenses (telephotos) have shallow DOF. Small apertures yield large DOF and conversely, large apertures yield shallow DOF.

On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, colour, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.

  • Shape refers to the contour of the main subjects.
  • Volume refers to the three dimensional quality of the object. This is accomplished using side light. Contrary to general belief, front lighting is not the best light. It tends to flatten subject. Best light of day is early morning or late afternoon.
  • Colour is important. Over saturated colours are not good.
  • Texture refers to the quality of the surface of the subject. It is enhanced by side lighting… it is the "feel" to the touch.
  • Perspective refers to the "angle" accompanied by lines that disappear into a vanishing point that may or may not be inside the image.
  • Balance refers to the arrangement of subjects within the image that can either give equal weight or appear to be heavier on one side.
  • Proportion refers to the relation of size of objects in picture. Generally, we tend to represent small objects small in relation to others, but a good technique is to represent small objects large contrary to natural size relationship. For example, a small flower is given preponderance over a large mountain…. This is called inversion of scales.
Not all elements must be present. Some photographs can be judged on individual characteristics, that is, an image can be about color or texture, or colour AND texture, etc.
  • Noise refers to unwanted corruption of colour brightness and quality and can be caused by underexposure. It is not a desirable quality and can be grounds for opposition.
  • Symbolic meaning or relevance … Opinion wars can begin here … A bad picture of a very difficult subject is a better picture than a good picture of an ordinary subject. A good picture of a difficult subject is an extraordinary photograph.
Images can be culturally biased by the photographer and/or the observer. The meaning of the image should be judged according to the cultural context of the image, not by the cultural context of the observer. An image "speaks" to people, and it has the capacity to evoke emotion such as tenderness, rage, rejection, happiness, sadness, etc. Good photographs are not limited to evoking pleasant sensations …

You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating.

Video and audio

Set nominations

If a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set. A set should fall under one of the following types:

  • Faithful digital reproductions of works notable in their own right, which the original author clearly intended to be viewed as a set. Examples: pages in a pamphlet, crops (puzzle pieces) of a prohibitively large scan, a pair of pendant paintings. Not acceptable: Arbitrary selection of sample works by an artist.
  • A sequence of images showing the passage of time. They could depict frames of a moving/changing object or a static object during different times of day or different seasons. Examples: diagrams illustrating a process, steps of a dance, metamorphosis of an insect, maps/drawings/photos of the same subject over the years (frame of view should be more or less the same).
  • A group of images depicting the same subject from different viewpoints, preferably taken under the same lighting conditions when possible. Examples: Exterior and interior of a building, different facades of a building, different interior views, obverse and inverse of a banknote/coin. Not acceptable: A selection of different rooms in a skyscraper, the facade of a church plus an organ, any images of fundamentally different scopes.
  • A group of images which show all possible variations of a particular class of object. Examples: Male and female versions of an animal (preferably in the same setting), all known species of a genus. Not acceptable: A few breeds of cats (unless they share a defining characteristic and represent all possible examples of that).

Adding a new nomination[edit]

If you believe that you have found or created an image that could be considered valuable, with appropriate image description and licensing, then do the following.

Step 1: copy the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg. Then click on the "create new nomination" button.

All single files:

For renominations, simply add /2 after the filename. For example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2


All set nomination pages should begin "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/", e.g. "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/My Nomination".



Step 2: follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save that page.

Step 3: manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list: Click here, and add the following line to the TOP of the nominations list:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg}}

Recommended: Please add a category from the list at COM:FP.

Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify him/her using {{subst:FPC-notice|Your image filename.jpg}} -- ~~~~.

Voting[edit]

Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for his/her own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed.

You may use following templates:

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

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

A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above.

Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:

  • No reason
  • "I don't like it" and other empty assessments
  • "You can do better" and other criticisms of the author/nominator rather than the image

Remember also to put your signature (~~~~).

Featured picture delisting candidates[edit]

Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep It deserves to remain a featured picture
{{Delist}} Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist It does not deserve to be a featured picture anymore.

This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Do not replace the old image with the new image as an FP.
{{Delistandreplace}} Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace Replace the current FP with the proposed replacement.

If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box:


In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include:

  • Information on the origin of the image (creator, uploader);
  • A link to the original FP nomination (it will appear under "Links" on the image description page);
  • Your reasons for nominating the image and your username.

After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list.

As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the original creator, uploader(s), and nominator with a link to the delisting candidate. {{subst:FPC-notice-removal}} can be used for this purpose.

Featured picture candidate policy[edit]

General rules[edit]

  1. The voting period is 9 complete days counted from the nomination. After the end of this period the result will be determined. Votes added on day 10 and after are not counted.
  2. Nominations by anonymous contributors are welcome
  3. Contributions to discussion by anonymous contributors are welcome
  4. Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Exception: registered users can always vote in their own nominations no matter the account age and number of edits.
  5. Nominations do not count as votes. Support must be explicitly stated.
  6. Nominators and authors can withdraw their nominated pictures at any time. This is done by adding the following template: {{withdraw}} ~~~~
  7. Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project.
  8. Rules of the 5th day based on vote counts on day number 5 (day of nomination + 5)
    1. Pictures are speedy declined if they have no support (apart from the nominator).
    2. Pictures are speedy promoted if they have 10 support votes or more and no oppose votes. (Note that if it takes more than five days to reach this threshold, the picture can be promoted as soon as it is reached.)
    3. Once either speedy criterion is reached, the voting period is considered closed, and no more votes may be added.
  9. Pictures tagged {{FPX}} may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied, provided there are no support votes other than that of the nominator.
  10. Pictures tagged {{FPD}} (FP-Denied) may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied.
  11. Only two active nominations by the same user (that is, nominations under review and not yet closed) are allowed. The main purpose of this measure is to contribute to a better average quality of nominations, by driving nominators/creators to choose carefully the pictures presented to the forum.

Featuring and delisting rules[edit]

A candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:

  1. Appropriate license (of course)
  2. At least seven Symbol support vote.svg Support votes at the end of nine days
  3. Ratio of supporting/opposing votes at least 2/1 (a two-thirds majority); same for delist/keep votes
  4. Two different versions of the same picture cannot both be featured, but only the one with higher level of support, as determined by the closer. Whenever the closer is not sure which version has consensus to be featured, he/she should attempt to contact the voters to clarify their opinions if not clear from the nomination page.

The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5. There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations.

The FPCBot handles the vote counting and closing in most cases, current exceptions are candidates containing multiple versions of the image as well as FPXed and withdrawn nominations. Any experienced user may close the requests not handled by the bot. For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished. Also note that there is a manual review stage between the bot has counted the votes and before they are finally closed by the bot, this manual review can be done by any user that are familiar with the voting rules.

Above all, be polite[edit]

Please don't forget that the image you are judging is somebody's work. Avoid using phrases like "it looks terrible" and "I hate it". If you must oppose, please do so with consideration. Also remember that your command of English might not be the same as someone else's. Choose your words with care.

Happy judging… and remember... all rules can be broken.

See also[edit]

Table of contents[edit]

List may contain works considered Not Safe for Work (nudity).

Nominators are requested, out of courtesy, to include the {{Nsfw}} template with such images. Users may select the gadget in user preferences "Deferred display of images tagged with {{Nsfw}} on COM:FPC" to enable the template's effect of hiding the image until selected.

Contents

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:De zon probeert door de mist te breken. Locatie, Langweerderwielen (Langwarder Wielen) en omgeving 05.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2017 at 06:00:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Prussian Creek Chain Bay, Kosciuszko Road, NSW.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2017 at 02:31:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Prussian Creek Chain Bay, near Mount Kosciuszko, Australia.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, nominated by Thennicke -- Thennicke (talk) 02:31, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Thennicke (talk) 02:31, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great composition. -- King of ♠ 04:53, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:04, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I have no clue what should make this image outstanding. Image quality is also not the best. --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:59, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Црква Св. Никола (нова) во Маврово (2).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2017 at 00:02:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. Nicholas Church in Mavrovo, Macedonia

Canon EF 180mm f3.5L Macro USM DSLR lens[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2017 at 23:17:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Out of date clock icon.svg
Nomination denied. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines because only two active nominations per user are allowed. -- Thennicke (talk) 01:46, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Bankote portrait pattern (Intaglio printing).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2017 at 21:14:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Banknote portrait pattern (Intaglio printing)
  • I made 2 portrait patterns of money. This will be first. Makroed as possible. Since we dont have any similar. Will be good for money folder, almost empty on FPC. --Mile (talk) 21:23, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 23:02, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 23:04, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm not quite sure that's how COM:DM works; it's generally when the whole work takes up a tiny part of a photo, rather than taking a tiny part of the whole work. There are instances where DM is valid for such cases like Cloud Gate, but it is because the tiny part is just a smooth metal surface which is below COM:TOO, not because of de minimis. By the way, could you identify on the description page which banknote it is taken from? -- King of ♠ 23:13, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • I've removed the note about DM. We need to know what country this banknote comes from. If it's US currency, then {{PD-USGov-money}}/Commons:Currency#United States would cover it. If it's currency from another country, the copyright status needs to be checked at Commons:Currency. lNeverCry 23:37, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • , lNeverCry This is still the case i have to ask, can i put this file into the Currency of that state...since its Copyrightable. Can be de minimis applied then !? De minimis is because it fell to 1st rule of "Case can be considered de minimis". So its not "crop" which is forbidden, but zoomed in. So merely even Google cant find it. But if i put biger size of banknote, what wont be de minimis, since people might know it. And Google finder also. I might check that also on COM:Currency, but there is one forum for this kind, they answer straight...currency is more for whole banknote. --Mile (talk) 07:14, 16 January 2017 (UTC) p.S. Its not American, its Chinese rinminbi.
  • Waiting for Help desk response. --Mile (talk) 07:35, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
Reply was fast:
  • In my opinion Commons:De minimis applies and the image can be kept. Only a small part of the banknote is visible, and more importantly the subject of the image is the printing process pattern. MKFI (talk) 07:54, 16 January 2017 (UTC).
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment You still haven't categorised the image to indicate what banknote and what country it is from. I'm not convinced by the opinion of one random person, though. If banknotes are copyrightable in your country then this image here is certainly displaying enough artistic expression to be copyrightable itself. I also think that someone familiar with the banknotes could identify which one, so it fails the test. -- Colin (talk) 08:16, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • All is stated there, so if you think you are correct, go there and ask more opinions. And who told you i had to name the money, thats is why de minimis exist. Name it. --Mile (talk) 08:28, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Paris-7957a.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2017 at 21:13:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Night over Pont Royal and Pavillon de Flores.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by idobi - uploaded by idobi - nominated by Idobi -- Idobi (talk) 21:13, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Idobi (talk) 21:13, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Stunning. I love the way the moon appears. Quality could be better especially on the right side but sufficient for FP. -- King of ♠ 23:07, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 01:45, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose great composition, vivid colors, excellent mood - if only image quality were better --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:25, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I really like composition, perfect moon-clouds situation. Its not so sharp, but saw camera is not the latest model.--Mile (talk) 07:38, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Gedore No. 7 combination wrenches 6–19 mm.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2017 at 17:29:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gedore No. 7 combination wrenches set from 6 to 19 mm. This is a shift panorama using the Canon TS-E 90 mm because my acrylic plate wasn't large enough for the whole set, additionally it's a focus stack of 5 to 6 images. Post processing to remove dust and make the background pure black.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Tools
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Gedore No. 7 combination wrenches set from 6 to 19 mm. This is a shift panorama using the Canon TS-E 90 mm because my acrylic plate wasn't large enough for the whole set, additionally it's a focus stack of 5 to 6 images. Post processing to remove dust and make the background pure black.
    Created by Lucasbosch -- uploaded by Lucasbosch -- nominated by Lucasbosch -- LB 17:29, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LB 17:29, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 17:38, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really a good job --LivioAndronico (talk) 19:55, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:03, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 23:04, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Thennicke (talk) 01:48, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 04:30, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:05, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • LB Did you check "landscape" version ? --Mile (talk) 07:40, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Little banana tree.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2017 at 12:07:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The image of little banana tree in Jaffna, Srilanka
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plantains
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Shriheeran - uploaded by Shriheeran - nominated by Shriheeran -- Shriheeran (talk) 12:07, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Shriheeran (talk) 12:07, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Nice tree, but the light is a little dull, the crops on left and right are closer than I'd like, and the focus on the tree should be sharper. As a new member of Commons, you might consider trying to nominate some of your photos at COM:Quality images candidates. I've seen a number of relatively new members improve their skills through nominations and discussion there, and several of them have started getting photos featured. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:27, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan. lNeverCry 17:13, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the unfavorable crop + light. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:35, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because the technical quality (sharpness, crop, light, composition) falls short of FP expectations. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:49, 15 January 2017 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Lantana camara-Silent Valley-2016-08-14-001.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2017 at 11:21:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lantana camara
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Verbenaceae
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Lantana camara. This is a wild one (not an ornamental cultivar), deep in the forest. C/U/N: Jkadavoor -- Jee 11:21, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jee 11:21, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Impressive closeup. I would have loved a slightly wider view, so that the top four leaves didn't get cut off, but you can't have everything. :-) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:34, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 17:14, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm sorry, Jee, but I do not think it is on par with our other two lantana camara FPs, when it comes to the composition and the light. You have a slight clockwise rotation of the leaves, which gives, together with the slight crop of the leaves an unbalanced composition in my opinion. Moreover, I think the light is too harsh (flash?), with reflections in the leaves and washed colors of the flowers. Isn't the Lantana camara actually an invasive species in India? With 'wild' do you mean, not a cultivar and thus less bright colors of the flowers? -- Slaunger (talk) 18:48, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Slaunger: 1.This is original lantana camara as confirmed by the experts in India. Since it is a popular ornamental plant, we can see it in gardens; but they are hybrids with boosted colors. This FP is 'Patty Wankler' as mentioned in description. The other FP is indeed a hybrid. This seems original; but can't confirm unless we know from where it was photographed. (It is also a hybrid.) The difficulty is our garden cultivars will escape to wild and mix with originals. Here the current nom is photographed from the core of Silent Valley National Park (1300 m a.s.l.) where no human settlement or activity. (Disclaimer: I'm not an expert; just sharing what I learned from experts. I do post my works in expert groups and read all related discussions before making a nom here. I know here we expect less subject specific reviews even compared to EN wiki FPC. I had read this and this too before making this nom.) 2. "You have a slight clockwise rotation of the leaves.." Not me; it's by the nature itself. We are not going to see the two leaves in the horizontal plane in real life. And I prefer this position more beautiful than with artificial straightening. Jee 03:17, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Slaunger. --LB 19:30, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Lez River, Saint-Clément-de-Rivière cf01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2017 at 09:13:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lez River, Saint-Clément-de-Rivière, France

File:Berlin, Denkmal für die im Nationalsozialismus ermordeten Sinti und Roma -- 2016 -- 5594.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2017 at 07:11:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Memorial to the Sinti and Roma in Berlin-Tiergarten (Dani Karavan, 2012), Berlin, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Sculptures
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by XRay -- XRay talk 07:11, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 07:11, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - That's a pretty striking picture, and of obvious socio-historical and educational value, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:36, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose While it may represent an important memorial, I find the photograph itself lacking. Low overal contrast, distracting reflections of the trees, distracting floating leaves hanging on the side of the memorial. It looks like a snapshot to me. The context of how the whole puddle looks is also missing, IMHO this should have been included. --LB 09:13, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • "Looks like a shapshot". :-( Never seen snapshots like this. It was made with tripod and I'd choosen a long exposure to accentuate the trees. IMO the the cloudy day is good to show the memorial in autumn. --XRay talk 09:20, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @XRay: Good to know that you took care when making the photograph, and I respect your decision to render the trees sharply, but still, I find the composition lacking and it doesn't represent the memorial well enough for my taste. I would have liked to see the whole puddle and its decoration around it. As it is, you kind of included the edge of the puddle, but only a bit, and not enough to give someone a good idea of how the whole memorial looks when standing in front of it. --LB 15:36, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:01, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • This must be from polar bear and the keeper ? I would put into description. --Mile (talk) 12:27, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • What are you talking about? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:20, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
    • I thought its about that polar bear and Zoo keeper in Germany. Both died i think. --Mile (talk) 21:26, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
@PetarM: Mile, I know you're not a native German speaker, but neither am I and yet I can clearly tell from the filename that this is "Memorial to the Sinti and Roma victims of the Nazis". As such I can only assume that you were trying to make a joke, and honestly it's in poor taste given the real purpose of the memorial. Daniel Case (talk) 04:57, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Sorry Daniel Case, i havent saw word "victims". Joke...grow up. --Mile (talk) 06:56, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
    • This is description in English : Memorial to the Sinti and Roma in Berlin-Tiergarten (Dani Karavan, 2012), Berlin, Germany. --Mile (talk) 07:55, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It gets low readings on my wow-o-meter, sorry. I agree with the assessement of LB, acknowledging that it is not a snapshot. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:09, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. lNeverCry 23:08, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Canon EF 100mm f2.8L Macro IS USM DSLR lens[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2017 at 00:21:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Optical_devices
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info My studio photographs of the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM DSLR lens. All were taken with a Canon 6D with Canon EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM lens (lighting and flagging setup: Image:Two flash photographic studio for lenses.jpg). Settings: f/8, 1/180 s, ISO 100. 10–25 shots for each setup were focus stacked in Helicon Focus, then masked, dusted and retouched as necessary in Photoshop. Final and only sharpening by highpass filter 1px.
    Created by Lucasbosch – uploaded by Lucasbosch – nominated by Lucasbosch -- LB 00:21, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LB 00:21, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 02:43, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great macro work. Very consistent processing and lighting. I could imagine seeing these images on the-digital-picture.com or somewhere like that -- Thennicke (talk) 02:54, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - This is not the kind of subject that most interests me, but I'm super-impressed with this work! I love all the detail and the light. Really great! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:20, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Ikan. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:14, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:22, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support "Great macro work" - LOL! -- King of ♠ 06:23, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great. This is really excellent. Congrats. --Code (talk) 07:21, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'm very impressed! Great work. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:00, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As a straight educational product catalogue shot (vs advertising where the image has to have desirable appeal) this is as good as it gets, with even lighting and a totally clean subject. -- Colin (talk) 11:50, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I also thought I was on the-digital-picture.com for a short moment. Very nice. - Benh (talk) 11:50, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 18:34, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 19:56, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great work. --Gyrostat (talk) 22:11, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support So good I can practically smell the plastic. Daniel Case (talk) 06:00, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

File:MNBA aos 80 anos 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2017 at 22:11:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the National Museum of Fine Arts in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Brazil
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tomaz Silva/Agência Brasil - uploaded by NMaia - nominated by NMaia -- ~nmaia d 22:11, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ~nmaia d 22:11, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad crop, perspective, noisy. Looks like a snapshot, sorry. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:24, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Slaunger. lNeverCry 02:43, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Slaunger.--Cayambe (talk) 12:36, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Slaunger; perspective problems are obvious even at thumb size. Daniel Case (talk) 05:59, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

File:MNBA aos 80 anos 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2017 at 22:11:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the National Museum of Fine Arts in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Brazil
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tomaz Silva/Agência Brasil - uploaded by NMaia - nominated by NMaia -- ~nmaia d 22:11, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ~nmaia d 22:11, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow for me, I miss a clear idea with the composition. Needs perspective correction, sorry. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:27, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Slaunger. lNeverCry 02:44, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Slaunger. --Cayambe (talk) 12:37, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 04:39, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Berdorf (LU), Aesbachtal -- 2015 -- 4550.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2017 at 19:46:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Plants in Aesbachtal near Berdorf, Luxembourg
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by XRay -- XRay talk 19:46, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 19:46, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Unsharp foreground on the left is slightly distracting to me and might be cropped out, but I don't know what that would do to the composition. And the composition is the main reason I support this picture. It's a kind of lovely miniature landscape, with the cobwebs between the plants accentuating their formal relationship in the picture frame. It's best viewed at full screen. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:17, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 21:25, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Ikan. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:13, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 19:56, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 04:37, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm too distracted by all the plants on the bottom. Daniel Case (talk) 04:39, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Caye Caulker Belize aerial (20688990128).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2017 at 19:08:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by dronepicr on Flickr - uploaded by User:Dronepicr - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:08, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I think this is an outstanding drone picture. My only hesitation in nominating it is that I hope people don't vote against it because the angle of the photo makes the ground diagonal, instead of straight, but I nominate it, anyway, to see what you all think. P.S. I didn't see a category for drone or aerial pictures; if you know of a good subcategory to add to the "Category" line, please feel free to add it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:08, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 21:26, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support No, I find the ground fine; as long as the horizon is level, which it appears to be. Great find too! Really lots of wow, and for a drone pic image quality is ok, but could be better -- Thennicke (talk) 02:55, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • I really should involve myself with Photo Challenge more, but I wish there was some "QI" barrier to the nominations or something - unfortunately some of the winners are shocking from a photographic perspective -- Thennicke (talk) 01:52, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Ikan. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:12, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Just not enough wow for me. Daniel Case (talk) 05:25, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • You will have to rework the colors here, think blue is +, green is missing. Some saturation maybe. --Mile (talk) 21:17, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the colors and composition. -- King of ♠ 04:59, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Talleitspitze, Ötztaler Alpen.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2017 at 13:22:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Talleitspitze, Ötztal Alps.jpg

File:Sand sculpture - Puerto de Mogan.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2017 at 09:49:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sand sculpture at the beach of Puerto de Mogán, Gran Canaria
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 09:49, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 09:49, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support refreshingly different --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:30, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice, something new here. Maybe a low level view could be more interesting with the sky on top --The Photographer 12:26, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info It was at a popular beach. In the background there was no sky, but hundreds of bathing people. --Llez (talk) 14:38, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:39, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • You might try diorama here. --Mile (talk) 13:07, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 14:47, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Very nice image. But IMO it is a non permanent art work and this is not FoP in Spain. --XRay talk 19:20, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support because it's very nice. --XRay talk 07:17, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support @XRay: In general, works that are designed to be naturally destroyed by the elements are considered permanent. -- King of ♠ 19:42, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
But what if that guy from the Charles Atlas ads comes across it on the beach and kicks it into dust? Would that make it temporary? Face-smile.svg Daniel Case (talk) 04:37, 16 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I do not fancy the angle too much, but won't oppose either as it is refreshing. As The Photographer suggest a photo taken from a lower level would have been more interesting. I realize it was a busy beach, but I think an interesting position would have been to get the camera to the ground level, put on a zoom or a macro lens and make a detail shot of some of the sand houses showing just the sand castle elements with no traces of the normal beach and background. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:13, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Composition is pretty good in my opinion, but I'm supporting this mainly for uniqueness, though of course the picture quality is high, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:22, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 21:29, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:05, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Clear depiction of a very interesting subject -- Thennicke (talk) 02:58, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I prefer this AOV here as it cover a lot of details which we will miss in a lower position of the camera. This looks like an areal view of a castle. The light is harsh; but I can understand as it is from a beach. Jee 04:03, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:23, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 13:00, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 19:09, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mö1997 (Questions ?!?!) German-Language-Flag.svgRegiowikiat-logo-vorschlag3.png 19:36, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 19:56, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Moscow ParkKulturyR vestibule 04-2016.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2017 at 07:58:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Moscow, Russia: entrance pavilion of Park Kultury (Red Line) metro station, built in 1935
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Russia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by A.Savin --A.Savin 07:58, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 07:58, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I love the colors and enjoy the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:01, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 08:24, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I just can't keep my eyes off the power lines. The left crop is also a little distracting. -- King of ♠ 09:15, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Power lines. Yann (talk) 12:48, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 14:48, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 15:26, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, per King of Hearts. --Basotxerri (talk) 17:37, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not enough wow for me --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:51, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Cables in foreground and lamppost to the left leans distractingly much. Main subject itself is quite nicely lit, but the overall composition does not convince me, sorry -- Slaunger (talk) 20:01, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Very weak support I have faced this same dilemma so many times myself ... great angle but for the wires. And so many times I've sighed and put the camera down. So молодец for trying where I usually give up. And for doing your best to make them less distracting instead of cheating entirely and cloning them out. Daniel Case (talk) 23:02, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Per the others, sorry -- Thennicke (talk) 01:53, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Orange hibiscus.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2017 at 00:23:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Orange hibiscus
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by LivioAndronico (talk) 00:23, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LivioAndronico (talk) 00:23, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - You might have moved the blue chairs (I think they are) away, but they arguably add interest to the background, and pro or con on the chairs, this is a great closeup of the flower. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:56, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The blue object/s aren't natural. I would've moved them. They distract from the flower. lNeverCry 03:07, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose, background is noisy and it seems a little underexposed to me. Nice color though. Daniel Case (talk) 16:58, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distracting background elements. Center of flower is not as crisply resolved as I would anticipate in a a flower FP, sorry. Colours are good though, and it is refreshing to see other topics than church interiors nominated by you. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:59, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks Slaunger, but unfortunately it is a rumor. I have [1] FP of paintings, statues, panoramas etc ... it is logical that something is more common as many people have more of FP of flowers, insects, or ... churches. Greetings.--LivioAndronico (talk) 19:53, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Livioandronico2013: Thanks for clarifying, that you are not a church interior only FP creator. It was the only type of FPs I recalled having seeen previously, but I did not double-check.-- Slaunger (talk) 19:59, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Natural nude tree.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2017 at 20:04:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 20:04, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 20:04, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Please tell us why you think this photo should be featured. I'd like to have your thoughts on that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:13, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
    • Well, I could tell you it is a study on texture and volume, or that the forms on these trees are interesting, or that I and some others have a dirty mind... ;) Please see #REDIRECT[[2]] and #REDIRECT[[3]] --Tomascastelazo (talk) 20:27, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Reject. Charles (talk) 21:30, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well, it was clear for me after a split second, why you nominated this, Tomas. Hahaha. Well spotted. A brilliantly illuminated trunk, nice texture and shape. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:04, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow for me. File:Enterolobium cyclocarpum 01.jpg has much greater visual impact. I would support that. lNeverCry 02:46, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I tried to explore some suitable categories. Jee 04:19, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, nothing featurable here. Daniel Case (talk) 16:56, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - So ultimately, I think this is a moderately funny joke, since it was explained to me, but the composition doesn't really add up for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:07, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Vista de Baku, Azerbaiyán, 2016-09-26, DD 108-114 PAN.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2017 at 18:40:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of Baku, capital of Azerbaijan.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Panoramic view of Baku, capital of Azerbaijan. Poco2 18:40, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 18:40, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Maybe more sky than necessary, but there are lots of interesting things to look at in full size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:52, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The stitching errors noted need to be fixed. Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:35, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
    Daniel: ✓ Done and thanks to Ivar for the notes Poco2 21:56, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment but why choose such a miserable day? Charles (talk) 21:31, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
    Good question Charles, actually I ordered good weather for the phototour, but they didn't listen to me :) Poco2 21:56, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • perhaps you can go back and take the same photos when the Caspian Waterfront Development is complete... Charles (talk) 09:57, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • And who guarantees good weather? :) Poco2 10:57, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Charles. The light is flat and unattractive. lNeverCry 03:09, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I think this is a very valid point. I still think it's featurable, because it's such a huge, sharp panorama with interesting things to see, and not every photo needs to be of a sunny day or some amazing cloud formations. But it is definitely a valid point. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:26, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 09:46, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Ivar, the last stitching issues you noted are now addressed, thank you Poco2 16:24, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There is a vertical straight near the right border. Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:18, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
    True, Christian, ✓ fixed now Poco2 09:39, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fine. I appreciate this view. Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:48, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Je-str: I just fixed the stitching error you noted Poco2 22:52, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Too much sky and not enough ground -- Thennicke (talk) 01:55, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Helfaut Generatrice 28 10 2011 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2017 at 16:46:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Vassil - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 16:46, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 16:46, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I just read a bit of the history of this bunker, and it's quite interesting. However, this photo is too small for FP (and QI) and could be clearer, too. The absolute minimum size for FPC noms is 2 megapixels. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:03, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
    • Ikan Kekek, It's 3.6 megapixels. Tomer T (talk) 18:56, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
      • Sorry for being careless. I still think it's pretty small for FP, though, and it would have to be a lot clearer to have a chance to wow me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:12, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Apart from the size, I'm not really wowed. Daniel Case (talk) 17:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I do not think the technical quality is quite on par given the modest imge size. Especially the kA and V-meters in the foreground. Interesting subject though. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:52, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. lNeverCry 03:10, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Russian chapel at Fort Ross (2016).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2017 at 07:36:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Frank Schulenburg - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 07:36, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 07:36, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 08:47, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Good shot of interesting stuff. I would decrease sky noise a bit, and put into description is it active or a museum. --Mile (talk) 10:35, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I slept on this photo, and my verdict is that it's beautiful. Decreasing the sky noise would be fine, but it's a very fine grain that doesn't bother me at all. I really like the texture of the wooden chapel and fences. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:31, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A good image but the shadowed fence make it not outstanding. Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:59, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful oppose per Christian. Daniel Case (talk) 17:24, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - For what it's worth, I like the alternation of light and shadow and think it contributes to the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:34, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
I actually agree. The main subject is literally in the "spotlight" this way. I'm not sure whether it would have resulted in a better outcome had I waited for afternoon sunlight to also shine on the palisades. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 23:08, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Delicate light and colours on the main subject and very balanced composition. I do not mind the fence in shadow. Sky could be selectively de-noised, but it is really only noticeable if you pixel peep. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:14, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 01:16, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The shade is not so prominent in a large view. Jee 04:24, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 06:22, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I would say edu. value as first here.--Mile (talk) 07:02, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nicely done -- Thennicke (talk) 09:52, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support well composed! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:36, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:41, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:52, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Heaven Shall Burn - Rock am Ring 2016 - Leonhard Kreissig - 25.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2017 at 00:53:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Concert Shot
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by LeoDE - uploaded by LeoDE - nominated by LeoDE -- LeoDE (talk) 00:53, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LeoDE (talk) 00:53, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The singer is in a strong pose, but the background is unattractive. This would've been better if he was at left in the frame and some of the audience took up the right of the frame. lNeverCry 01:23, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Pictogram voting info.svg Info Just for Information: Audience wasn't possible due to the huge pit. But thanks alot for your feedbak --LeoDE (talk) 12:12, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per INC. Daniel Case (talk) 06:00, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very powerful concert foto. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 06:18, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Frank! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:00, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose composition, background lighting, sharpness. Charles (talk) 12:57, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think this is a good and expressive concert photo, and I like the background stage illumination. It is as if it pushes the singer towards the audience. The crop of the foot could have been better but oh well. -- Slaunger (talk) 22:10, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Charles + random compo. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 01:18, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This is for sure not one of the very best --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:02, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I like this photo, but ultimately, Uoaei1's argument really cuts to the heart of the matter and carries the day for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:30, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Window detail De Bazel Vijzelstraat Amsterdam 2016-09-13-6627.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2017 at 22:05:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Facade detail of De Bazel, Amsterdam
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info De Bazel is a monumental building in Amsterdam named after the architect Karel de Bazel. It was completed in 1926 and stands as an example of Brick Expressionism. This nominated picture is a detail of the facade, including four windows, and shows how bricks are used as ornamentation in complicated patterns. Today, the building houses Amsterdam City Archives. Created, uploaded, nominated by Slaunger -- Slaunger (talk) 22:05, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 22:05, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Splendid! Daniel Case (talk) 23:03, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 23:04, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 07:03, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great picture. Love detailed images like this of architecture, and the blue contrasts well with the brick and stone. WClarke (talk) 03:44, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and the seventh :-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:37, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Worker in São Paulo city.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2017 at 12:22:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Worker in São Paulo city
Obrigado caro Arion, por qué vc paro de nominar minhas fotos? --The Photographer 16:25, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
@The Photographer: Olá meu parceiro, na verdade eu pausei minhas atividades no Commons, por motivos pessoais. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 15:11, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support The monochrome brings out the grittiness of his work, and the chaos of his space is nicely contrasted with the geometric orderliness of the surrounding facade. Another great bit of street photography. Daniel Case (talk) 17:32, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:36, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great scenary. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:35, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 23:06, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The B&W adds a nice sentimental touch, but when I ask myself "Is this the best we have to offer?" I think it falls short. His pose and facial expressions are all rather ordinary. -- King of ♠ 00:29, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - If you had cropped this closer, I might want to feature it. But as it is, the door to the worker's right (viewer's left) distracts me too much, when what I'd really like to focus on is the scene in his workshop. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:04, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no wow + per King. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 01:20, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Daniel Case. --LB 19:43, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Panorama of Auxerre.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2017 at 20:41:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Your note hasn't shown up yet. Daniel Case (talk) 07:25, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'd also suggest a tighter crop (see my note - I couldn't find Miles' yet) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:30, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Hope now is there. --Mile (talk) 07:42, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - My problem with the photo as is is that I don't really like the right crop, which cuts through a boat (and also what seems to me to be a concession stand, but I care less about that). However, I'm not sure if either of the two suggested crops solve the problem for me. My main hesitation in terms of Martin's crop is that although it's neat, cropping out the tall tree might have an adverse effect on the form, making it unbalanced between right and left, plus I'd just miss seeing that tree and its reflection. Something similar to Mile's crop might be helpful, but I wouldn't suggest bisecting the reflection of the trees near the near right corner. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:13, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Whilst this is well-processed and it's a lovely image, the right crop is too bad and I don't think this can be rescued in post. This kind of thing needs to be thought about in the field, unfortunately. Turning the camera a little to the right would have saved this. The reflections and processing are definitely impressive though. I hope my review is helpful. -- Thennicke (talk) 10:15, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition does not work for me, too much foreground water, sorry. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:04, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done thanks --LivioAndronico (talk) 23:38, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support now. Jee 03:27, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Gut feeling: Even with this crop, this is a good to very good picture but not one of the most outstanding on this site. No offense intended. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral An attractive picture (I love the autumn colours of the trees on the right), but it's a bit unbalanced with the left side "higher" than the right. I also find the NR (?) smears too many details away. - Benh (talk) 15:47, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

File:2016 Minox C 8.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2017 at 17:53:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sub-miniature spy camera Minox C

File:Komatsu bulldozer pushing coal in Power plant Ljubljana (winter 2017).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2017 at 07:44:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Komatsu bulldozer pushing coal in Power plant Ljubljana (winter 2017)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Other land vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Komatsu bulldozer pushing coal in Power plant Ljubljana (winter 2017). My shot. -- Mile (talk) 07:44, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mile (talk) 07:44, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Just like Kabellerger's shot of the train going across the bridge, the color pops against the natural winter monochrome behind it. Daniel Case (talk) 19:51, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 20:46, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 21:13, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 03:06, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This image is good, but I feel uneasy looking at it because you seem to have rotated it to make the bottoms of the tracks horizontal - really, what needs to be horizontal is the bucket, because that is what is in the center of the image - and at the moment the bucket is tilted heavily to the left. Which would be fine if the dozer was going uphill, but the composition does not contain clues to that, and therefore this is uneasy on my eyes. I also think this is slightly overprocessed - too much contrast. Good, simple composition though, and Daniel's comment about the colours is spot on. I'll definitely support if you fix the problems I've noted -- Thennicke (talk) 10:22, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Thennicke Good, first, i couldnt say is bulldozer in normal position by nothing here seeing vehicle alone, but look i have some luck. See note, there is part of high building on right side, you can see vertical line is positioned good. This was one of quick images, nothing much to change, contrast same, but offset changed to my taste to -0.0124. Offset and crop. So, no rotating, this path goes some 10-12 % uphill. --Mile (talk) 12:47, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Yes, now that you point it out I see it. However, a person looking at the thumbnail will not notice it, so that isn't good. And for that reason, I stand by my statements. -- Thennicke (talk) 13:04, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. No problem with the angles for me, and the distant buildings on the right confirm that no rotating has taken place. —Bruce1eetalk 17:28, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the contrast between the yellow dozer, the black coal and the white snow. Nice and creative idea. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:54, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 03:30, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 12:45, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - There is a lot of energy in the picture. Nice composition and I am not worried about the angles. --Pugilist (talk) 07:43, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

File:北京市民俗博物館·東岳廟·北京朝外大街·(二道門).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2017 at 03:52:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The first gate of Beijing Dongyue Temple. The gate is located in Chaoyangmenwai Street, Beijing, China. And it is one of the MHCSPNL (Major Historical and Cultural Site Protected at the National Level)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The first gate of Beijing Dongyue Temple. The gate is located in Chaoyangmenwai Street, Beijing, China. And it is one of the MHCSPNL (Major Historical and Cultural Site Protected at the National Level) created by Legolas1024 - uploaded by Legolas1024 - nominated by Legolas1024 -- Legolas1024 03:52, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Legolas1024 03:52, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose It's a good subject and you're using a good camera, but for these kinds of low buildings you're almost always best using a landscape orientation. The processing is not great either, but that just requires practice. Also, at 1/30th of a second, you'll struggle to get truly sharp images. One thing I do like about this image is that it's quite symmetrical, and it's great to see nominations from China - we don't get enough of them. If you'd like more feedback to improve your photography skills, have a look at commons:Photography critiques -- Thennicke (talk) 04:55, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Excellent composition, but I dislike the sky (and trees) enough to oppose. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:17, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Thennicke. Daniel Case (talk) 17:41, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The symmetric view through the gate is good, but the light is dull, the sky burns the leaves of the trees and the portarit aspect ratio is not the adequate choise. Actually, a square crop may have been better. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:51, 12 January 2017 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /FPCBot (talk) 05:00, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Biblioteca Central de la Universidad de Bucarest, Bucarest, Rumanía, 2016-05-29, DD 97-99 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2017 at 19:43:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Frontal view of the Central University Library of Bucharest and Carol I statue, central Bucharest, Romania.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Frontal view of the Central University Library of Bucharest and Carol I statue, Bucharest, Romania. The Central University Library was founded in 1895, 31 years after the foundation of the University of Bucharest, as the Carol I Library of the University Foundation. The building, designed by French architect Paul Gottereau, was completed in 1893 and opened on 14 March 1895. The volume collection has grown steadily from 3,400 volumes in 1899 to over 2 million in 1970. Poco2 19:43, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 19:43, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose All is well, until we hit the black tiled roof. If I zoom to fit my screen, there is a purple noisy halo around the roof, most dominantly at the left and right towers. If I zoom to a reasonable review resolution of 10 Mpixel, the technical quality of especially the left and right side roof structures are bad - very noisy and very little structure/texture. I am a little surprised this was promoted to QI by Jacek Halicki back in september. It seems like shadows have been boosted much more than justified. I think HDR merge of bracketed exposures would have been a better technical choice given the large dynamic differences in light in the scene. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:44, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Slaunger HDR merge of bracketed exposures has been the technical choice Poco2 20:54, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Poco a poco: OK, it was not evident for me from the EXIF, the categories, any other information on the file page nor the picture. Which exposure times did you use? I recommend using the {{Photo Information}} for HDRs, see this for example such that you can indicate the exposure times. It is useful information for photographers interested to learn. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:02, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
Slaunger, I always provide this information in the title, will add it in the file description page --Poco2 21:05, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
I had not noticed 'HDR' was part of the quite long file name, sorry. I do not find the exposure times/EV step/number of brackets info in the file name though. I usually do not pay much attention to the file name as its primary role is to be unique identifer and secondly not be directly misleading. I pay more attention to the file page. But thanks for your intend to add the metadata to the file page. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:13, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Excellent building picture and I will change my vote if the noise aura generalized and noise in the left side is fixed. Please, compare the building right side with the left side. I added a note. --The Photographer 23:15, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The lit areas of the building are blown out. Since it's an HDR I presume you've shot frames where they aren't lost right? I think those areas should not be so bright in the postprocessing. -- King of ♠ 01:46, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - What are all those lines on the left side of the sky? Should they be there? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:43, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
    Ikan Kekek: Those lines are in the original (brightest) frame, I guess that could have been airplanes Poco2 07:28, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • They're in the current version, too. So many planes in .3 seconds?? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:33, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • It was 20 seconds, not 3 and the traces of the planes remain for a while, Poco2 07:56, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • What does this mean in the Metadata, then? Exposure time 3/10 sec (0.3) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:26, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Ikan, he problem comes from Lightroom, it takes the exposure time from the first frame after the HDR merge. As I documented in the file description page the exposure times were 0.3, 2,5 and 30 seconds. Btw, in the last version I've removed the (airplane) lines Poco2 20:19, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • If so, your last version isn't showing up. I still see plane lines after reducing my cache to nothing. I think my overall opinion is that I like the building very much but find the blown lamps too distracting. I'm really not sure why or what you could have done about that, but it is so far making it impossible for me to feel "wow" from this photo. I won't oppose but don't feel impelled to support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:45, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I will upload a new version this evening I see indeed room for improvement but right now the Lr catalogue is crashing when I try to rework it, as said, will look into it later Poco2 07:28, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
    Ok, I could upload a new version, this evening will upload another one. Poco2 07:56, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per The Photographer. Update to Symbol support vote.svg weak support after last edit, and now that I know the exposure was 20 seconds and not a third. Daniel Case (talk) 17:39, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @Slaunger, Daniel Case, The Photographer: Would you mind having one more look at it? I've completely reworked it Poco2 20:19, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Looks like the shadows have been lifted quite que bit (and Canons suck when it comes to this so it shows). Wonder what your HDR pipeline is exactly. Strange you get this much noise. Also I don't like the prominent stars/glares. But it's still a very nice night architectural. We have worst FP.- Benh (talk) 20:37, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The edit helped, and thanks for the added metadata on the file page. As benh I am surprised you are not getting a better quality, assuming your HDR processing has been done right. Have you had a look at each exposure and verified the quality is allright prior to HDR combination? And I find the weird lightbrown jagged lines in the sky mystic. It does not seem plausible that they are trails from aircraft over a 20 s period to me. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:47, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Okay, there's noise, but in the FPC rulebook, supporting is allowed if the "wow overrides technical defects". The lighting and symmetry, along with the fabulous architecture, and impressive sunstars on the lamps, wow me enough. I think this deserves the star - just my opinion -- Thennicke (talk) 10:11, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg weak support I don't really get the nitpicking here. Is the subject good? Yes. Are the lights good? Mostly yes. Are there minor technical issues anyone can nitpick on? Sure. But I could go back to any given FP, even those getting the "support trains" and point out problems that could be improved. Same goes for the "distracting red lights", gotta be kidding there... Why weak support then? I'm not a fan of the sunburst effect, personally think the aperture was way lower than should have been. Apart from that I'd like to see a more gentle roll off of the whites, much like in v2-3-4. The reds were a bit over the top burning here and there but not much and should be easily corrected with little effort. Most importantly no artificial darkening of the sky because simply burning it will leave a halo around the building. Pull the sky down to dark and if part of the roof goes with it, then be it. The statue is easy to mask out to keep the details there. IMHO from the peanut gallery. KennyOMG (talk) 15:47, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Thennicke and KennyOMG. I think the criticism is much too harsh. Might be that there's still room for an improvement but all in all it's an excellent picture and surely one of our finest. --Code (talk) 16:23, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think that this picture is FP, improvable? of course, however, that is another subject at photographer discretion. --The Photographer 16:27, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:59, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 06:20, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 06:22, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Virmalised 18.03.15 (2).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2017 at 15:53:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aurora Borealis in Estonia

File:National Gallery from SW, Canberra Australia.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2017 at 03:30:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • ✓ Done Changed the 16:9 to a 2:1 crop -- Thennicke (talk) 13:56, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Verde78 (talk) 10:00, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good - can you replace image on Wikipedia article. Charles (talk) 12:57, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I was thinking this building just wasn't featurable from my point of view, but your edits to brighten and crop the photo have made a huge difference. It's funny how relatively small a change can make the difference between a decent photo and a really good one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:19, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Ikan, who hits the nail on the head, like so many times before. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 15:24, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but I'm not wowed and I don't get the wide support. It's just a good photo of a notable building. It's of course QI (though some remaining CA's at the left still there), but it was taken in plain midday light, so that the grass looks fade-out and the scenery rather boring. I also don't find the architecture particularly special. To get a wow photo of this, maybe a good idea to do it on Blue hour like on this photo (which itself is technically poor, but could maybe serve as a source of inspiration). --A.Savin 17:10, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • @A.Savin: I'm still deciding what I think about this review, but in the meantime, thanks for providing it; it's making me think more about how important the subject or the lighting are for making "wow" in an image. I'd like to point out that a lot of your own architectural images are also taken in harsh midday light though -- Thennicke (talk) 10:37, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Yes; when on travel, there is very limited choice what to photograph at which time of day. But nominating a photo on FPC is quite another story. --A.Savin 10:47, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Oh, I guess that makes sense - fair point. I guess there's a taste element to it, but I happen to love harsh light (reminds me of summer), and for this image in particular, chose it deliberately. Also to be consistent with other similar images. -- Thennicke (talk) 12:19, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Gran Mezquita de Isfahán, Isfahán, Irán, 2016-09-20, DD 26.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2017 at 21:17:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jameh Mosque of Isfahan, Isfahan, Iran
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A little noisy in some places, but not the places that matter. Daniel Case (talk) 03:26, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Daniel. Strange, there shouldn't be any noise at ISO 200. Something that happened in post? Not a big deal anyway... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:06, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Shadow-sun dont go together here, neither part of sky. This could be done when without sun, and would also cut sky out. --Mile (talk) 07:44, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent --The Photographer 13:50, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Distinct approval. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 15:30, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:09, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 21:25, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As per Mile. --Gnosis (talk) 01:55, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Can you interpret his objections, then? It sounded like he was trying to argue that a night photo that somehow excluded any sky but yet had the complete iwan would be better than this. None of that sounded possible, but then maybe you understand what he meant better than I did. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:11, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
I can't underestand why Mile is not banned from FPC --The Photographer 11:27, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
That's a separate question, though it might be related if his reasons for voting against photos by Poco make no sense. I don't know whether this time, they make no sense or whether it's just a language problem. Probably best to discuss this elsewhere, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:14, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Palácio das Indústrias (São Paulo city).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2017 at 20:53:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Palácio das Indústrias (São Paulo city)
BTW, 5 min after started to rain and rained for 3 hours. Beria and me will wait in the building, however, without being able to enter. --The Photographer 22:16, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done Thanks --The Photographer 12:29, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Fünfseenblick.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2017 at 17:23:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view from the lookout-tower "Fünfseenblick" near Bad Salzig over the UNESCO World Heritage Site Rhine Gorge
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jörg Braukmann - uploaded by Milseburg - nominated by Milseburg -- Milseburg (talk) 17:23, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Milseburg (talk) 17:23, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very detailed for sure, but no wow for me: just a long strip of green with few features. -- King of ♠ 19:28, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 00:10, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'm sufficiently wowed by all the little details --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:03, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg weak oppose Per KOH -- Thennicke (talk) 13:51, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info @King of Hearts:, @Thennicke: I added some more linked notes, to make clearer what interesting sights can be seen from here. Most of them also have articles in English. --Milseburg (talk) 14:16, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 21:28, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Much respect to you: This is a really well-done panorama, a fine photograph and very valuable. But what it doesn't do, relative to other panoramas, including some of yours, is wow me. That's basically covered by KoH above: There just isn't that much to look at. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:44, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Hamadruas sp 05600.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2017 at 06:41:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hamadruas sp.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Vengolis - nominated by Christian Ferrer
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great details, color and composition -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:41, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great pic. Excuse my language, but that is just a crazy-looking motherfucker right there! lNeverCry 07:24, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 09:08, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yikes! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:13, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 10:19, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schnobby (talk) 10:23, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I had this on my list of possible nominees, too. I think the spider is interesting-looking, not scary. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:27, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For me, this is not sharp enough (and we don't know the species). Charles (talk) 15:38, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I've to agree with Charles but still the subject does wow me Poco2 17:44, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not only per Charles (although I should add the color is very nice) but because the leaves unfortunately get in the way of appreciating the spider. Daniel Case (talk) 21:40, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Verde78 (talk) 10:03, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 15:33, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Hope Vengolis will switch to RAW soon which will improve the results a lot. Jee 03:22, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Emelie January 2017 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2017 at 20:02:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ferry Emelie.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water transport
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The ferry Emelie arriving in Henriksdalshamnen (Stockholm) a very cold January day. I think the beautiful winter weather, the reflections in the ice/water and the lines in the sky and the ice makes the image special (and something more then just another ferry images). Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 20:02, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 20:02, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Good things: The light and colors are good, and I agree the ice helps. Less convincing for me: Very strong highlights/reflections of the sun from side of ferry. The main subject being the ferry seems to fill a disproportionately small area of the photo and the almost centered composition does not work so well for me. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:34, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for your comment. I don't mind the highlights, its natural for a sunny winter day with low sun and reflections (and no important details are lost). It's a little unusual composition, but it works in my opinion and the eye is drawn to the centre of the images (with the ferry).--ArildV (talk) 21:44, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I think this picture is great and by no means just a picture of a ferry. I would have nominated this if you hadn't gotten around to it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:33, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Teal works surprisingly well here as a color for the boat. Daniel Case (talk) 03:49, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support lNeverCry 04:04, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great composition. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:40, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I understand the highligths, normal at ships. Also dont like centralizing, but here just works. --Mile (talk) 08:17, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A tad too centered, but well... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:12, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 09:44, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I really don't like the composition and execution, with the boat (in the middle of the picture) lost against the buildings. And the reflections on the boat are unfortunate. Charles (talk) 15:41, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 17:04, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Martin but wowing to my eyes. I enjoy the close wide-angle view, the background and the icy water. Poco2 17:42, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good shot; aside from the boat, the smokestack in the background looks nice. WClarke (talk) 21:04, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Charles. A narrower FOV would've been more suitable IMO -- Thennicke (talk) 03:05, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 06:30, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Verde78 (talk) 10:04, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Ivan the Great Bell Tower in Moscow Kremlin 1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2017 at 13:44:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Moscow. The Ivan the Great Bell Tower.
Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question @Charlesjsharp:, could you point to examples of a better location for this shot? Daniel Case (talk) 19:14, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Sure,i'm curious too--LivioAndronico (talk) 20:18, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Just Google great bell tower moscow. Charles (talk) 22:44, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Charlesjsharp: Yes, a view from the Sobornaya (Cathedral) Square (I think you mean it) is more informative: for the whole building is seen. This view isn’t so informative, but (I suppose) it has some “visual advantages”: the picture of the white tall tower “growing from the forest” can create a certain mood. Dmitry Ivanov (talk) 00:14, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support per Dmitri. "Qualified" because I think a crop of a lot of that empty space on the right would help, but if the photographer has a reason for it, I defer. Daniel Case (talk) 03:46, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:42, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 09:08, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:10, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but the facade is too soft. I wouldn't have promoted this photo on QIC either. --A.Savin 15:32, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no wow (I don't think this light and composition are the best for it) + issues with sharpness. Kruusamägi (talk) 17:06, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm not wowed either. The main subject is centered, the left towers are not really contributing to the composition since they are significantly visible but only partially (that's somehow irritating). Charles is probably right and lighting/sharpening are not outstanding either as Ivo mentioned. Poco2 17:40, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:54, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose--Verde78 (talk) 10:04, 9 January 2017 (UTC)


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]

Wed 11 Jan → Mon 16 Jan
Thu 12 Jan → Tue 17 Jan
Fri 13 Jan → Wed 18 Jan
Sat 14 Jan → Thu 19 Jan
Sun 15 Jan → Fri 20 Jan
Mon 16 Jan → Sat 21 Jan

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

Sat 07 Jan → Mon 16 Jan
Sun 08 Jan → Tue 17 Jan
Mon 09 Jan → Wed 18 Jan
Tue 10 Jan → Thu 19 Jan
Wed 11 Jan → Fri 20 Jan
Thu 12 Jan → Sat 21 Jan
Fri 13 Jan → Sun 22 Jan
Sat 14 Jan → Mon 23 Jan
Sun 15 Jan → Tue 24 Jan
Mon 16 Jan → Wed 25 Jan

Closing a featured picture promotion request[edit]

The bot[edit]

Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below (except to add categories on the file page, because need a non-bot user to do it). However after the bot has counted the votes a manual review step is used to make sure the count is correct before the bot again picks up the work.

Manual procedure[edit]

Any experienced user may close requests.

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|category=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}}
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    featured or not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    becomes
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. If it is featured:
    • Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate category of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
    • Also add the picture to an appropriate subpage of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images.
    • Add the template {{Featured picture}} or {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
      • If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
      • If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessments template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
      • Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
      • The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
      • You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
    • Add == FP promotion ==
      {{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.
    • Add on the file page its respective categories for Featured pictures of... like Category:Featured pictures of objects, Category:Featured pictures of landscapes, of people, of Germany, of Paris, etc. This is the only part of the process that needs a user who is not a bot to complete it.
  5. As the last step (whether the image is featured or not; including {{FPX}}ed, {{FPD}}ed and withdrawn nominations), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/January 2017), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.

Closing a delisting request[edit]

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    '''Result:''' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg)
  2. Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
    delisted or not delisted
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted ===
  3. Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/January 2017.
  4. If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
    1. Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
    2. Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes). Also, remove the image from all categories like Featured pictures of ....
    3. Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.