Commons:Featured picture candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Skip to current candidates Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates


FPCandiateicon.svg

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

Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and current month.

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

Formal things[edit]

Nominating[edit]

Guidelines for nominators[edit]

Please read the complete guidelines before nominating.

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

  • Licensing – Images licensed with solely "GFDL" or "GFDL and an NC-only license" are not acceptable due the restrictions placed on re-use by these licenses.
  • ResolutionImages (with the exception of animations, videos, and SVGs) of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are strong mitigating reasons.
Graphics on Commons are not only viewed on conventional computer screens. They may be used in high-resolution print versions, and the images may be cropped to focus on portions of the image. See Commons:Why we need high resolution media for more information.
  • Scans – While not official policy, Help:Scanning provides advice on the preparation of various types of images that may be useful.
  • General quality – pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality.
  • Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer. Digital manipulation for the purpose of correcting flaws in an image is generally acceptable, provided it is limited, well-done, and not intended to deceive.
    • For photographs, typical acceptable manipulations include cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and colour/exposure correction. More extensive manipulations, such as removal of distracting background elements, should be clearly described in the image text, by means of the {{Retouched picture}} template. Undescribed or mis-described manipulations which cause the main subject to be misrepresented are never acceptable. For images made from more than one photo, you can use the {{Panorama}} or {{Focus stacked image}} templates.
    • 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 one useful guideline. Horizons should almost never be placed in the middle, where they "cut" the image in half. Often, a horizon creating a top or bottom third of the space works better. 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}} ~~~~. Also, remember that if more than one version is nominated, you should explicitly state which version you are withdrawing.
  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 is 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:Schwarzseen Villanders Südtirol.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2018 at 05:10:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Schwarzseen ponds in St. Valentin, Villanders South Tyrol - Protected natural monument.

File:Osteospermum ecklonis 03.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2018 at 15:46:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Osteospermum ecklonis in Dunedin Botanic Garden, Dunedin, New Zealand
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asterales
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tournasol7 - uploaded by Tournasol7 - nominated by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 15:46, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Tournasol7 (talk) 15:46, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose We have lots of FP Asterales - it is a relatively easy, common and spectacular flower to photograph. I'm finding the magenta blob in the bottom left a little distracting, and think it could be cloned out. Overall it looks overcooked wrt processing -- too much contrast/saturation. Shame the right side is not continued green but earth or a path. -- Colin (talk) 18:40, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment - I'd suggest just cropping a bit on the left and then on the right to eliminate the isolated leaf in the lower right corner. Then I'd probably support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:50, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Hieno näkymä merelle Seurasaaresta.png[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2018 at 15:44:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of an ocean from an island.

File:Sunset at Ganga Sagar, Janakpurdham 11.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2018 at 13:38:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Joséphine-Charlotte metro station platform, facing "Les oiseaux émerveillés" by Serge Vandercam in (Woluwe-Saint-Lambert, Belgium).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2018 at 13:16:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Joséphine-Charlotte metro station entrance and main part of the platform

File:Andkjelvatnet seen from Durmålstinden summit.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2018 at 11:56:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Andkjelvatnet lake seen from Durmålstinden

File:Pitkä alikulku espoossa.png[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2018 at 09:33:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

long underpass in Finland
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by JKorpimies - uploaded by JKorpimies - nominated by JKorpimies -- JKorpimies (talk) 09:33, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- JKorpimies (talk) 09:33, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Regretful oppose It's a great idea and good composition, the kind of image you'd expect to see on a square meter of canvas at photo exhibitions, but unfortunately the focus has ended up on the tiles instead of the bike. That makes it a no-go for me, sorry. --Cart (talk) 09:42, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose as per cart Bijay Chaurasia (Talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support - I find this a good composition and I don't find that having the bike be a little out of focus in the background makes it unworthy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:36, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

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

Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2018 at 07:38:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hermione (ship, 2014)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water transport
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:38, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Despite the tents the atmosphere is very special and brings this picture out of the ordinary. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:38, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Some might complain about the tents but I like the old vs. new contrast and the very lovely tones. Quality is flawless as always. --Code (talk) 08:11, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per Code -- Colin (talk) 08:45, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support The tents actually add to the image since they look exactly like the old military campaign tents of the original ship's era. They put the ship in context. In this dim light you can imagine what it looked like when the ship was made ready to sail for the American Revolution. --Cart (talk) 09:16, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support despite the tents. Storkk (talk) 11:14, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Sorry, but the angle doesn't work for me; it makes the image show too much of the harbour and not enough of the ship.--Peulle (talk) 11:45, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Kruusamägi (talk) 12:09, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:41, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment - I'm still evaluating this photo, but please fix a dust spot that's some ways to the left of the upper right corner. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:29, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • ✓  Done I cloned out not one but two dust-spots, let me know if yours is still here. Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:53, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • No, you took care of it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:19, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • On the photo: I love the ship and the harbor, but the bottom crop isn't working that smoothly for me and the right crop, with the one unsharp object in the lower right corner, is bugging me. I don't know what a photo that included more that is now below and to the right of the crops would have looked like, but I think I'd like this photo better if you did a horizontal crop right in front of the unsharp post, thereby also getting rid of a lot of the tents. The tents don't disturb me per se, but they kind of clog up a section of the photo. I think my proposed crop would create a more unified composition, but of course others might disagree. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:25, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Puerto de Opakua - Paisaje -BT- 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2018 at 19:08:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landscape at the Opakua mountain pass. A stile, pastures, fog and the Iturrieta mountain range. Álava, Basque Country, Spain

File:Lopesan Baobab, Maspalomas, May 2018 -3.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2018 at 18:41:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lopesan Baobab Resort, Maspalomas, Gran Canaria
  • No time for sitting idly by the pool if you hope to be first in line for dinner! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:38, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 12:35, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose This picture I can only review in comparison with the already promoted one, which I clearly prefer -- perhaps the dark building parts at both sides do the blue hour photo no favor, and I also prefer for this motif the more wide crop instead of a square photo. --A.Savin 13:26, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Why not? IMO it's better indeed and has more of the symmetry, though because of the dark parts I still wouldn't vote in support. --A.Savin 15:06, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose - I'm inordinately bugged by the asymmetry of the near right and left corners. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:20, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose The sky and the pool are nice, but the building and tree lights are too dark and too bright. Not saying it could have been taken/processed any better but the result isn't quite there compared to our best night FPs. -- Colin (talk) 07:08, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Alternative - uncropped[edit]

Lopesan Baobab, Maspalomas, May 2018 -2.jpg

File:Red Clover 2011 G1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2018 at 16:01:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The red clover (Trifolium pratense). Ukraine

File:Soyuz rocket and spaceship V1-1.svg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2018 at 13:15:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Soyuz rocket and spaceship
  • Could you please add documentation sources? Thanks, Yann (talk) 14:44, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  conditional on documentation sources --Trougnouf (talk) 22:48, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Conditional support per Trougnouf. Daniel Case (talk) 05:22, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Fontana di Trevi columns.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2018 at 03:23:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:23, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:23, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment Nice level of details, however the perspective distortion is disturbing. Yann (talk) 13:06, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Yann: no verticals or horizontals are vertical or horizontal, and they don't seem deliberately diagonal in a pleasing way. Storkk (talk) 11:17, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Needs a perspective correction, (mainly) I don't think it's a notably interesting composition, and I would expect it to be shot in the best technical conditions (on a tripod with minimum ISO) since it's a static easily accessible and commonly photographed scene. --Trougnouf (talk) 22:44, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Perhaps it could one day be a VI as an excellent illustration of the Corinthian order, but not an FP. Daniel Case (talk) 05:19, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Stercoraire iceland.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2018 at 22:43:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Iceland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Aymen861 - uploaded by Aymen861 - nominated by Aymen861 -- Aymen861 (talk) 22:43, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Aymen861 (talk) 22:43, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Beautiful view but the front-right blurry rock kills it for me. The very bright one on the bottom-left isn't great either, and I would like to see some of the mountain range with a little bit more focus though that's technically nearly impossible. There is some red CA on the grass and the categorization is very imprecise. --Trougnouf (talk) 00:14, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment Great EV, if only you could put some more information and categories. Yann (talk) 13:02, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Frhdkazan (talk) 06:54, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment I don't think the out of focus rocks or mountain is a problem... but the CA is disturbing. Would support if that was fixed. Storkk (talk) 11:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:26, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Nice! Tournasol7 (talk) 15:51, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose - It's a really interesting composition and great luck to find the eggs! But oppose per others, primarily for the unsharp foreground. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:13, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Ikan and Tougnouf. Great juxtaposition marred by technical shortcomings. Daniel Case (talk) 04:06, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Vitascope.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2018 at 21:53:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Edison's Greatest Marvel: The Vitascope

File:Unidentified ceiling in Panam Nagar (01).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2018 at 21:40:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Unidentified ceiling in Panam Nagar

File:Iceland's Mid-Atlantic Ridge during snow.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2018 at 20:31:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mountains in Iceland, taken from a plane
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Iceland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A shot taken from a plane over one of Iceland's mountain ranges. All by me -- Bharel (talk) 20:31, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Bharel (talk) 20:31, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment Looks very nice but it needs denoising and it's not well categorized. --Trougnouf (talk) 21:52, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
    Tbh, I didn't even notice the noise. Good catch. I've applied a VERY small denoise filter, in order to leave the sharpness as is. Trougnouf, tell me if you believe I need a little bit more denoising or whether I've hurt the sharpness too much. Bharel (talk) 22:28, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
    Took care of categorizing, changing it's name to be more descriptive too (managed to find the exact mountain range by comparing with other photos taken on the plane a few minutes before and after).Bharel (talk) 23:48, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
    Great job on the mountain range identification. The mountains look good but the sky is still noisy, you should filter it separately. There is also posterization on the right of the sky where it turns from dark blue to lighter blue to pink/purple to gray. (very visible between the two dark blobs I just annotated and the small cloud left of them) --Trougnouf (talk) 23:51, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
    How do you find those blobs? Regarding the posterization, it took me a few minutes to see that. Apparently it doesn't show up on Lightroom but only in the final product (might be due to small jpeg artifacts)? I'm currently trying different export settings. Bharel (talk) 00:08, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
    Trougnouf, seems like it was ProPhoto RGB. Changing to Adobe RGB sRGB removed the posterization and most of the artifacts. I'm not entirely sure how does it work, but it worked. Bharel (talk) 00:23, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
    That's a lot better. I think modern browsers still don't take color profiles into account. There is still a significant amount of noise in the sky. The last two blobs are still a little bit visible and there seems to be another one (dark spot) on the bottom-right of the central cloud. I look at QIC/FPC pictures at 200% of my (1080p) monitor and expect no visible flaw then, it might help to look at it on different monitors as the blobs are nearly invisible on my TN screen but jump at me on the IPS one. --Trougnouf (talk) 10:06, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
    I actually reduced noise filter on bottom, added a little bit on top and resampled dust spots. Removal of more noise results in a soft picture and (apart from the uniform parts of the sky,) I believe the details are more important in here. Is there anything else you believe can improve the picture? (Don't have any available IPS screen nearby so do tell if you think there's something more to fix Face-smile.svg) Bharel (talk) 11:48, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
    Well done, I don't see dark blobs or posterization → Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Trougnouf (talk) 23:19, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
    Why thank you my friend, I highly appreciate it :) Bharel (talk) 12:10, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Big wow. :) I like that you can see that road snaking along the landscape. And the light is lovely on the left. --Peulle (talk) 10:29, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Yann (talk) 13:03, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 15:53, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:37, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:59, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Frhdkazan (talk) 07:10, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Cart (talk) 09:23, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:23, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Storkk (talk) 11:25, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Kruusamägi (talk) 12:12, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:24, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support - That's a really good photo from an airplane! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:04, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:32, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Water, Sand and Ice.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2018 at 19:50:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Glacier in Diamond Beach, Iceland
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Ice
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Natural phenomenon occurring in Iceland. Icebergs from the nearest mountain get detached and melt on the pitch-black, basalt lava sand. All by me -- Bharel (talk) 19:50, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Bharel (talk) 19:50, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment I like the idea. Reminds me (remotely) of this photo. However, the flare of the sun spoils the nomination for me. Not good enough to support, not bad enough to oppose. --Code (talk) 06:10, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
    Thanks Code for your review Face-smile.svg The flare was actually an artistic choice. I have a few other shots on different angles without the flare, but I chose this on purpose. (Much like another close image I've uploaded with an international glare File: Diamonds of nature.jpg) Bharel (talk) 10:05, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Regarding that file's name, please read Commons:File naming. Since people need to be able to search this huge archive to find the right photo, names must be accurate and not poetic or misleading. Only those looking for "natural diamonds" will find that file now, and they will be disappointed. --Cart (talk) 20:48, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
    ✓  Done , thanks cart Face-smile.svg Bharel (talk) 21:01, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Yann (talk) 13:03, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Looks like another one that could be an album cover. Daniel Case (talk) 06:06, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
    Thanks mate :-) Bharel (talk) 12:15, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support - Beautiful and striking, and this particular flare doesn't bother me, or not much. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:02, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Chirk Castle gates.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2018 at 18:57:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The gates of Chirk Castle
@Podzemnik:, remember to sign your !vote. Daniel Case (talk) 04:01, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Fundación César Manrique - post.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2018 at 14:27:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Top of a post of a cordon, Fundación César Manrique, Tahiche, Lanzarote

File:Panorama vom Wachtküppel.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2018 at 13:24:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view from the Wachtküppel in the Rhön Mountains
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Instructive panoramic view (360°) from the Wachtküppel in the Rhön Mountains. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 13:24, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Milseburg (talk) 13:24, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Storkk (talk) 18:16, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Llez (talk) 21:04, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support ~Moheen (keep talking) 21:27, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Ermell (talk) 08:20, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:35, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Procedural oppose This image has been nominated for deletion as copyvio; we should wait until it's resolved before considering it as an FP.Symbol support vote.svg  Support Never mind; it turns out it was by one of INeverCry's socks and the account has been blocked indefinitely. Daniel Case (talk) 05:00, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support - Lots to see, and very pretty. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:46, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Sympecma paedisca 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2018 at 12:25:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Siberian winter damselfly

File:Kjæret boligeiendom.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2018 at 07:46:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kjæret boligeiendom
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Norway
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info We have had quite a few different images coming up for nomination recently and I've been wondering what you guys will think of this one, so I thought I'd put it up and see if you get the same emotional impression I do; it's a house from the early 1800s located in a picturesque small town in the south of Norway. All by Peulle.
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Peulle (talk) 07:46, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose , as someone who's taken a lot of pictures like this, it just isn't special enough. Daniel Case (talk) 01:02, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Large Gautama Buddha statue in Buddha Park of Ravangla, Sikkim.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2018 at 17:27:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Large Gautama Buddha statue in Buddha Park of Ravangla, Sikkim - Front Telephoto Shot

--Trougnouf (talk) 17:36, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment The brightness of the statue has been increased by adding some localized adjustments. But as per histogram there are no over blown highlights. It is slightly on the bright side but with details intact. The slight bluish in forest I guess was a result of decreasing the global contrast in the image. - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 18:06, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose as previous comments Charles (talk) 20:23, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose An impressive photo, but unfortunately you have emphasized the blue colours --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:12, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment The blue colour has been dialed down a bit globally in the photo. Pl check - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 02:14, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support good enough now, imo --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:30, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment Looks good, but there's a strange loss of fine detail (visible in the grass and bushes at the bottom). Too much noise reduction? dllu (t,c) 06:29, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment - This is a really imposing image. I'll await your work to address dllu's points before I vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:47, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment - I re-processed the image from scratch this time with selective noise reduction and aimed at maintaining the overall incremental improvement on this image that I have been doing basis feedback from various reviewers over the last few weeks. I think I have been able to address the issue highlighted by dllu in the latest version. The updated image has already been uploaded. - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 17:16, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support chest detail is visible to the naked eye, less blue and less exaggerated colors, I approve. --Trougnouf (talk) 18:15, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Interesting subject, quite good for me. Yann (talk) 11:32, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg  Question statue appears to be leaning roughly 0.5° (counterclockwise from viewer's position)... does that reflect reality? Storkk (talk) 18:22, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment - The observation on tilt is correct (It was off by 0.53 deg). I have fixed it now and uploaded the updated photo. Thanks - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 02:51, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support seems fine now. dllu (t,c) 18:59, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:01, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:18, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:39, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:37, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Bridge leading to Dam hole at Thatipudi dam.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2018 at 15:15:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A pedestrian bridge leading to Thatipudi Dam hole near Visakhapatnam, India
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by IM3847 - uploaded by IM3847 - nominated by IM3847 -- IM3847 (talk) 15:15, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- IM3847 (talk) 15:15, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Harsh light, technical quality could be better. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:29, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose - Good motif but oppose per Basotxerri. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:51, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Ikan. Unfortunately it is very, very hard to get the quality we want for an FP using a phone camera. It has been done, but you probably need to download some image editing program for final fixes. --Cart (talk) 19:40, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per others Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 07:26, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Basotxerri.--Peulle (talk) 07:31, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Sorry, IMO quality is not good enough. --XRay talk 07:37, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because of all these opposes with no new supports. Daniel Case (talk) 01:00, 17 June 2018 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Rosa 'Kent' (d.j.b) 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2018 at 14:41:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants Rosa #Family Rosaceae
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Rosa 'Kent' has half-filled white flowers with yellow stamens on a bushy shrub that cools well. This very strong and healthy rose has green fine leaves. All by ] -- Famberhorst (talk) 14:41, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 14:41, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Nice shot --Patriccck (talk) 14:56, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose nice shot, but nothing extraordinary, imho. --El Grafo (talk) 08:04, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per El Grafo; it's nice but I can't say I'm really blown away. The white petal obscuring part of the yellow is a bit of a nuisance.--Peulle (talk) 11:48, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info That curled petal is typical of half-filled roses.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:18, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

File:De Molen (windmill) and the nuclear power plant cooling tower in Doel, Belgium (DSCF3859).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2018 at 14:22:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Windmill and nuclear power plant in Doel, Belgium
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment What is technically missing? I think the camera settings were ideal, ISO200 is the lowest my camera goes, F/9 is optimal on this zoom level with my lens, I don't think the focus is a miss, and I even had the camera on a tripod to do exposure bracketing in case that was necessary, it doesn't look flawed to me at a reasonable zoom level. If there's anything I missed in software I would be happy to improve it. --Trougnouf (talk) 16:56, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support - I find this photo compelling: The unbalanced nature of the photo that Basotxerri is complaining about is part of what I see as the dystopic new technology dominating over the windmill and the benches, grass and so on that are attempting to pretend everything is alright. I get the feeling in viewing this photo that everything other than the ugly, polluting new technology will be annihilated before long. And it looks fine to me, technically, though I could be missing something. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:01, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment The technical quality is fine. It's an APS-C camera using the right settings in the daytime. The juxtaposition of the two power plants is quite interesting. I would support, but the composition is a bit left-heavy. The left of the image is a lot busier than the right. Meanwhile, I don't know what Ikan is talking about regarding "ugly, polluting new technology". The nuclear cooling tower only outputs pure water vapour, and is shaped in a beautiful hyperboloid. dllu (t,c) 06:19, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I'm not an expert, but that was my emotional reaction. And I don't think we want to debate here whether nuclear power plants are completely clean. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:55, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg  Neutral It's really close for me, but I think on reflection it's not quite enough to gain my support. I really like the idea, but the light is a bit of an issue for me. I also find the car a bit disturbing; the left side of the image is supposed to represent the old technology, so its presence in front of the windmill is putting me off. I'd suggest reshooting on a day with better light, at least getting the light from the back so the left side is illuminated better.--Peulle (talk) 07:50, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per Ikan --Milseburg (talk) 13:26, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment I uploaded a new version where the exposure has been increased on the left side especially. Let me know if there's any other adjustment to be made, I have a lot of room on the histogram. I think the light looked beautiful at that time of the day. The car is unfortunate and I won't be going back as Doel is a ghost town that's over an hour bike ride from the nearest train station, maybe some other Belgian commonner will be luckier. --Trougnouf (talk) 16:48, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 14:09, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Interesting juxtaposition, but overly busy composition for FP to me. Daniel Case (talk) 17:27, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Frhdkazan (talk) 06:57, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de San Juan Bautista, Ágreda, Soria, España, 2018-03-29, DD 43-45 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2018 at 12:48:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Main nave of the church of John the Baptist, Ágreda, province of Soria, Castile and León, Spain. The originally Romanesque church (visible in its portal) was built in the second half of the 12th century and reworked in the 16th century with Gothic, Renaissance and Baroque elements. All by me, Poco2 12:48, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Poco2 12:48, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Granada (talk) 19:35, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:18, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 07:27, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Patriccck (talk) 09:24, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg  Question What's going on with that cord the light is hanging from? Does it look like that naturally? Daniel Case (talk) 14:50, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
    Daniel: I see no problem with that wire. When I saw you comment I thought that it could be due to the long exposure of one of the frames, but I see not such an issue. If you wonder why the wire is not perferctly vertical it's because it is a metal wire that doesn't get straight by its own weight. This picture is made of 3 frames with different exposure but no stitching or editing that could cause that. Poco2 09:17, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg  Support OK, that explains it. Daniel Case (talk) 17:26, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Припратата на црквата „Св. Ѓорѓи“ во Будинарци.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2018 at 07:24:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bell hung on the narthex of the St. George's Church in the village of Budinarci, Macedonia

File:Checker Taxi Cab.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2018 at 06:10:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Checker Taxi cab from 1978.
@Ikan Kekek: I didn't retouch this photo. - Groupir ! (talk) 15:41, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
Of course my remarks are for the photographer. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:39, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Too dark, bad light. Yann (talk) 08:18, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 09:19, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per others. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:31, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Groupir !, Ikan Kekek, Yann, Peulle, Basotxerri: I like old cars like this so I gave the photo a bit of love, please revert it if you don't like it. The source link doesn't work anymore and it seems to be removed from Flickr. All the online versions have the same muddled license plate, so it was probably made that way by the author. I substituted it with a more natural-looking text. I also wanted to keep as much of the bluish evening light as possible since it goes well with an old cab like this. Not sure it is enough for FP, but this is as good as it gets. --Cart (talk) 19:33, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Sure! Good now. Yann (talk) 19:52, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment Still at 'no' here. The level of sharpness is not high enough; it's kind of telling that the "checker" sign is unsharp too, despite the image being one of a checker cab.--Peulle (talk) 22:22, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose The brightness is good now, but I'm with Peulle that it's not sharp enough for FP. And I don't even mean the depth of field, I'm not sure any part of the cab is actually sharp. -- KTC (talk) 23:31, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment - It looks a lot better, but I agree with the others that it probably needs more sharpness. I don't know if that's possible. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:11, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Nope, sorry, post-processing can only do so much. If it's not there from the beginning, you can't get it out. --Cart (talk) 08:46, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Even putting the unsharpness and CA in the background aside, this is just too static a composition to be an FP for me. Daniel Case (talk) 03:51, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Laurier Quebec mall, Québec city.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2018 at 23:21:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Laurier Quebec mall, Québec city
✓  Done Please add more examples. --The Photographer 00:30, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
I found two more :) --Podzemnik (talk) 00:49, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
✓  Done Thanks --The Photographer 01:04, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose I've changed the FP category as this is Places/Interiors, not Architecture/Cityscapes. The overall scene is too dark, and don't think people walking round the mall would experience it that gloomy. I appreciate it is hard to handle the exposure range here, but many of our FP interiors do. The eye catches the central monitor advertisement, which is blown. You can see from the top two revisions of File:King's Cross Western Concourse.jpg that even a single exposure DSLR photo can recover that sort of brightness. The EXIF aperture f/2.8 and the relatively low resolution for a stitch makes me suspect this was taken with a mobile phone? If so, well done, but I don't think the quality reaches the standards for Places/Interiors at FP. -- Colin (talk) 07:40, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment Podzemnik and User:Dllu please can you apply any Notes using the tool on this FP candidate page and not directly on the file page. See Commons talk:Featured picture candidates#Notes on a photo, Help:Gadget-ImageAnnotator#Local annotations and Commons:Image annotations. -- Colin (talk) 07:40, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
I can't has more quality of it because it was taken using a cheaper Chinese very compact camera Yi. --The Photographer 11:01, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
@Colin Right, sorry for that, I deleted my notes. --Podzemnik (talk) 13:02, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg  Neutral The issues Colin identified need to be addressed. Daniel Case (talk) 03:26, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment - I'd like to be able to support. Can you make edits that deal with at least some of his points? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:17, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • @Colin: IMHO has a dslr camera not should be a requeriment in FPC, it's allready a formal Quality Image on commons. I don't underestand, objectively, FPC quality requeriments --The Photographer 02:34, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • We're judging the image, not the camera. Cart takes FP's with a 1"-sensor compact camera all the time, but the tiny sensor in most compact and phone cameras will struggle to compete at FP -- I think we have a few that were taken outdoors in great light. FP is for the "finest on Commons" and the Places/Interiors category is full of technically very fine photos, many of which are super sharp and detailed and also handle the dynamic range seen in interiors. You wouldn't expect such a camera to compete at FP for macro or bird photography either. -- Colin (talk) 06:28, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment - I'm impressed with this photo, but you do have a lot of tough competition in the interiors category, so why don't you tweak the photo so that there is no longer a blown area, for example. And was the mall actually brighter in general? If it was, you could work on that, too, right? Anyway, looking for an objective set of criteria that automatically result in passing at FPC doesn't work when "wow" is one of them, and I think you would agree. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:37, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Petr Lexa 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2018 at 19:55:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Petr Lexa with Czech pop band in 03. 06. 2018.
Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment @KTC: Should be fixed now … --El Grafo (talk) 07:19, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Not extraordinary, e.g. the mouth of the frontman is covered by the microphone, view upwards, etc. Also not the best moment, as he is not singing. --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:31, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Uoaei1, not a good perspective, nothing impressive about the scene (lights, movement, set, expression). --Trougnouf (talk) 15:39, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per others. A good photo to include in the montage on the back of the album, but not an FP. Daniel Case (talk) 03:24, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Slza 03.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2018 at 19:55:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Czech pop band in 03. 06. 2018.
Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment I moved the page and I changed the file. --Patriccck (talk) 06:36, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose not impressive. ~Moheen (keep talking) 11:30, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Moheen. The face of the frontman is covered by the microphone, etc. --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:33, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Uoaei1, and the perspective is way off. --Trougnouf (talk) 15:45, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Trougnouf. Daniel Case (talk) 02:45, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Blücher-Denkmal Bebelplatz 1961.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2018 at 19:30:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Monument to Prussian field marshal Blücher, Berlin, Germany, 1961, with WWII damages still to be seen.
  • Ahem Peulle, the building in the background is part of the historical context of when the statue was dissembled and the building was a ruin. It's an iconic photo from the days of the Cold War in which the "de-throned" man from the statue looks at the ruined city. Please compare with more recent photos in Category:Blücher-Denkmal (Berlin) where it looks very different. --Cart (talk) 21:06, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
I know it's part of the image but it's terribly rendered. That would be fine if it was just a background feature but it's not.--Peulle (talk) 09:21, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
Well, it's a film photo and you can't expect the same quality for that as with digital photos, even if this was made by a large(r) format camera (negative 6 x 6 cm, imagine a sensor that size...). --Cart (talk) 09:56, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
6x6cm is medium format Face-grin.svg --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:48, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
Ooops! Face-blush.svg --Cart (talk) 16:44, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
6x6 should have very high resolution, even if it is an old photo. High quality 6x6 films easily resolve over 100 megapixels of detail [1]. Even for 1960 film I think it's still possible to get better quality. I think the problem here is with low quality scanning and digital postprocessing. dllu (t,c) 22:09, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Good point there about the scanner. Most normal film scanners are just made for normal 35 mm film, a 60 x 60 mm would require something else. The scanning function on a printer with scanner would not be enough. --Cart (talk) 12:17, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
I did use a flatbed scanner with a dedicated 6x6 negative holder, but I hat no interest in getting a 100 MB file, so I chose a lower resolution than technically possible. And no, probably there wouldn‘t have been a gain in quality. --Till (talk) 05:03, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
It can sometimes be advisable to do the scan at maximum, post-process it like that and then downsize it for publication. We did that when we scanned old glass plates at a museum and found out that was the best way to get it as sharp as possible. --Cart (talk) 09:30, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Excellent composition. --Cart (talk) 21:06, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support  --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 23:47, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:45, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:58, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Quality too poor. Charles (talk) 20:26, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:45, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --XRay talk 04:33, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support but it is necessary to furnish a better description of the image (in german and in english) than the one given by the uploader. --Harlock81 (talk) 11:16, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
I enhanced the descriptions. --Till (talk) 14:10, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Purple rain on roof.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2018 at 17:27:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Purple rain on roof
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Storms
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The rain came down very hard on a black roof, so my first thought was to just do this in B&W. But then the idea about making this in another monochrome color popped up, and there is really only one other color suited for rain. ;) The filter used was set to the shade that the Pantone Color Institute developed in honor of Prince. I have no idea if using other monochrome filter goes against the rules of FPC in some way, guess we're about to find out. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 17:27, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Cart (talk) 17:27, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support - I enjoy this. And of course it has an obligatory soundtrack... -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:03, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment Nice, but educational value? Yann (talk) 18:29, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment I think this discussion has popped up so many times (even on one of your own noms) that we should know it by now, but here goes: Educational value is not a requirement for FP, see FP General rules # 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.". If you look though the PTOY categories, you will find a lot of just artistic images. --Cart (talk) 18:41, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Not suitable for WM, OK, but yet some educational value is a requirement for FP. So Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Yann (talk) 20:29, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Yann: Well, I could argue that there is probably some article that could use a photo of falling rain or that it could illustrate the color mentioned in the file description or a photo article about different filters or to illustrate monochrome images. There are several places where it could have educational value if you insist on an FP needing such, I just didn't think I would have to bring it up since it isn't an issue per previous discussion mentioned above. As long as you have some imagination, there are always articles where a photo can be used. --Cart (talk) 20:40, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • All photos on Commons must have some educational value, otherwise you should open a DR. I do think educational value is a quality we look for at FP, along with technical and artistic qualities. (The requirements mention we seek "valuable pictures" more than just pretty pictures, and this is an educational media repository, so I think it is fairly obvious what we should value). A photo with all three is a winner and a photo that is deficient in one of them inclines one towards negative voting. We all differ in our judgement of these three qualities and having wow in one of them can compensate. What isn't a requirement for FP is encyclopaedic value, which implies the image would be useful to illustrate the lead of an article at Wikipedia, or that the image is itself must be a source of encyclopaedic information. Instead, I think a wide variety of images can be used as illustrations on educational articles, as Cart notes, with a bit of imagination.
However, I do think the meta use of an image to illustrate just that style of photography or processing is the weakest argument for educational purpose. For example, I believe File:Bluebells ICM, Ashridge Estate, 2015.jpg has educational use beyond merely illustrating Intentional camera movement. Another example are the POTY 1st and 3rd prize winning photos File:Glühwendel brennt durch.jpg and File:Glühlampe explodiert.jpg. The former is not used on en Wiki at all, and the latter only to illustrate high speed flash photography. Yet people, including Yann, support these eye-candy photos, and the whole wiki community thought they were the very very finest featured images for two years running. Neither of those light bulb photos illustrates anything realistic, just the artistic imagination and technical talent of the photographer. -- Colin (talk) 08:13, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
To me, these 2 pictures of light bulbs illustrate chemical and/or physical properties. Yes, the setup is artificial, but the result has high educational value to me. Cart's picture is nice, but colored that way, I don't see any EV. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:03, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
So natural or black and white are OK and have EV, but no other colors? Then how about photos like this, no EV? Or sepia or cyanotypes? I'm just trying to find out where the boundaries are. --Cart (talk) 14:18, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
For old images, I always think that black and white is better than sepia, but other disagree. There is an obvious educational value in coloring the Ebola virus, but I don't know the technical details of electronic micro-photography. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:59, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for explaining your standpoint on this. --Cart (talk) 17:27, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
I think Yann it might be helpful to be less black & white (ha!) about saying there isn't "any EV". I can appreciate that colour toning an image is (a) not to everyone's taste and (b) can limit its usefulness vs a neutral tone. This image assumes people want or are happy with using a purple rain image vs original coloured or neutral b&w where they could apply processing themselves. At least Cart did upload the colour original. We've all seen how someone can wreck a perfectly good photo with too much HDR or sliding the Highlights to -100 or Clarity to +100, etc. The result might rarely be appropriate for some illustration and be tasteful to some people, but not many. So I respect your claim that the processing here may limit the EV, but think it is hard to claim there isn't any EV at all. -- Colin (talk) 20:35, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  SupportEve Teschlemacher (talk) 20:59, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Extraordinary and WOW! -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:46, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Mmm ... purple. Daniel Case (talk) 04:51, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support  :-) --XRay talk 05:39, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg  Neutral I'd actually prefer the original shot... I like these spotty yellow leaves on the grey surface --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:57, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Rain. Mood. Pop culture reference. Certainly could illustrate an educational article. Well executed and simple composition. -- Colin (talk) 08:13, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 14:47, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Brave nomination. --Podzemnik (talk) 15:19, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per supporters. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:34, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per Colin and Podzemnik -- P999 (talk) 16:19, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:57, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg  Neutral I prefer the original version for the exact same raison as Martin. But still an unconditional fan of Cart images. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:43, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Face-blush.svg Thanks! The original is not bad at all and I totally respect yours and Martin's votes. But like so many times, I want to try out new things and see where they lead me/us. At least all versions are there for anyone to use freely and that is most important. Btw, the yellow dots are not leaves but lichen as it says in the text. --Cart (talk) 17:56, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose I cannot see that this meets FP criteria. Charles (talk) 20:27, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • No worries, a nom of my photos wouldn't be complete without an 'o' from you, Charles. :) --Cart (talk) 20:34, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Charles, you are expected to give a reason or reasons -- Colin (talk) 20:37, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Don't bother Colin, I'm used to this and I'm sure Charles can come up with something. --Cart (talk) 20:41, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • "Featured pictures are images from highly skilled photographers and illustrators that the Wikimedia Commons community has chosen as some of the highest quality on the site." As this is an image that does not not reflect reality then it is submitted as an artistic creation 'of the highest quality' and I don't think this is. I will continue to oppose any images that in my opinion do no favours to the Commons FP project. I think it is important that FP images would be rated by those not in our community as being outstanding in their genre, whether it is landscape, interiors, wildlife, sports or whatever. Artistic images have their place of course, but the artistic barrier needs to be as high as the technical barrier is for most nominations. We should make every effort not to devalue the FP award, but it is unfortunately very difficult to guarantee objective voting when many of the voters are also nominators. Perhaps we should be forbidden from voting when we have a live nomination? Would that work for everyone? See talk page. Charles (talk) 21:18, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Are you saying that my photos are devaluing the FP award? --Cart (talk) 21:30, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Alternative - original[edit]

Hard rain on a roof.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Before tensions get any higher here, it might be a good idea to offer the original as an alt. Anything to keep it mellow. --Cart (talk) 21:47, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Cart (talk) 21:47, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Jee 02:40, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support - I support this version, too. I find poetry in it. Not every FP has to hit you over the head with how specially decorated it is or whatever. Beauty also lies in simplicity, when done right. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:04, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:25, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Cart has a great eye for patterns, but for some reason, I don't feel totally comfortable looking at this picture. The picture seems imbalanced and the composition seems haphazard... the strong diagonal lines are neither parallel patterns, nor do they converge in a meaningful way. The raindrops seem to be distributed nonuniformly, with fewer around the bottom-right-most line. The depth of field seems insufficient, leading to only a narrow horizontal band that is sharp; but the out-of-focus areas aren't blurry enough to become an artistic bokeh either. Ultimately the eye wanders around the image looking for detail and is left unsatisfied. As a final straw on the camel: among the yellow particles are scattered throughout the image (which are fine), there's a particularly large clump on the left, visible at thumbnail size, which draws too much attention to itself. dllu (t,c) 06:08, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I think dllu's comment sums up the problem with photographing rain very well. When you shoot rain, the weather is always bad. A bit self-evident, but you have bad light and you are dealing with raindrops that are very small and you need detail, so you are left with a narrow selection of ISO and DoF. To get this many splashes in the 1/125 sec (0.008) you have as your timeframe, it must really come down. You might think a normal rain will do but I've tried that and at best you get about 5-7 splashes in the area of your frame. The sound when this rain hit the roof was deafening(!), and it didn't fall uniformly but moved with the wind. Personally, I don't think the non-uniform pattern is a flaw. It makes it look natural, otherwise you could just bring out the garden hose. Rain is something that's available to most of us to photograph but there are reasons why we don't have that many good photos of it here. You can't predict or plan a rain photo unless you are a storm chaser. --Cart (talk) 08:37, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes, that is a really good photo, facing about the same problems as I had. I hope he had a waterproof casing for his camera! Even if I was standing in a window, I had to wrap my camera in a towel because of all the splatter. :) --Cart (talk) 09:46, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • The main difference between File:Falling rain in mexico.jpg and Cart's photo is that that photo tells a story with a human element. When a story/scene is sufficiently compelling, even the sloppiest opportunistic snapshot can be an FP. Cart's photo, however, relies entirely on interesting patterns/textures in my opinion, so I hold it at a higher bar for technical and execution quality. Now, I agree with Cart that it's incredibly difficult to take a good photo of natural phenomena like rain, and a lot of it does come down to luck. But certain factors, like focus, framing, and lighting, can be controlled. For the uneven distribution of raindrops, the easiest remedy is to take many, many photos in quick succession, and select the most aesthetic arrangement of raindrops (Cart may have already done this). Since this is an art project, stacking or compositing different frames may not be entirely out of the question either. Also, water droplets in the air against a dark background look really cool [2], but a lot of this can't be seen in this photo because the top half of the image is the same shade of light grey as incoming raindrops --- a problem which may be mitigated by a polarizing filter or directed artificial light for the raindrops. Another possibility is to take this photo from farther away and higher up using a longer focal length, so that the scene appears compressed, allowing us to focus on the texture when all straight lines are nearly parallel and all raindrops are nearly the same size. Conversely, we can also take the photo from close up at a low angle, to isolate a single row of raindrops while rendering other droplets as artistic blurry blobs. We can also use a tilt lens or a camera that supports Scheimpflug movements to get the ground plane entirely in focus. The possibilities are endless, and heavy rain isn't exactly rare (try the monsoon season in Singapore) so I think it should be possible to achieve better execution. dllu (t,c) 09:59, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I agree totally with what you say (yes, I took and have taken many, many unpublished photos of rain, this is the best so far) and that the possibilities are endless, but in the end it comes down to just one thing: Actually doing it and publish it here. --Cart (talk) 10:16, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment Prefer the processed one. It has more pop, and some of the rain streaks are enhanced. -- Colin (talk) 07:21, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Yann (talk) 11:36, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Milseburg (talk) 13:27, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Kuritiba muralo.jpeg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2018 at 13:55:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Street art mural in Curitiba, Brazil
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#Brazil
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by NMaia - uploaded by NMaia - nominated by NMaia -- ~nmaia d 13:55, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- ~nmaia d 13:55, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, Does not meet Quality Image criteria by far. --A.Savin 14:36, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Patriccck (talk) 15:45, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per A.Savin. You might want to read COM:PT for some guidance about how an image is made to be up to FP level. --Cart (talk) 17:18, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per A.Savin. -- KTC (talk) 17:42, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose This is not one of the finest images on Commons. Not by a long shot.--Peulle (talk) 17:55, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Of its low quality, as noted in the above opposes. Daniel Case (talk) 04:51, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Daniel Case: You can't add FPX if there are more than one support votes. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:23, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per others. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:35, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Insufficient quality, per A.Savin. --Trougnouf (talk) 15:56, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Obra de Teatro Don Quijote en el Teatro Teresa Carreño.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2018 at 00:09:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Obra de Teatro Don Quijote en el Teatro Teresa Carreño
To create the sentimental effect of solitude like if god is not there --The Photographer 10:53, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
With this explanation, I find it compelling, but without it, I didn't get it. So in order for me to support, I'd need for this explanation to be in the file's description. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:06, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Laura Fiorucci gracias a ti por permitirme tomar fotos de tu obra. --The Photographer 22:52, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support I like the starkness. Daniel Case (talk) 04:48, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support And please do not crop the photograph. --XRay talk 05:42, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support after some consideration... but yes! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:43, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per Martin. It seems that after a while, your eyes adjust to the darkness. ;) Cart (talk) 19:47, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Very interesting shot, but the quality for the darker characters is off-putting. And too much black for my taste. Charles (talk) 20:30, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
Non static scene, in a low light condition interior and a Nikon D300. Of course it has noise, IMHOW aceptable. --The Photographer 22:08, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Cordillera de Alaska desde Tok, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-29, DD 16-19 PAN.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Jun 2018 at 21:31:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Alaska Range from Tok, Alaska, United States.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Alaska Range from Tok, Alaska, United States. All by me, Poco2 21:31, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Poco2 21:31, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment Beautiful picture, but it seems to be curving downwards towards the right of the image. dllu (t,c) 22:51, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
    dllu: I'm not sure what you mean. I was not parallel to the shore, so the right side is closer than the left side from the position I took the picture. I checked the tilt and looks fine to me sure. Could you add a note, please?Poco2 20:42, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • If we look at the tallest mountain peak (which seems very far away, effectively at infinity), then the distance from the peak to the top of the image is longer than the distance from the peak's reflection to the bottom of the image. It seems this can be fixed by rotating the image 0.4 degrees counterclockwise around the middle of the left edge. dllu (t,c) 21:03, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Whatever, it's not a huge deal. Maybe it's an optical illusion. dllu (t,c) 06:30, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • dllu: Finally I applied a slight tilt along with other minor improvements (crop, WB, curves) Poco2 09:18, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I would like to, but I'm concerned people might find the two photos too similar. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:55, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • That one is quite nice, but its sky is blown out. I like this picture much better. dllu (t,c) 21:03, 13 June 2018 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Tower in Uptown, Saanich, British Columbia, Canada 05.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Jun 2018 at 19:56:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. Just another tower you know. -- Podzemnik (talk) 19:56, 12 June 2018 (UTC) The hexagon-shaped tower is on top of an elevetar going down to underground garages in Uptown, Saanich, Canada. The whole structure can be foound here. --Podzemnik (talk) 20:26, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment The image is cool enough for me to support, but I'd want a bit more info - specifically about what building the tower is on. "Just another tower" isn't accurate enough for FP.--Peulle (talk) 20:16, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
    • You're right, sorry for that. I just read a comment like "just another view of a tower from the bottom" in other old FPC candidate :) I've added the description. --Podzemnik (talk) 20:26, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Peulle (talk) 09:00, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Of course! Face-smile.svg -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:29, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support - I think I'd like a little more room on the bottom, but that's a beautiful tower and very well photographed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:38, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
    Alright, I gave it a bit more space on the bottom. --Podzemnik (talk) 15:25, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment The photo seems to be oversharpened with a bright edge around every dark object, and the effect is visible both at full size and at thumbnail size (this seems to be the case with all your night photos). I would recommend not using the "clarity" slider too much for this type of photo, as artifacts from that slider are particularly obvious against the smooth sky. I am also not sure about the composition. It seems to be not quite centered, but not sufficiently off-center for an interesting asymmetric composition. dllu (t,c) 08:12, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
Thank you dllu, what's you're saying is really valuable to me. I actually don't use the clarity almost at all but yes, the bright edge was caused by using too much of sharpening. It seems like night photos don't handle as much sharpening as day photos. And yeah, the composition was somewhere in the middle - I tried to give it a bit more space. Do you think it's better? And thanks again for your comment, I'm basically starting with a night photography and every advice is welcome. --Podzemnik (talk) 15:25, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Patriccck (talk) 10:49, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Llez (talk) 11:43, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Weird angle doesn't add anything for me (I like this one better), and the subject itself, while perhaps interestingly decorated, doesn't have any wow for me. Sorry. Storkk (talk) 12:27, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
    No worries, thank you for the vote anyway. --Podzemnik (talk) 15:25, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support While the other image looks pretty cool too, if the creator thinks more of this one it's good enough that I will defer to his judgement. Daniel Case (talk) 20:26, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Weak support For me the interplay of the blue and yellow and black gives me a Wow feeling every time, which finally trumped concerns about the angle. —Eve Teschlemacher (talk) 21:07, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 14:48, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --XRay talk 04:39, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:10, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Templo Yanasen, Ayutthaya, Tailandia, 2013-08-23, DD 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Jun 2018 at 15:55:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Yanasen Temple, Ayutthaya, Thailand.
  • Thanks for the ping. No change in my vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:23, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose lighting. Charles (talk) 21:59, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose as per Charles and Ikan. Yann (talk) 23:36, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Charles and Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 18:22, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Eastern black-and-white colobus (Colobus guereza matschiei) head.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Jun 2018 at 10:37:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Eastern black-and-white colobus (Colobus guereza matschiei)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 10:37, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Charles (talk) 10:37, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Simply great! -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 14:40, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support This reminds me to somebody I know --Uoaei1 (talk) 15:04, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment Color noise on white wool, especially on the neck. Fixable? -- George Chernilevsky talk 15:23, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Sorry, having seen File:Abyssinian black-and-white colobus (Colobus guereza guereza) male head.jpg, I think the dull light here with the resulting blue WB plus color noise and lack of detail in some parts, makes this not measuring up to FP. The light blobs in the background are also a bit disturbing. --Cart (talk) 15:51, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose as per Cart. Yann (talk) 23:34, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 17:32, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support - I do think the other photo is better, mainly in my view because of the background. However, I love this monkey's facial expression, and that's sufficient for me to support. If you'd like to go some distance toward addressing the others' objections, that would probably only improve the photo, but it's good enough to get my support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:06, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 15:55, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Common blue butterfly (Polyommatus icarus) male underside.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Jun 2018 at 10:18:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Common blue butterfly (Polyommatus icarus) male

File:Baker Beach 2.jpg (delist)[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2018 at 22:55:43
SHORT DESCRIPTION


File:Cleistocactus strausii (70387).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2018 at 22:49:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wooly torch cactus
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Cactaceae
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Cleistocactus strausii is a "wooly torch" cactus, with dark red flowers that jut out horizontally. One of the things I like about this one is the sharpness (unavoidable pun) of the spines. Also, as a bonus, I have never seen a cactus look so much like a bird. :) all by — Rhododendrites talk |  22:49, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- — Rhododendrites talk |  22:49, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Ha! I said "I have never seen a cactus look so much like a bird." Looking at the FP category, I see that in 2013 we have promoted another picture of the same species with some [rather creepy] birdlike qualities! I see in that one there was a suggestion to brighten it. We will see if that is echoed here -- brightening is definitely possible, although the brighter it is the more detail will be lost at the base of the spines. — Rhododendrites talk |  22:56, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Lighting is very flat, resemblance to bird is mildly amusing but composition is not Wow. -- Eve Teschlemacher (talk) 05:41, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose as above. Charles (talk) 09:09, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment This is one of those cases when you could experiment with using a fill-in forced flash (if you have one) on one or two photos. Try it sometime, if the ambient light is this good, you will not get harsh shadows. I'm always amazed how subtle such a flash can be even if it feels like it lights up the whole room. --Cart (talk) 11:29, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • This I do not understand. I look at the image that was featured and does look to have been taken with a flash, and I see less detail/clarity than in this one, and I have a hard time imagining how a flash would be an improvement. Maybe I've just never used a good flash or known how to use one. New version uploaded - I just went back and brightened the subject in Lightroom and uploaded a new version. Presumably this is not what's being recommended here? If not, could someone link to a good example of a white subject made clearer using a flash? — Rhododendrites talk |  14:08, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • You have a flash used in this, this and I used a flash directly on the birch in this. These are some that I could come up with right away, there are probably more/better examples out there. I think flashes are more in sync with cameras these days. Using a flash is a new tool in your camera box, it takes a bit getting used to as do all new photo things. :) Not so long ago you had no idea about CA or stacking, and look at you now! :) I thought I'd plant this seed in your curious mind. --Cart (talk) 16:03, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks. I do need to experiment with it more, it's true. In this case, I remain mystified how this is preferable to the current image, and skeptical (glibly, likely) that a flash would produce something preferable to simply amplifying existing light in post-processing. If the tastes of FPC are such that the other image is deemed superior, then it is a standard I'm not inclined to aspire to, for better or worse. — Rhododendrites talk |  19:14, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • As far as the specimen goes, yours is way better. :) The think a flash could have done for you here, is put a bit if sparkle in the needles and bring out the definition of the green/grey/brown plant texture of the cactus skin. It would also have lifted the shadow where the "beak" joins the main plant and made the red a bit more prominent. --Cart (talk) 14:47, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support You so want to pet it, but you wouldn't ... Daniel Case (talk) 01:47, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Patriccck (talk) 10:52, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

File:A wedge on a newly constructed support for preassure tanks 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2018 at 19:54:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A wedge on a newly constructed support for preassure tanks
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Tools
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Still life with shadow play, my way. ;) C, u, n, -- Cart (talk) 19:54, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Cart (talk) 19:54, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose For me, not an FP composition. Charles (talk) 22:12, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support I almost expected this nom. With pictures like this one it's not always easy to see the veeery thin line between something all too banal and something really interesting. For me, this image works for two reasons: a) the lighting (side light) b) the careful composition (especially the diagonals). --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:23, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Not to mention that the golden evening light and the resulting blue shadows gives it more than 'fifty shades of grey'. Face-wink.svg --Cart (talk) 10:12, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Per Martin. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 09:52, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Not really special for me. Yann (talk) 10:04, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support I understand that this image is not for everyone but it works for me. Composition, colors and lights are smooth and calming even though the materials are all cold. --Podzemnik (talk) 16:49, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per Martin. --Basotxerri (talk) 16:57, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support I like the lines, the abstraction, and the textures. Daniel Case (talk) 18:57, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Sorry, this image is not talking to me Poco2 20:39, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose A bit confusing.--Ermell (talk) 21:22, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose I kind of see the ceci n'est pas une cale idea, but it still doesn't quite seem special enough. dllu (t,c) 21:33, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support - I've been on the fence about whether it's special enough, but I guess I think it is. Nice still life per nom. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:56, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Kokořín, tunel pod hradem.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2018 at 16:01:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kokořín Tunnel in the Czech Republic
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Aktron – uploaded by Aktron – nominated by Draceane — Draceane talkcontrib. 16:01, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 16:01, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose - Very nice motif, but I'd suggest cropping out the bit of staircase on the right, and the light could be better. I'm also slightly bugged by the highlight in the upper center. I might be willing to reconsider if the crop is made and there is a little work done on the sky. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:46, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Karelj (talk) 21:07, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose As per Ikan Kekek. I would change my vote if current picture is cropped. Gnosis (talk) 21:22, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Conditional support on cropping the stair out. Daniel Case (talk) 14:35, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose The curve is cropped and my eyes want to see the entire road. --Basotxerri (talk) 16:55, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Patriccck (talk) 10:53, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

File:20180610 FIFA Friendly Match Austria vs. Brazil Miranda 850 0051.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2018 at 05:59:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

João Miranda header
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Granada - uploaded by Granada - nominated by Granada -- Granada (talk) 05:59, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Finally a real sports photo again. João Miranda squeezing the ball while heading it back to the playfield. Granada (talk) 05:59, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Great team. Super match. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:08, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose super match is not an argument. Too poor quality for a FI for me. Olivier LPB (talk) 07:55, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose I want more sharpness on the Brazilian since he's the main subject. Here it looks like the focus was on the player on the right.--Peulle (talk) 10:00, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Great sport picture. --Yann (talk) 10:05, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
The nomination was withdrawn, dude ... :P --Peulle (talk) 12:41, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
Sometimes a post-withdraw support can prompt a user to re-open the nom. Such votes serves a purpose, dude. --Cart (talk) 13:20, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
I am not sure if it would be a good idea to reopen this nom. After closing I've uploaded a downscaled Version as I am stil convinced that it is a good shot hit in the perfect moment despite some missing sharpness. --Granada (talk) 13:34, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment - I would support the original nom, if you'd like to unwithdraw it. I find it an exciting shot and a good composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:39, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Isiwal (talk) 22:03, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support More sports/activity photos, please. Jee 01:51, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment Granada, please don't upload a downsampled version over the original version. As per Commons:Image guidelines, "Images should not be downsampled (sized down) in order to appear of better quality. Downsampling reduces the amount of information stored in the image file." Even if the picture is slightly soft (e.g. due to moving subjects), just ignore the pixel-peeping haters. dllu (t,c) 08:16, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Patriccck (talk) 10:54, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support As long as both the original and downsampled versions are present and available, which they are, I don't really care in which order they are uploaded. They exist on the file's page. I suspect Granada might be sick and tired of all comments and discussions about size vs sports photos and all, yet again. ;) --Cart (talk) 18:20, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose As Peulle Charles (talk) 20:34, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 09:05, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Pride NYC 2017 (51839).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2018 at 05:15:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A man in the NYC Pride Parade in 2017
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events (Arts, concerts, shows...)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info June is LGBT Pride Month, commemorating the Stonewall Riots, and I find myself looking through pictures from last year's parade in New York City. I keep coming back to this guy, doing his own thing by himself in the parade, facing up into the sun with this jubilant and unselfconscious expression that seems to fit the occasion really well. One of those images where I really don't know if others will think it worthy of FP, but if I'm going to nominate it, this is the month to do it. all by — Rhododendrites talk |  05:15, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- — Rhododendrites talk |  05:15, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment The subject itself is great, but the background is pretty busy and a bit distracting. That's of course difficult to avoid in a parade … I'll have to think about this for a bit. Just wanted to let you know that apparently one of your edits removed the EXIF data from the file (the first version still has it) --El Grafo (talk) 07:31, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks. For some reason Lightroom retains EXIF but as soon as I put it through Photoshop it disappears. I'll restore it manually. — Rhododendrites talk |  14:35, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • ✓  Done Looks like by using Photoshop's "Export" command I was stripping EXIF (and also reducing dpi!). Using the standard "save as" fixed it. — Rhododendrites talk |  15:08, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support I agree with you, this guy sticks in your mind with the pride and energy he exudes. Subject is sufficiently isolated from the background and since you spot more of the parade, he is placed in context. Otherwise he might look like a lone nut-job. --Cart (talk) 09:34, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per Cart. He stands out from the crowd to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:25, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Granada (talk) 14:12, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Composition not FP for me. Charles (talk) 14:53, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Per Charles. — Draceane talkcontrib. 16:13, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment Fortunately, « ridiculous does not kill », as we say in french.--Jebulon (talk) 19:31, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Nice atmosphere... --Karelj (talk) 21:09, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:41, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Cart's got a point there … --El Grafo (talk) 08:43, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Not special enough for me. Yann (talk) 10:06, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per others --Uoaei1 (talk) 15:00, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Yann --George Chernilevsky talk 15:25, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Per others.--Ermell (talk) 21:23, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose --Patriccck (talk) 10:54, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Maarja Nuut Viljandi folgil 2016.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2018 at 00:51:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Singer Maarja Nuut at Viljandi Folk Music Festival (2016)
✓  Done Kruusamägi (talk) 20:54, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose This darkness just does not work for me. --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:15, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support - Really striking image. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:22, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment Can you add English descritpion please. Like who is it and where at least. Thank you! --Podzemnik (talk) 14:12, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:52, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support nice creative touch...Atsme 📞 16:47, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Personality rights template shall protect which person?--Ermell (talk) 19:50, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Since the person is identified by name and her performance is probably recognizable to her friends, family and fans, it is right to add the template. "Better safe than sorry". --Cart (talk) 20:02, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Panoramic view of Estaing 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Jun 2018 at 23:03:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of Estaing, Aveyron, France
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#France
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Tournasol7 - uploaded by Tournasol7 - nominated by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 23:03, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Tournasol7 (talk) 23:03, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support great view! A tiny perspective correction might improve the image even further - there's also a hint of CA. But fine for me anyway --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:41, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per Martin --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:11, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • For me it seems there is a slight upward curve on the "horizon" line (which you obviously can't see because of the hills). However it is visible on the buildings vertical lines which are leaning slightly outwards from the image, especially on the right side of the picture. It's a good panoramic however. --Ximonic (talk) 10:55, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 16:12, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Wall bottom right is off-putting. Charles (talk) 22:15, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:19, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 08:22, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Llez (talk) 10:45, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 18:40, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Patriccck (talk) 10:54, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment per Charlesjsharp, I think cropping off the bottom ~11% would be significantly better. Storkk (talk) 12:32, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Golden Gate Bridge and San Francisco skyline from Hawk Hill at Blue Hour dllu.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Jun 2018 at 22:23:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Golden Gate Bridge as seen from Hawk Hill
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg  Comment I think the softness comes from strong wind causing the tripod to vibrate a little bit. There may also be some heat distortion due to the atmosphere, which I saw in a photo a few hours earlier with a 200mm lens. dllu (t,c) 17:24, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Ruine Aggstein 20180527.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Jun 2018 at 13:10:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Castle ruins of Aggstein, Wachau, Lower Austria
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Excellent work.--Ermell (talk) 21:20, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Beautiful, excellent! -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 22:17, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Captivating, I would like to go there ! Tournasol7 (talk) 23:06, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Nice castle, but too much shadows & too harsh contrast, a pity. --A.Savin 02:08, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 05:26, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Exceptional quality, very nice composition! Light condition could be a little better where I understand the point made out by A.Savin. However, for me the other things make me go for a support. --Ximonic (talk) 11:01, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support A bit hazy in the very distant background but outstanding nearby.--Milseburg (talk) 12:14, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Overcomes the haze by being so big and detailed. Daniel Case (talk) 16:38, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per others. Beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:01, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Per others. Nice one --Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 08:21, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg  Neutral Because of the shadows -- Llez (talk) 10:43, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:57, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Plaza Mayor de Santa Ana, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, May 2018.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Jun 2018 at 16:32:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Plaza Mayor de Santa Ana and City Hall, Las Palmas de Gran Canaria
IMHO composition is centered, not remarcable main subject, btw, tilt --The Photographer 18:15, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose I think the composition is fine, but the light is a bit flat, a bit dull. Not very exciting. --Peulle (talk) 18:02, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Perhaps even threatening clouds thicken slightly.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:10, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support The hills with all the houses, looking very much like some crazy piles of LEGO, make the picture. :) Different, fresh. --Cart (talk) 18:33, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose dull light. Charles (talk) 21:19, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support I like. Not sure it would have been better with sunny weather (sun = shadows). --A.Savin 21:48, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:40, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per Alex. The sky looks very much like ours in this Monsoon season! :) Jee 03:02, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:05, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose - Very drab, doesn't excite me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:44, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Nice view and good quality, but I agree with Ikan. In the picture there is some dynamic thank to the perspective but I'd tried to emphasize that with a wider angle view in order to have the feeling that I'm surrounded by those 2 rows of houses. Poco2 08:15, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Addressing the issues mentioned above, I've tried to increase clarity and brightness of the image's lower half (the city). The lighting should be less drab now. As far as a wider angle is concerned, well, I'd have preferred a bit more space on both sides as well, but some protruding elements of the church's facade (i.e. ugly stones) prevented me from getting any - pinging: The Photographer, Peulle, Famberhorst, Cart, Charles, A.Savin, Michielverbeek, Jee, Johann Jaritz, Ikan Kekek, Poco2 --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:13, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Still not for me. Charles (talk) 20:44, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • The main issue to me is the perspective, I would have enjoyed it from a lower point of view, not sure whether just pitching down the camera would have made it. Poco2 16:35, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Sorry. The weather is not a problem (clouds are nice), but I think we have too much sky and not enough plaza (Composition issue). Not a bad picture, but not FP for me.--Jebulon (talk) 15:21, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose per Peulle. Daniel Case (talk) 05:24, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per Alex. Empty bue sky could also be dull. --Milseburg (talk) 12:11, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Per Peulle. --Karelj (talk) 21:13, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose I would prefer lower camera angle to get more of the plaza. Lighting is flat. Nothing particularly special to merit FP status. —Eve Teschlemacher (talk) 06:12, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Bissendorf - Schelenburg - Wasserschloss -BT- 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Jun 2018 at 08:26:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Water castle Schelenburg. Bissendorf, Lower Saxony, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. -- Basotxerri (talk) 08:26, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Basotxerri (talk) 08:26, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support -- Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 12:42, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Shadow. Yann (talk) 12:43, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support the shadow can't be avoided and adds some drama to the composition. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:06, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Left tree shadow distracting --The Photographer 16:32, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose as above. Charles (talk) 21:20, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support Per Martin. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:03, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose - I don't agree with blanket opposition to shadows, but this one distracts me, as does the tree, which partially blocks the castle. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:59, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg  Support per Martin. Daniel Case (talk) 01:23, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg  Oppose Sorry, I think it's a decent picture. But I agree about the shadows. Not just that they are there but I think the shadows gain too much attention from the subject. This view would benefit from slight HDR process I suppose. The shadows would not be too dark. --Ximonic (talk) 11:06, 11 June 2018 (UTC)


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]

Wed 13 Jun → Mon 18 Jun
Thu 14 Jun → Tue 19 Jun
Fri 15 Jun → Wed 20 Jun
Sat 16 Jun → Thu 21 Jun
Sun 17 Jun → Fri 22 Jun
Mon 18 Jun → Sat 23 Jun

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

Sat 09 Jun → Mon 18 Jun
Sun 10 Jun → Tue 19 Jun
Mon 11 Jun → Wed 20 Jun
Tue 12 Jun → Thu 21 Jun
Wed 13 Jun → Fri 22 Jun
Thu 14 Jun → Sat 23 Jun
Fri 15 Jun → Sun 24 Jun
Sat 16 Jun → Mon 25 Jun
Sun 17 Jun → Tue 26 Jun
Mon 18 Jun → Wed 27 Jun

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). 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 {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
      • If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
      • If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessments template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
      • Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
      • The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
      • You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
    • Add == FP promotion ==
      {{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.
    • Add on the file page its respective categories for Featured pictures of... like Category:Featured pictures of objects, Category:Featured pictures of landscapes, of people, of Germany, of Paris, etc. This is the only part of the process that needs a human user 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/June 2018), 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/June 2018.
  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.
  5. If this is a Delist and Replace, the delisting and promotion must both be done manually. To do the promotion, follow the steps in the above section. Note that the assessment tag on the file page and the promotion tag on the nominator's talk page won't pick up the /replace subpage that these nominations use.

Archiving a withdrawn nomination[edit]

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    In the purpose that the FPCbot will not mark withdrawn nominations with a "to be reviewed" template and put them in Category:Featured picture candidates awaiting closure review just like if they were on the usual list, put the following "no" template:
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=X|oppose=X|neutral=X|featured=no|category=|sig=--~~~~}}
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    becomes
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], not featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. Open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/June 2018), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.