Commons:Featured picture candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
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 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'. Note that a 1600 × 1200 image has 1.92 Mpx, just less than the 2 million level. A 1920 × 1080 image, commonly known as Full HD, has 2.07 Mpx, just more than the 2 million level.
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:Jaguar head shot-edit2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2015 at 00:42:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jaguar headshot

File:Monumentoaltoro.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2015 at 22:36:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Monument to the bull, Sociedad Rural Argentina, Buenos Aires

File:Libélula (Pantala hymenaea), Cerro Brujo, isla de San Cristóbal, islas Galápagos, Ecuador, 2015-07-24, DD 147.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2015 at 18:17:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Spot-winged Glider (Pantala hymenaea), Cerro Brujo, San Cristobal Island, Galapagos island, Ecuador. The common name in English is due to the 2 spots on the wings near to the body.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Odonata
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Spot-winged Glider (Pantala hymenaea), Cerro Brujo, San Cristobal Island, Galapagos island, Ecuador. The common name in English is due to the 2 spots on the wings near to the body. All by me, Poco2 18:17, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 18:17, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Damsels annual season in FPC Clin--Jebulon (talk) 21:26, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Great details and excellent background but body and lower part of the head are in shadow plus this pose is not attractive for this subject, imho. --Laitche (talk) 23:25, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Dülmen, Hausdülmen, Kettbach -- 2015 -- 8499-503.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2015 at 15:51:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kettbach at the street "Strandbadweg" near Hausdülmen, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 15:51, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 15:51, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 16:23, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral nur ein Tipp: bei solchen Bildern ertrinkt der Blick sofort, er geht unter: es fehlt ein Vordergrundelement, ein Ast, eine Ente, ein paar Blätter, irgend etwas ... Grüße, --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:20, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • You've basically right. There was just nothing as an element in the foreground except a bridge railing. That looks not good.--XRay talk 17:35, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support I might under other circumstances be bothered by the blown area around the sun, but it seems that steps had been taken to reduce it, and it doesn't distract from the perspective in any event. (BTW, why the FoP notice? What's in the image that could require it?) Daniel Case (talk) 23:05, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 01:12, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Kings park gnangarra 250815-108.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2015 at 13:18:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Diuris corymbosa -- Donkey Orchid
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 too unsharp and noisy 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:Tikjda Main du juive.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2015 at 10:53:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

One of Djurdjura summits.

File:Two columns, Temple of Zeus Olympian, Athens, Greece.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2015 at 10:22:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Two columns of the Temple of Zeus Olympian

File:Zwellende bloemknoppen van Chaenomeles x superba 'nicolina' (chinese kwee). Locatie. Tuinreservaat Jonkervallei 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2015 at 07:19:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Carte du cours du Rhône de Genève à Lyon - 1787.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2015 at 06:05:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Map of the Rhône river from Geneva up to Lyon, France, with ports and fords, 1787

File:Hirundo rustica (Linnaeus, 1758).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2015 at 23:53:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The image shows a barn swallow when feeding her young in the nest.

File:Cologne Germany DITIB-Central-Mosque-01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2015 at 19:22:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
All by -- CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 19:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 19:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 02:38, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:40, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I am sympathetic to the problem of shooting large buildings and not being able to get far back. The result is often an extreme wide-angle view with enhanced perspective and distortions. Here the two hoops are a give-away and the top one is almost at 45-degree angle, whereas it should be horizontal. File:DITIB-Zentralmoschee Köln - April 2015-7493.jpg from across the road has much less distortion and shows the second minaret (?) but then there is more street furniture and there are more trees in the way. The front face of the building is also in shade, and the stone (concrete?) is a bit utilitarian. -- Colin (talk) 09:15, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 17:31, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Карпатські схили.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2015 at 18:16:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Carpathian Mountains
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Vian - nominated by Ivar (talk) 18:16, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 18:16, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The dark graduation at the top is too extreme and unnatural (seems to be a common feature of this photographer's photos). -- Colin (talk) 18:34, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition, great light. Yann (talk) 18:35, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A bit heavy on the processing but still reasonable. --King of ♠ 21:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 23:52, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin + too overprocesssed. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 11:24, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose overprocesssed --The Photographer (talk) 11:30, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as others. You have a good hand for motifs, but not for colors. Maybe it is your stile, but for me (and others) it is not more than straining after effects. I would like to support your work, but not with these artificial candy colors. --Hubertl 17:37, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm not sure, whether the compliment goes to me or to the author Clin --Ivar (talk) 17:51, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark and unnatural, per others. Daniel Case (talk) 19:03, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:2015 Nowa Bystrzyca, kościół fil. pw. Wniebowzięcia NMP 02.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2015 at 17:07:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church of the Assumption in Nowa Bystrzyca

File:Rhinocypha bisignata male-Kadavoor-2015-08-20-001.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2015 at 16:48:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rhinocypha bisignata
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 21:28, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 02:40, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:28, 31 August 2015 (UTC)--Cayambe (talk) 06:28, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 07:22, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think, this image is worth, that we have had this discussion on QI. --Hubertl 17:39, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Lucky en Panzerwiese, Múnich, Alemania, 2014-12-24, DD 05.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2015 at 12:54:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"Lucky" a Mal-shi (50% mix of Maltese and Shih Tzu) searching for mice in the evening in the Panzwiese, a meadow in the north of Munich, Germany.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info "Lucky" a Mal-shi (50% mix of Maltese and Shih Tzu) searching for mice in the evening in the Panzwiese, a meadow in the north of Munich, Germany. All by me, Poco2 12:54, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 12:54, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment to @Poco a poco: I will support another photo of this dog (maybe another angle, crop…). It's a nice animal (P.S.: I don't oppose nominations). Clin 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:31, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Ok, it looks like it will not be a speedy promotion...can somebody at least give me a hint where the problem is (composition, lighting, quality, subject....)? Poco2 16:13, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
    • The dog is looking at the right, but we have a large empty area on the left. It would be better if the empty area is in the direction the animal is looking. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:46, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Personally, I have issue with the choice of background. The colours of the dog and the grass are too similar in colour such that the dog get lost against it. -- KTC (talk) 17:10, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry Poco, but the light is very harsh and die composition unfavorable. In front of the dog-look (or other ...), must be more room ... --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:23, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral you know, Diego, I´m the greatest fan ever of Lucky, but - except Lucky of course - the composition is not wow enough. --Hubertl 17:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Ok, understood, my opinion here is of course not objective (not just because it is my picture). I chose this crop because I didn't want to crop the shadow, but, fine, just be sure that I will try it again with this subject! :) Poco2 18:06, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
    • I'm looking forward to the next Lucky! --Laitche (talk) 20:49, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:TAXI.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2015 at 12:16:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

TAXI in night traffic.

File:HUN-2015-Budapest-Hungarian Parliament (Budapest) 2015-02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2015 at 11:24:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Hungarian Parliament building in Budapest. Created and uploaded by Andrew Shiva - nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 11:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 11:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition and lighting. I'm a bit surprised with the lack of details in the dark areas, it's more "smeary" than anything else. And the highlights are also a bit clipped. Not enough to spoil it! - Benh (talk) 17:20, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great picture and an impressive camera gear. --Code (talk) 04:46, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as Code --Hubertl 06:36, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Great! --Brateevsky {talk} 09:35, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - thanks for the nom...--Godot13 (talk) 15:57, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great lights, not a typical photo of the Hungarian Parliament. Einstein2 (talk) 18:32, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support The clipped lights are not a deal-breaker given their overall size in the picture. Daniel Case (talk) 22:59, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Samuel D. Ehrhart - An International High Noon Divorce (1906).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2015 at 06:22:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Samuel D. Ehrhart - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info As I said in the previous nomination (6 supports, no opposes, one short of quorum - how annoying!): As with many restorations, the borders were the most hellish part of this. Which is always annoying. There were some challenges on the cartoon and text, of course, but the borders were filthy, but the paper texture has to be maintained. en:Template:CSS image crop or the local equivalents can easily do any other desired crops.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:02, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 09:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 11:48, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As per my support at the previous nomination. Daniel Case (talk) 19:42, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nicely restored. A lot of very funny details.--Jebulon (talk) 16:30, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Paris 16 (talk) 19:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Guaratiba morning.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2015 at 19:24:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Early morning on whaling coast, Bahia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Jonathan Wilkins (edited by Poco a poco) - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:24, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:24, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I could imagine a bit less processing, but given what Paco had to work with I think he did the best he could. Daniel Case (talk) 01:47, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Case. --King of ♠ 07:15, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Wonderful composition. Sorry, but IMO it needs more sharpness. --XRay talk 09:14, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per XRay. I find some palmtrees too dark (no details)...--Jebulon (talk) 11:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good for me. Yann (talk) 21:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice composition and the light but not enough sharp and too much green CAs. --Laitche (talk) 09:03, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Mealt Waterfall with Kilt Rock, Isle of Skye.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2015 at 17:47:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mealt Waterfall with Kilt Rock, Isle of Skye.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The waterfall from Loch Mealt on the Isle of Skye falls 55 metres to the sea. Behind is Kilt Rock, 90 metres tall, so-called because the combination of basalt columns upon a sandstone base resembles a kilt. All by Colin -- Colin (talk) 17:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support High resolution photo of two notable natural features of Skye. The viewpoint is the very edge of the cliff nearby, and there is no better vantage point on land. -- Colin (talk) 17:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support WOooooooOW! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:51, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 18:14, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose So good while in thumb but when opened some huge portion on left side is out of focus. Makes some 20 % of photo area, too much. --Mile (talk) 19:31, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Mile, more like 12.5% is the near-by grass, and many photos contain far more featureless sky. In the distance, you can see the Isle of Lewis some 25 miles away, and the rocks below the waterfall are quite lovely. -- Colin (talk) 21:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment So its 12,5 %. What is the purpose of being Feautered then ? Simple push on touchscreen on that area and all would be solved, since is stitched anyway. Shouldn't Feautered wannabe photo deliver at least some minimal technical advantage ? Building megapixles shouldn't move that margin. --Mile (talk) 07:26, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
    • You must not know other cameras than your Olympus then ;) (They don't all focus with a tap on screen). And not "all would be solved", it's likely distant objects would be out of focus. But I think settings are not optimal and maybe a better focus point could have been chosen to achieve en:Hyperfocal_distance. - Benh (talk) 07:44, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
      • Benh, I agree using f/8 could have improved the in-focus area a bit, and the point of focus seems to be a little further than I intended. The grass does come really close so I suspect I wouldn't get it sharp enough to satisfy. The bokeh is rather busy, so perhaps a different lens would render it more pleasingly. At the end of the day, the grass is not the subject, which is in focus. I'm leaning as far as I safely can out from a metal barrier at the cliff edge, and it is 600 miles away by car, so that's all I've got. -- Colin (talk) 11:01, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
        • It's not the subject but it's close enough to be a little distraction IMO. But yes, I didn't mean "go back and reshot it" :) Just my review and advices for a next time (but I'm pretty sure you didn't really need them) - Benh (talk) 16:25, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per mile,maybe a crop --LivioAndronico (talk) 20:04, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
    • I think the reason the out-of-focus area appears large and obvious to you is the very 54MP high resolution so that at 100% the web browser shows only a tiny portion of the image. But please remember that when viewed at 100% on a 100dpi monitor, this image is 2.3 metres tall and 1.5 metres wide, which would run nearly the whole height of a UK standard sized domestic room. I hope that when looking at an image that big, you stand back a little and don't study the bottom left corner with your reading glasses on. Reduced 50% to 13.5MP the close-by grass isn't nearly such a large area on-screen when you view the bottom of the image. Reduced further to 6MP, say, and the area considered unsharp is very small indeed, and not at all unusual. A crop would unbalance the composition, for the sake of pixel peeping. -- Colin (talk) 20:23, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes 54MP actually are true, they are not convinced, then, I leave to others the judge Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral --LivioAndronico (talk) 20:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 20%? I opened it and mesure the out of focus area, I would have more say not more than 12% of a 54mpx image, so that stay a lot of good pixel. No doubt in the finest of Commons. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:03, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The out-of-focus areas are not too distracting IMO. --King of ♠ 07:17, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Remember: we are not judging Mile's opinion, but a picture...--Jebulon (talk) 11:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
    • True, Jebulon, but opinions have a habit of sticking to an FP once stated: "per XXX" often follows and is hard to shift, and less commonly the opposite happens if people reject the complaint. I'm happy for people to look critically, pre-informed of any potential issues, rather than a pile-on support that might not be warranted. I think it healthy to discuss a picture as well as any opinions made, provided things stay friendly. I don't think any of us believe we are experts at taking pictures or judging a picture, and the question of "what is a featured picture" is always up for discussion. I always think the audience for these pages is bigger than just the person who votes and the nominator -- so there are things others, lurking perhaps, can learn here such as avoiding having too much busy out-of-focus area or considering the use of hyperfocal distance to maximise the in-focus-areas. -- Colin (talk) 12:10, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
      • I agree, Colin. I just want to notice that very often, a "support" (or an "oppose") vote is due to the disagreement with the opinion (of the expression of the opinion) of another reviewer, not exactly aboit the picture by itself... It is a trap IMO. That's why I did not vote at first view, but only now. Let's wait, we get the time !--Jebulon (talk) 16:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose the issue for me is not just the size of the out-of-focus area, but because it's placement on the foreground and this is too distracting for me. Otherwise it's very nice. --Ivar (talk) 13:29, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Aside from irrelevant technical issues, everything is wow so it's FP, no question. --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 21:15, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose per Ivar. Daniel Case (talk) 03:18, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • I personally like to have control about how things render on pictures I take, unless I post them to Instagram or Facebook. Not a useless conversation IMO. - Benh (talk) 22:23, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as Moroder and Chr. Ferrer.--Hubertl 06:38, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I've been thinking about it. It's definitely impressive but I would rather have the single shot version promoted because of its bigger DOF. 18mpix is far more than enough for most uses, and there's still that one in case someone wants to cover a whole building with a poster. - Benh (talk) 06:54, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Benh, one issue with the single shot photo is that the slightly slower shutter has made the waterfall more of a continuous white flow, and I think it much better in the nomination. -- Colin (talk) 16:51, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
      • Fine with me. I'm one of those who like long exposure waterfall shots. But up to you. Let go this nom first and see then. - Benh (talk) 20:03, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Technical issues are never irrelevant, IMO, but aside from that, per Moroder Clin--Jebulon (talk) 16:35, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

A comparison, not for voting[edit]

Single frame at 18mm

I thought it would be interesting to compare the above image with a near-identical one taken from a single frame at 18mm and f/9 rather than lots of 50mm frames at f/5.6. The wider angle and smaller aperture should give much more depth of field. There's a small difference in shutter speed (1/125 vs 1/160) and the second photo is lit by hard direct sunlight rather than softly from sun behind clouds. I've tried to process it so it looks as similar as possible. The brighter sun in the second photo enabled a much smaller aperture with only a slightly longer shutter. Since the original is 54MP rather than 16MP, I've uploaded a version of the above nomination saved by Lightroom to the same dimensions and you may wish to compare this to the full size version of comparison photo. Finally, here's the full size 54MP version.

Benh mentioned hyperfocal distance. The DoF markings on old manual lenses, and most online calculators, assume we are casually viewing an 8x10 print at arms length. The calculator at CambridgeInColour has a fancy "advanced" mode that lets you choose a more nit-picking measure for people who have put on their reading glasses but I can't get the "advanced" button to work today. I've yet to see any calculators designed for the digital age where people are viewing a small 100% section of your image on a 100dpi monitor at 30cm. I accept the nomination could have had a greater DoF if a smaller aperture was used, though I'd have had to increase the ISO which can then start to rob detail, or wait till the sun came out from the clouds as it did here. And you might not like the composition, which was limited by circumstances. I do wonder, though, if I'd nominated the image downsized to 16MP whether anyone would even have noticed the near-grass was out-of-focus. When I compare the two 16MP images, I'm not convinced having it sharp helps the photo, which is of a waterfall and cliff face. But I thought comparing a single-shot wide-angle might be informative. -- Colin (talk) 16:52, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Interesting comparison. So 18mm f/9.0 renders quite good, which isn't suprising. The lens aperture diameter is 2mm. On your mosaic, the lens' aperture diameter is 50 / 5.6 = 8.9mm. More than 4 times the aperture of the single shot. No wonder it's more blurry. But I don't know if DOF is actually related to absolute size of aperture or not. I always say I have to find it out (read : find someone who did the calculation) but never do it. - Benh (talk) 17:14, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • And btw, several DOF calculators exist out there, which take into account the sensor size and resolution. My guess to get the correct one for this picture is to input 18mm lens at f/2 and a 54mpix sensor (Canon 5DS comes close to it). - Benh (talk) 17:27, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Benh, to get the same field-of-view on a Full frame camera would require a ~24mm lens, not 18mm. I think Poco a poco has the required camera. Fancy a holiday to Skye? -- Colin (talk) 17:37, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Actually, playing with the DoF calculator, at 18mm on my crop camera, f/9 wasn't necessary and f/4 or f/5.6 would have been a little sharper. -- Colin (talk) 17:42, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Didn't know your camera was APS-C :) So based in f/5.6 at 18mm, you would have needed f/16. f/4.0 at 18mm gives you f/11 @50mm. Sounds right. - Benh (talk) 19:08, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Eurasian Roller (Coracias garrulus semenowi) (16518343511).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2015 at 16:14:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Eurasian Roller (Coracias garrulus semenowi)

File:Asian Brown Flycatcher (Muscicapa dauurica) (15489798050).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2015 at 11:44:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Asian Brown Flycatcher (Muscicapa dauurica)

File:Iglesia de La Compañía, Quito, Ecuador, 2015-07-22, DD 137-139 HDR.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2015 at 10:27:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Church of the Society of Jesus (La Iglesia de la Compañía de Jesús) is a Jesuit church in Quito, Ecuador. The exterior doesn't give an idea of the beauty of the interior, with a large central nave, which is profusely decorated with gold leaf, gilded plaster and wood carvings, making of it the most ornate church in Quito. The temple is one of the most significant works of Spanish Baroque architecture in America and considered the most beautiful church in Ecuador. The pipe organ is located in the choir, over the main entrance, and is the second biggest pipe organ in Quito that is still working. The piece, used in special festivities, was built in the United States in 1889 and has 1104 tubes in total.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Church of the Society of Jesus (La Iglesia de la Compañía de Jesús) is a Jesuit church in Quito, Ecuador. The exterior doesn't give an idea of the beauty of the interior, with a large central nave, which is profusely decorated with gold leaf, gilded plaster and wood carvings, making of it the most ornate church in Quito. The temple is one of the most significant works of Spanish Baroque architecture in America and considered the most beautiful church in Ecuador. The pipe organ is located in the choir, over the main entrance, and is the second biggest pipe organ in Quito that is still working. The piece, used in special festivities, was built in the United States in 1889 and has 1104 tubes in total. Note: high quality images of this temple are rare as photograhs are strictly prohibited without a special permission of the authorities. All by me, Poco2 10:27, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 10:27, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 10:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support strongly. I know perfection is not of this world, but you are not very far from it, my friend. That's a big wow, if I may say. --Jebulon (talk) 10:57, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
    wow, coming from you, thank you! I've to say that I explictly performed this picture following the comments (of Benh and yours) of this other nomination. Commons does help! a lot! :) Poco2 11:02, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Isn't the ceiling a bit overexposed? But anyway, as Jebulon says. Yann (talk) 11:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great details. --Laitche (talk) 11:15, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent job... the more so as it is not that easy to take pictures in that church. Poco will understand me :-) --Cayambe (talk) 13:19, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
    Cayambe: As I stated above, and you remember, you usually cannot take any pictures in that church. I had to do some paperwork and convince some people to be able to use my camera. Poco2 13:40, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Oh sorry, I hadn't read your note above, having just looked at the image.--Cayambe (talk) 13:52, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Active corruption ? Smile What was the price ?--Jebulon (talk) 15:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Nothing wild, as said, paperwork and a friend of mine who is local and very persuasive :) Poco2 16:43, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
OK. Passive corruption then.--Jebulon (talk) 20:03, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 17:03, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:23, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another great pipe organ pic. And congratulations to Paco for making the extra effort! Daniel Case (talk) 01:39, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A triple PRO for your efforts. --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 02:45, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 12:27, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 12:34, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 14:09, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:09, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 06:39, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Rüüt.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2015 at 10:18:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pluvialis apricaria
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Abrget47j - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 10:18, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 10:18, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There's a lot more space than necessary around the bird—I know, I know, we're trying to show it in its environment and show how its coloration helps it keep a low profile—but even if it were cropped in close, I wouldn't find it more than a QI. Daniel Case (talk) 01:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: (ru) да, птица на фото могла быть и больше. I think the photo need a crop. Also I agree with Daniel Case. --Brateevsky {talk} 09:39, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Kruusamägi (talk) 17:10, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Hommikune udu Kakerdaja rabas.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2015 at 10:21:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Morning in Kakerdaja bog
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Abrget47j - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 10:21, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 10:21, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wonderful mood! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 10:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice mood. Could you remove the dustspots? --Laitche (talk) 11:13, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good one. --Mile (talk) 17:07, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but there is some CA in the upper left corner. --Code (talk) 17:14, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support I guess it's been fixed. So very painterly ... Daniel Case (talk) 19:13, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Picturesque. --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 02:53, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 07:17, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Subtle nice lighting and mood. Like a painting ! - Benh (talk) 08:04, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice. But: Please remove the CAs top left. --XRay talk 09:13, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Removed CAs in the upper left corner and uploaded new version. --Laitche (talk) 10:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 12:52, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:11, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 06:39, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request Please add a more detailed description and if possible a geo location. -- -donald- (talk) 07:10, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 07:25, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Frescos of Ignatius of Loyola HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2015 at 10:13:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Frescos of Ignatius of Loyola HDR.jpg

*Symbol support vote.svg Support I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled? --Jebulon (talk) 11:38, 29 August 2015 (UTC) in favor of alternative.--Jebulon (talk) 20:13, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could you put alternative, the middle shot. I think HDR spoiled it. --Mile (talk) 17:14, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Why HDR for this? The dynamic range is not higher than it could be captured by a single shot, I guess - no windows, lamps or other bright areas. There are also some ghostly contours, see note. --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:29, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:08, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

The Triumph of St. Ignatius.jpg For Mile and Uoaei1

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 20:01, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Would you mind if we to turn to panorama ? Pictures that are very tall looks so strange. --Mile (talk) 20:04, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Colors are more natural than in HDR. I like this more. --Mile (talk) 20:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Whatever. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:10, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Again, I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled? --Jebulon (talk) 20:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Much better. The ghostly contours are gone, and the colors also look better for me. --Uoaei1 (talk) 21:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support You can see the improvement in the thumbnails. Daniel Case (talk) 01:42, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, better. --Yann (talk) 11:50, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:12, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WP needs it very badly  ;-). But, please give a better file description. --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 21:21, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

File:2015 Wieża widokowa na Górze Wszystkich Świętych.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2015 at 07:51:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Observation tower on Góra Wszystkich Świętych
Symbol support vote.svg Support Love the the lines and the colors. Daniel Case (talk) 01:42, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • @Daniel Case: ✓ Done --Jacek Halicki (talk) 19:37, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Little wow to me. I'm not quite sure how you framed it: did you try to center it? Looked for rule of third line? Really looks like a quick snapshot to me. Also tilted. - Benh (talk) 08:07, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I did not found the words, now Benh helped me...--Jebulon (talk) 11:27, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 17:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Cicindela duponti in Kadavoor.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2015 at 06:37:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cicindela duponti

File:Червоні карпатські гори.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2015 at 04:16:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Carpathian Biosphere Reserve, Zakarpattia Oblast, Ukraine
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Carpathian Biosphere Reserve, Zakarpattia Oblast, Ukraine, created by Vian - uploaded by Vian - nominated by Christian Ferrer --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 07:42, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 07:55, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. --Yann (talk) 08:45, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great! --Laitche (talk) 09:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WOW --LivioAndronico (talk) 09:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Color banding in the sky, especially at left, and looks unnatural to me. This is discussible. But what is not is the following: please dear reviewers, be more careful in reviews, how can you support as FP such a picture, with at least 6 very visible dustspots in the sky ???? I'm afraid we need to be more serious in assessing, I recommend, for those who don't know, some stages at the QIC pages...--Jebulon (talk) 11:46, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Perhaps that banding is caused by jpeg compression, I can remove the banding with Photoshop but when save it as jpeg, the banding appear again. (Tiff is no problem.) --Laitche (talk) 13:54, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There is so big wow for me that I didn't noticed the little qualities issues, great and fp even with those qualities issues. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This kind of hemisphere-stratosphere border can be seen above 15-20 km, here original curve was moved so far to show up the banding, beside at least 3 smudges in the sky. Main oppose is : its not real. --Mile (talk) 17:01, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unnatural colors (sky), too pale. --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:32, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others; unnatural color. Daniel Case (talk) 19:00, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A pity… 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:36, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I removed many light dustspots and tried to minimize banding problem. Please check and revert, if it's not better. --Ivar (talk) 13:18, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 13:31, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
A real improvement, thank you very much Ivar --Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:53, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I support (although very weak) my suggested crop. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:49, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
I don't want to crop the work of an other photographer and I don't want an alternative too, thanks. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:46, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for a FP, the colors are not realistic enough. --Hubertl 06:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:F. Champenois imprimeur-éditeur.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2015 at 23:28:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

1898 poster, lithography, 67 x 49 cm.

File:Krafla power plant - Kröflustöð - alternative.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2015 at 20:53:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Krafla power plant
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Industry
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Villy Fink Isaksen - nominated by Benh (talk) 20:53, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well if you don't nominate it again, I do. I love it. You could probably make it even stronger by tweaking clarity and recovering some details in the sky, but just my opinion. And it's already so good. -- Benh (talk) 20:53, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support thanks Benh. I have made some adjustments, and hope it is okay now. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 04:30, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:54, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 07:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice view. --Laitche (talk) 09:34, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Indeed. My pleasure to support, as (almost) promised...--Jebulon (talk) 11:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support And 7… 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 06:46, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Frederic Edwin Church - Rainy Season in the Tropics - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2015 at 20:46:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

One of many beautiful artworks by notable American landscape painter Frederic Edwin Church.

File:2012 July 06 North-South Lake from.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2015 at 20:31:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"North–South Lake is an 1,100-acre (4.4 km²) state campground in the Catskill Forest Preserve near Palenville, New York operated by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation..." (Description from the English Wikipedia article "North–South Lake")
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#United States
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Naib - uploaded by Naib - nominated by Pine -- Pine 20:31, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pine 20:31, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:37, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, but I miss any wow. --Hubertl 06:46, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Very regretful oppose No one would want to have a picture from the Catskills make FP here more than I. And this picture is certainly an improvement over my own earlier take with a DP/S from almost the same spot. A featured picture is certainly possible from this spot ... believe me when I say this. However, while this could definitely be a QI, it's not an FP. We'd need to see more of the landscape around the lakes, below the Escarpment and under perfectly clear skies for it to have wow (IMO). I'm also a little bothered by the apparent banding in the sky. Daniel Case (talk) 19:09, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination since Daniel Case knows this location so well and is better positioned to evaluate this photo. --Pine 00:04, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Sant'Agnese in Agone (Rome) - Dome HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2015 at 18:53:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sant'Agnese in Agone (Rome) - Dome HDR

Alternative[edit]

Dome of Sant'Agnese in Agone (Rome).jpg

✓ Reworked Christian Ferrer,Jacek Halicki,Benh, Jebulon and Yann better? Merci.--LivioAndronico (talk) 09:38, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

  • In Italy the people say:"God is perfect,but I'll go close" --LivioAndronico (talk) 19:59, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • We don't have to judge an improvement in comparison of a previous nomination, but a picture alone, by itself...--Jebulon (talk) 11:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry Livio, it's still far from optimal. It looks too purple now. The image you replaced looks much better in this respect. As a side note, I'm not quite sure about the replacement and will likely revert your change. The old one has a better composition and comprehensive view. Your picture is a nice complement though. @Jacek Halicki, Christian Ferrer, ArionEstar, Daniel Case:, can you double check? - Benh (talk) 07:55, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • OK Just to be clear, I intend to keep both pictures in the article. Please no drama ;) - Benh (talk) 07:57, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Purple, indeed.--Jebulon (talk) 11:29, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as per Benh, again. --Yann (talk) 11:53, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done Less purple Benh,Jebulon and Yann --LivioAndronico (talk) 12:10, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Livio, to me it's still not good enough as simply being faithful to reality colourwise (and therefore not good enough for display in an encyclopedia article). Before asking if it's good enough, simply compare to the picture I referred to. And of course, feel free to seek help if you can't fix it yourself. If you seek advices, don't forget to share what settings you've changed. It's always free to ask ;) - Benh (talk) 16:49, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Well ... if you think you can do better, for me you can give to the crazy joy. LaughingOutLoad.gif--LivioAndronico (talk) 10:20, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm busy processing my own pictures :) but I'll do my best to help since I did criticise your picture. Feel free to mail me a link to your RAWs, and I'll do the necessary. - Benh (talk) 11:51, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:WolayerSee.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2015 at 18:32:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nature reserve Wolayer See and surrounding area in Carinthia.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by GeKo15 - uploaded by GeKo15 - nominated by لا روسا.--لا روسا (talk) 18:45, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- لا روسا (talk) 18:32, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great scene, but overuse of polarizer is evident, resulting in an unevenly exposed sky, too dark in places. Daniel Case (talk) 18:52, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is also oversharpened Poco2 19:26, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't believe a polarizer was used. The variations don't have that pattern. And at f/13 and 1/250 sec, it would be darker (unless this was brightened afterwards of course, but I don't think either). Also high altitude = darker blues in the sky from my experience. But to get back to the point : the sky is posterized, generally screwed and has strange artifacts/blues halos at some edges with the mountains. The whole picture could be better processed. Nice scenery though...- Benh (talk) 20:37, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For me the posterization is not too bad. Agree with Benh, if the settings are accurate there's no way a polarizer was used. --King of ♠ 00:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Whatever. My point was that the sky looks unnatural for some reason. And what a shame given that it looks like a Yes album cover. Daniel Case (talk) 06:27, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Benh. I would like to see this image better processed. The posterisation may be due to the JPG being saved with ProPhotoRGB colour profile -- the 8-bit JPG format can't handle that profile without serious information loss. -- Colin (talk) 11:45, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Calopteryx Splendens.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2015 at 09:03:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Clément Bardot - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:03, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:03, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 11:05, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:05, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 15:20, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- KTC (talk) 15:42, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great capture Poco2 19:27, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love the irridescence on their legs. I love the bokeh. And I love most that, given what they're doing, the legs make a little heart shape. Daniel Case (talk) 19:52, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A bit of déjà vu but this one stands out with its better point of view and composition (lagging behind in quality but it's fine with me) - Benh (talk) 20:46, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Like this styles are the in thing among today's fashion-conscious odonata 💚 --Laitche (talk) 21:07, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:18, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:02, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The focus on female head is fine. There is slight alignment issue; so the male head is not that much sharp. A very good posture and these big damselflies are not very approachable. Jee 06:31, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 08:00, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:15, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Vengolis (talk) 04:56, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 06:47, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:LEI0440 190 Leica IIIf chrom - Sn. 580566 1951-52-M39 vs. Minox Leica IIIf -6075 hf.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2015 at 08:50:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Pierre-Auguste Lamy (?) - Les contes d'Hoffmann by Jacques Offenbach, prologue.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2015 at 05:17:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Prologue (or possibly epilogue) to Jacques Offenbach's Les contes d'Hoffmann in the 1881 première.

File:High-Pressure-Cleaning-with-Personal-Protective-Equipment-01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2015 at 15:29:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

High pressure cleaning of pressure vessel parts.
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/People#People_at_work>
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by CEphoto, Uwe Aranas - nominated by El Grafo -- El Grafo (talk) 15:29, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Spotted at the recent Photo challenge. I know, that piece of wood in the lower left corner is a bit disturbing, but I think it's an awesome shot neverheless. -- El Grafo (talk) 15:29, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nothing is disturbing. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:06, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 16:35, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 17:18, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support Has a great gritty documentary quality to it. Daniel Case (talk) 17:53, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Strongly. The board in forground, and the overexpo back of the man are a pity, but they are very little flaws. This picture is absolutely wonderful for me. Many thanks for sharing it, Uwe !--Jebulon (talk) 20:13, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I reduced the highlights to cope with the bright back. Thanks for the hint, Jebulon! --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 15:31, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Well done ! I'm still enthousiastic.Thanks.--Jebulon (talk) 18:28, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Jebulon. --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 04:21, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Jebulon --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:22, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 09:19, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 09:36, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- GoMinU (talk) 11:00, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:12, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice pressure. --Laitche (talk) 11:26, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:10, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 17:08, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support one of everyday heroes --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 19:05, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support There is a lot of dynamic in there! Poco2 19:30, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Benh (talk) 20:48, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 06:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent documentary photography, very good.--ArildV (talk) 07:54, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 08:03, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Grey heron 2015-08-27.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2015 at 14:01:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Grey heron, Osaka, Japan.

File:Total reconstruction of Neunkirchen station (254).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2015 at 10:14:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Unimog 405/UGN road-rail vehicle used in remodeling, renovation and modernization of Neunkirchen railwaystation in Austria.
Pictogram voting info.svg Info GoMinU, es freut mich, dass du an diesem Foto Gefallen gefunden und es ehrt mich, dass du dieses hier nominiert hast. Auch ich finde das Foto durchaus gelungen und auszeichnungswürdig, da die Maschine, die ich während des Arbeitseinsatzes (also in Bewegung) fotografiert habe, in für mich bestmöglicher Qualität abgebildet habe. Die dunklen Bereiche sind gut durchgezeichnet und alle Details der Maschine sind gut zu erkennen. Ich habe mir aber seit geraumer Zeit abgewöhnt, meine Bilder auf den Jahrmärkten QI oder FP zur allgemeinen Belustigung zur Schau zu stellen, da es manchen Benutzern Freude bereitet, mit "sachkundigen" Bemerkungen den Fotografen die Freude am Fotografieren zu verderben. Abgesehen davon, dass ich im Gegensatz zu Daniel Case keinen CA in der Oberleitung sehe, frage ich mich, ob sowas bei einem Foto, das die Maschine zeigen soll, von Bedeutung ist? Ähnliches gilt für die von XRay angemerkte "Überbelichtung". Auch hier frage ich mich, ob der höchst unwichtige Hintergrund, der sich nicht vermeiden lässt, oder die Maschine von Bedeutung ist. Vermutlich hätte man mit entsprechenden Bildbearbeitungsprogrammen und längerer Spielerei den Hintergrund etwas besser hinbekommen, frage mich jedoch ob das noch etwas mit dem eigentlichen Objekt (die Maschine), dem Fotografieren und der Leistung des Fotografen etwas zu tun hat? Daher, Hubertl, was macht dich so sicher, dass es "far away beeing FP" ist? Die Kandidatur kann daher gerne beendet werden. Die Kritiker können ja gerne bei google nach besseren Fotos dieses Spezialfahrzeugs mit aufgesetzter Schraubmaschine suchen... Schöne Grüße --Steindy (talk) 23:13, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Die Oberleitung ist lila. Ich bezweifle sehr, es ist, dass Farben in der Realität Face-smile.svg. Daniel Case (talk) 00:57, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Daniel Case wenn du die Oberleitung lila siehst, solltest du dringend deinen Monitor neu kalibrieren. Ich sehe nur helles blaugrau und habe diese Farbe soeben auch abgetastet. Und selbst wenn es lila, rotbrau oder rötlich wäre, wäre es korrekt, denn bekanntnlich besteht eine Oberleitung weltweit aus Kupfer und Kupfer ist bekanntlich rötlich. Wenn man also eine Kritik abgibt, so sollte diese aus Respekt vor dem Autor auch korrekt und nicht von persönlichem Glauben geprägt sein. Genau das habe ich zuvor ausgeführt und genau dies ist es, weshalb ich bei diesen Kasperle-Theater bei QI, FP oder VI nicht mehr mitmache. Zu deiner Ehre sei gesagt, dass du nicht der Erste bist, der ahnungslos ist und "solche CAs" sieht... Schönen Gruß --Steindy (talk) 19:23, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Die Meinungsverschiedenheiten über die Zertifizierungsstellen abweichend, es ist immer noch nur ein ganz gewöhnlicher Zusammensetzung. Daniel Case (talk) 01:50, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
From the composition and the quality of the object itself it is a valuable picture. Therefore QI and VI. But not the picture as a whole. But this is the requirement for FP. In my opinion - beside some repairable faults - it does not meet these requirements at all. I never disrepected your work, Steindy, and you know it! --Hubertl 08:10, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Hubertl, es ist mir durchaus bekannt, dass du meine Arbeiten anerkennst. Ich bleibe dennoch bei meiner Meinung, dass das Foto, das nichts anderes als den Zwei-Wege-Unimog samt aufgesetzter Schraubmaschine zeigen soll, in allen Details fein durchgezeichnet, scharf und von bestmöglicher Qualität ist. Oder gibt es daran etwas auszusetzen? Alles andere außer dem Gleis, auf dem die Schraubmuttern festgezogen werden, ist uninteressantes Beiwerk und die Position der Maschine, den Sonnenstand und das Wetter kann ich mir nicht aussuchen. Daher wäre es mir sogar lieber, wenn dieses Beiwerk noch deutlicher in den Hintergrund treten würde, was allerdings nicht möglich ist, da man sowas nicht in einem Lichtzelt fotografieren kann. Aber seis drum, ich lege ohnehin keinen Wert mehr darauf, ob eines meiner Bilder QI, FP oder auch VI ist. Was für mich zählt ist, dass dieses Foto ebenso wie einige andere vom Umbau des Bahnhofs Neunkirchen mit Handkuss für eine Publikation angefordert wurde. L.G. --Steindy (talk) 19:23, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, far away beeing FP. Did you ask Steindy before? --Hubertl 11:24, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Hubertl. QI for sure, very good pic of a hi-lo, but compositionally it's nothing special and the CA on the overhead lines in the background is not a good thing. Daniel Case (talk) 17:17, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry. IMO partial overexposed.--XRay talk 17:19, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

User:GoMinU lasse uns noch ein wenig diskutieren. Ich erachte die Diskussion als unterhaltsam und durchaus lehrreich, weil hier höcht unterschiedliche Meinungen und Standpunkte aufeinander treffen. Freundlichen Gruß --Steindy (talk) 19:42, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Spiral stairs (спирално степениште).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2015 at 07:48:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Spiral stairs.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Spiral stairs. All by --Mile (talk) 07:48, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mile (talk) 07:48, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 08:21, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice compo and light. --Laitche (talk) 10:51, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great dynamic, even when the light situation is not absolutely perfect and a bit unrealistic. --Hubertl 11:25, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:36, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:43, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support And 7 --LivioAndronico (talk) 13:02, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support I was going to weak-oppose but then I looked at the metadata and realized just how difficult this one must have been. Daniel Case (talk) 17:15, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 17:20, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's a stacking image, isn't it? --Laitche (talk) 20:08, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Laitche the lack of lens info in the EXIF makes me suspect a Samyang fisheye lens. That would explain the large depth-of-field. -- Colin (talk) 09:09, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:24, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Perhaps a little more chroma noise reduction on the grey parts, but understandable given the high ISO. -- Colin (talk) 09:09, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 09:38, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great shot! Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 11:49, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great!--Soundwaweserb (talk) 13:28, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. --Code (talk) 17:37, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wonderful perspective Poco2 19:32, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 08:09, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 10:49, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent!--Vengolis (talk) 04:59, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great.--ArildV (talk) 10:45, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Benh (talk) 06:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 15:22, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Siriema.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2015 at 00:29:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Swaledale Sheep, Lake District, England - June 2009.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2015 at 16:17:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Swaledale Ewe
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff. I thought I'd go for something a bit different. An older photo of mine that was actually previously nominated and almost passed but for lack of votes. I think it's a characterful animal portrait. You have good detail of the animal (a relatively rare domestic breed of sheep native to the hills of northern England) and an idea of the typical landscape it inhabits with pleasant blurred background. -- Diliff (talk) 16:17, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 16:17, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:17, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Its good, but some more space around should make it. --Mile (talk) 17:35, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
    • I no longer have access to the original file (from memory this is not cropped anyway), so I'm not able to give more space unfortunately. Diliff (talk) 17:43, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Very weak oppose Tada, it's an oppose! A fine QI, but missing that little something for me. The tight crop "tips the scale" toward oppose (hope I use the expression right). - Benh (talk) 20:54, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:25, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 07:00, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's a really impressive portrait! --Tremonist (talk) 12:47, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Tremonist. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:14, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I wasn't convinced at thumbnail size (too static, tight crop, centered,...) but the expression and detail is very good Poco2 19:34, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:09, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Photax BW 2015-03-01 16-45-43.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2015 at 09:12:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Photax III camera
F/0: I used a old manuell macro lens so my camera don't know I used F/16 --Berthold Werner (talk) 05:23, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Cardinalis cardinalis (female), Owen Conservation Park, Madison, Wisconsin.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2015 at 08:05:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A female northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis) at Owen Conservation Park, Madison, Wisconsin, United States
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by John Benson - uploaded by Bruce1ee - nominated by Bruce1ee -- —Bruce1eetalk 08:05, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- —Bruce1eetalk 08:05, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Good sharpness with acceptable size, the problem is the right crop, the bird cannot breath, he is looking far to the right but there is nothing shared with the viewer. Poco2 09:16, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful little creature! --Tremonist (talk) 12:08, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but I prefer tight crop at the left and top. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:37, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well-done picture, great bokeh, nice sharp detail on the bird (is that the remnants of a bug in her beak?) We have one as a pet (legally, but it's sort of a long story), and I showed the picture to my wife and she went "Awwww ..." (and this with the bird in question not too far away, although it's a little prettier than this one (it looks young). So it gets my !vote. Daniel Case (talk) 17:07, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Nice but disappointed crop... --Laitche (talk) 20:29, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 07:03, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose per Poco and Laitche. I think this image is oversharpened too?! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:48, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

File:St Patrick's Church Nave 2, Dundalk, Ireland - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2015 at 18:02:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St Patrick's Church, Dundalk, Ireland
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 18:02, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 18:02, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alex Florstein (talk) 18:34, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark for me and the composition is too busy for me, with many uninteresting/ordinary things. I would have chosen a portrait framing, with a focus on the stained glass window and the mosaic around, which is rich and colorful... Well, be bold and go ahead with your tripod, just in front of the altar, chose the choir, add maybe the columns left and right, and avoid the rest !--Jebulon (talk) 19:39, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
    • I try to show show the interior as I saw it. If it's dark, I leave it dark. I suppose I could brighten it a little bit without changing it's ambience, but I don't think it should be a bright looking interior. I thought the symmetrical confession boxes framed the sides nicely, but I suppose for a Catholic, they are quite ordinary. ;-) Diliff (talk)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not extraordinary this for me,and also a few dark --LivioAndronico (talk) 19:53, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Could this be another revenge vote though? They always seem to come immediately after someone opposes one of yours. You say it's too dark, but please consider that it's actually a dark interior. Look at the colour of the wooden confession boxes. Compare them to the confession boxes in your recent nomination. Yours are significantly darker and the wood looks quite similar to me. I think you need to consider that not every church is a whitewashed baroque church like the ones you usually photograph in Rome. Some of them are dark, and should be shown as dark. Just my opinion anyway. Diliff (talk) 21:51, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
You're boring, another vote for revenge (?). where are the white churches?. Besides, this have very light compared to the churches of Rome (see that big window). Accept Negative Ratings. Besides the church do not like, it is distorted and dark.--LivioAndronico (talk) 22:35, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
I may be boring, but you're just plain rude. Once again, I don't really understand what you're saying and you don't seem interested in actually responding to the point I made about the darkness, so I'll just end the conversation here. Diliff (talk) 22:44, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Bravo, stop here and you grow up a little--LivioAndronico (talk) 22:58, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Sigh,...Poco2 09:19, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but crop is a bit tight on top. --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:58, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Smaller church, apparently, so I don't mind. Daniel Case (talk) 20:41, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
    • It's actually quite a big church. This is the view from about half way down the nave. This is the view from near the rear. It seems to be that you can't please everyone. I thought the view from this position showed the altar and mural in enough detail to be interesting, but still wide enough to show the other features of the church, but Jebulon thinks it should have been tighter and closer, Uoaei1 thinks it's too tight at the top (it's very wide angle already, any more and I'd start getting complaints that there is too much perspective distortion), and you seem to imply you'd prefer to see it from further back? Can't please everyone. ;-) Diliff (talk) 21:51, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
I'm sorry if you thought I didn't like it ... can't say I blame you for feeling a bit defensive after the drama above. All I meant was that, since it looked from the image like it wasn't a very big church (there was no way to know you were only standing halfway back), the failings other people were complaining about were not an issue for me. I have no problem with where you took the image from. Daniel Case (talk) 16:49, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Understood, I didn't interpret it as you disliking the image, per se. It was just a brief response to you about its size, and then a longer moan about the whims of everyone else, so I suppose it's my fault that we got crossed wires! Diliff (talk) 17:41, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment. I've uploaded a new image - brightened slightly as per Jebulon and Livio's comments, wider framing at the top as per Uoaei1's comments, and also fixed a slight tilt issue. Diliff (talk) 22:06, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as always. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:48, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support No complaints. --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 03:02, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:43, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 06:03, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support no doubt --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:27, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:32, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support absolutely. --Code (talk) 07:07, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support not dark enough for a church ;-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:22, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 08:23, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent as always :) --Laitche (talk) 08:52, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 09:19, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DXR (talk) 09:39, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Many churches are quite dark inside, that's hardly the photographer's fault. Many details are visible, e. g. the coats of arms of the different guilds. The photo is a good illustration of this specific church. --Tremonist (talk) 12:14, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hockei (talk) 16:16, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ArildV (talk) 08:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 10:32, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hockei (talk) 17:53, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Ups. Double vote, Sorry. SMirC-chuckle.svg --Hockei (talk) 19:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Church and rainbow in Akureyri.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2015 at 15:29:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church and rainbow in Akureyri, Iceland
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Villy Fink Isaksen -- Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 15:29, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 15:29, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The rainbow itself is nice, quite strong, it almost looks too intense, but the foreground (road, signs,...) spoils the composition IMHO, sorry Poco2 17:34, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice, but no FP --Atamari (talk) 20:30, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Poco. I want an image like this to be a featured picture. The church is beautiful. The rainbow, especially against a land background, is as beautiful as it is rare. But unfortunately two beautiful things together do not automatically add up to an even more beautiful thing combined (per Circle of Iron: "Two birds tied together have four wings, yet they cannot fly"). Besides, the road in the foreground adds some extra distracting clutter. Daniel Case (talk) 20:36, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Works for me. --King of ♠ 02:57, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's an extraordinary photo with a rainbow this intense! The church as foreground works as a composition for me, too, as it does for King. --Tremonist (talk) 12:17, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice, absolutely --Shuhrat Sa'diev (talk) 11:03, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support What Villy Fink Isaksen could do? Relocate the rainbow? Great mood. I cahnged the FP category to Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:20, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
    • He could clone out the disturbing signs and poles...--Jebulon (talk) 18:36, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Route du désert vers Cox Gassi.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2015 at 08:47:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Road in Algerian Sahara
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Algeria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Eagleyes* - uploaded by Eagleyes* - nominated by Vikoula5 -- Vikoula5 (talk) 08:47, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Vikoula5 (talk) 08:47, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice photo, but the blurred grey area in front is a bit distracting. --Tremonist (talk) 12:05, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support I like it in spite of the shallow DoF and top crop Poco2 17:38, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Poco; the composition is striking enough to offset those issues. Makes me think of the landscape that inspired Led Zeppelin's "Kashmir": "All that I see turns to brown ..." Daniel Case (talk) 20:31, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:24, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:27, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose overexposed especially sky in the background, too much of the blurred "grey" in the foreground. I also think that the colors are too wrong or too weird for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:08, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, per Poco's arguments.--Jebulon (talk) 10:12, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Road in Algerian Sahara

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info suggestion of Jebulon. @Jebulon:, @Alchemist-hp:, @Tomascastelazo:, @Martin Falbisoner:, @Daniel Case:, @Poco a poco:--Vikoula5 (talk) 20:00, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vikoula5 (talk) 20:00, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm fine with the top crop but I not with the bottom crop. Tha area was blurry, sure, but makes the picture more interesting, as it provides perspective and hides a part of the scene. The current version looks rather like a boring aerial shot. Poco2 20:21, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Poco --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:17, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm so sorry Vikoula5, not good picture, we have better pictures from Algeria for nominating at WLE. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:55, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hello @ArionEstar: if you find better let me know, and i will nominate it. Or you can do it your self Clin.--Vikoula5 (talk) 21:15, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like having the road in front; it draws us in to the image. Daniel Case (talk) 03:21, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Armillaria mellea, Honey Fungus, UK 1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2015 at 15:58:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Armillaria mellea, Honey Fungus

File:Bombus pratorum (male) - Knautia arvensis - Keila.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2015 at 06:02:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Male early bumblebee

File:Incomplete Graffito.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2015 at 17:39:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Graffito on a wall of corrugated iron (one sheet of metal missing)
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Graffito by unknown sprayer - everything else by El Grafo -- El Grafo (talk) 17:39, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I've got at least 3 potential stories on why this tile might be missing in my mind right now and I like pictures that do this to me. I have no idea if this will work for you, so let's just give it a try. -- El Grafo (talk) 17:39, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice impression! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:49, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Vivid colors. --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 04:18, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, El Grafo, it is very surprising and indeed, it works for me too !--Jebulon (talk) 13:35, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 16:02, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The missing tile kicks the interest level up a notch, as well as making a nice contrast with the bright colors of the graffito. Daniel Case (talk) 17:16, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Complete would be better to me --LivioAndronico (talk) 08:50, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
    • That's the point, IMO ! "Complete" would be "just" a graffito, like many others...--Jebulon (talk) 09:25, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
      • Extactly, the missing tile was the reason for taking the picture in the first place as well as this nomination. The complete graffito would have made a nice QI, but FP? OK, I was lucky with the light coming from the right direction to support the sheet metal structure and being "warm" enough to make the colors pop nicely, but I don't think that would've been enough to make a FP. --El Grafo (talk) 10:00, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:09, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 17:43, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 08:28, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support The broken off piece looks like a different, superimposed image. Although, the colours are nice! —Skyllfully (talk | contribs) 00:40, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Mercedes-Benz W115 220D (1973).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2015 at 17:23:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mercedes-Benz W115 220D


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 21:38, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects/Vehicles

File:Poertschach Pfarrkirche hl Johannes Theodor Theyer-Glasfenster 20082015 6808.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2015 at 16:16:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Stained glass window, dedicated by Theodor Theyer, in the Roman Catholic parish church Holy John the Baptist, Poertschach, Carinthia, Austria
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Stained glass
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Johann Jaritz - uploaded by Johann Jaritz - nominated by Johann Jaritz (talk) -- Johann Jaritz 16:16, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz 16:16, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:32, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 19:29, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 07:35, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Nice -- George Chernilevsky talk 10:38, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I changed the category to interior of Religious buildings. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:45, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support...and 7 --LivioAndronico (talk) 14:07, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kameraprojekt Graz 2015 (talk) 15:46, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:45, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good job. --Laitche (talk) 22:16, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like it. Technicaly very good, sharpness excellent, no noise, OK. But I find the work (not the photograph) not interesting, more a 19th century kitchy "painting on glass" portrait than a real "stained glass window" we have from the Middle Ages. I don't know who is that saint (a martyr (see the palm) like Saint Martin maybe ?), there is a red link to the author in the category, the crop below is frustrating, even if this part of the glass is just banal, a part of the "frieze" is broken and replaced by a modern glass... IMO it is just an average subject, not extraordinary. Well, no wow, I'm sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 14:36, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
    • @Jebulon: Thank you for your high grade analyses about that image. You are an excellent profiler. Yes, the glass window originates from the years 1904-1906, when the church was set up. No available documents that might give a hint to the saint (?) at the glass. I am desolate about that missing information as well as the mended part. The frustratiing crop below is due to a grill which partially covers the banal lower part. I nominated the image due to the colors, which are IMHO able to catch the eye. --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 03:10, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
      • @Johann Jaritz:, I guess it is not Saint Martin of Tours, who died peacefuly. As we have a palm, it is a martyr, who was probably beheaded (the sword).--Jebulon (talk) 08:28, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
        • I strive towards more information about the artworks in that church, but at the moment there is no one there who I could ask. Not even a preacher, because in September there`ll be a new one. --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 08:55, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 17:48, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree with Jebulon, excellent work. I believe artwork needs more support on FPC. The lower part is useless as the sky in most of the landscapes ;-) --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 06:37, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree with Moroder: artwork needs more support on FPC ! Furthermore, I agree that the lower part is useless, see crop suggestion !! ;-)--Jebulon (talk) 08:28, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
      • Jebulon, I said ironically that the lower part is useless.I like the composition as it is, I believe that it gives a good dimension of the window --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 09:31, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
        • @Moroder: Thanks for your comments, Wolfgang. The windows were crafted by "Tiroler Glasmalerei - Innsbruck", a more than 140 years old traditional enterprise, that is still designing and crafting windows for churches for foreign and home dioceses. The proportions of the windows are demonstrated by this complete example:
          Poertschach Pfarrkirche hl Johannes N-Galerie-Glasfenster Sponsor Carl-del-Fabro 20082015 6809.jpg
          .

--Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 11:09, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

          • @Moroder:, I understood very well your irony, Wolfgang. But you had a wrong feeling, as demonstrated by the thumb of the whole picture... Anyway, as the glass comes from a "Tiroler Glasmalerei", I understand your support too (hey, it is a joke, my best (south) tiroler friend !!!)--Jebulon (talk) 16:25, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:48, 31 August 2015 (UTC)




Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 21:40, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects#Stained glass


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]

Thu 27 Aug → Tue 01 Sep
Fri 28 Aug → Wed 02 Sep
Sat 29 Aug → Thu 03 Sep
Sun 30 Aug → Fri 04 Sep
Mon 31 Aug → Sat 05 Sep
Tue 01 Sep → Sun 06 Sep

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

Sun 23 Aug → Tue 01 Sep
Mon 24 Aug → Wed 02 Sep
Tue 25 Aug → Thu 03 Sep
Wed 26 Aug → Fri 04 Sep
Thu 27 Aug → Sat 05 Sep
Fri 28 Aug → Sun 06 Sep
Sat 29 Aug → Mon 07 Sep
Sun 30 Aug → Tue 08 Sep
Mon 31 Aug → Wed 09 Sep
Tue 01 Sep → Thu 10 Sep

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 Assessements 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/September 2015), 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/September 2015.
  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.