Commons:Featured picture candidates

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

Featured picture candidates


FPCandiateicon.svg

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

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

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

Formal things[edit]

Nominating[edit]

Guidelines for nominators[edit]

Please read the complete guidelines before nominating.

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

  • Licensing - Images licensed with solely "GFDL" or "GFDL and an NC-only license" are not acceptable due the restrictions placed on re-use by these licenses.
  • ResolutionImages (with the exception of animations, videos, and SVGs) of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are 'strong mitigating reasons'. Note that a 1600 × 1200 image has 1.92 Mpx, just less than the 2 million level. A 1920 × 1080 image, commonly known as Full HD, has 2.07 Mpx, just more than the 2 million level.
Graphics on Commons are not only viewed on conventional computer screens. They may be used in high-resolution print versions, and the images may be cropped to focus on portions of the image. See Commons:Why we need high resolution media for more information.
  • Scans – While not official policy, Help:Scanning provides advice on the preparation of various types of images that may be useful.
  • General quality – pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality.
  • Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer. Digital manipulation for the purpose of correcting flaws in an image is generally acceptable, provided it is limited, well-done, and not intended to deceive.
    • For photographs, typical acceptable manipulations include cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and colour/exposure correction. More extensive manipulations, such as removal of distracting background elements, should be clearly described in the image text, by means of the {{Retouched picture}} template. Undescribed or mis-described manipulations which cause the main subject to be misrepresented are never acceptable.
    • For historic images, acceptable manipulations might include digitally fixing rips, removal of stains, cleanup of dirt, and, for mass-produced artworks such as engravings, removal of flaws inherent to the particular reproduction, such as over-inking. Careful colour adjustments may be used to bring out the original work from the signs of ageing, though care should be taken to restore a natural appearance. The original artistic intent should be considered when deciding whether it is appropriate to make a change. Edits to historic material should be documented in detail within the file description, and an unedited version should be uploaded and cross linked for comparison.
  • Valueour main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that:
    • almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others,
    • night-shots are pretty but normally more details can be shown on pictures taken at daytime,
    • beautiful does not always mean valuable.


Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Photographs

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

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

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

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

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

Video and audio

Set nominations

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

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

Adding a new nomination[edit]

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

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

All single files:

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


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



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

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

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

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

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

Voting[edit]

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

You may use following templates:

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

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

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

Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:

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

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

Featured picture delisting candidates[edit]

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

Featured picture candidate policy[edit]

General rules[edit]

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

Featuring and delisting rules[edit]

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

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

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

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

Above all, be polite[edit]

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

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

See also[edit]

Table of contents[edit]

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

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

Contents

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

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Vista desde Julio Andrade, Provincia de Carchi, Ecuador, 2015-07-21, DD 38-40 PAN.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2015 at 16:31:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of the fields seen from the location of Julio Andrade, Carchi Province, Ecuador.

File:Münster, Prinzipalmarkt -- 2014 -- 4502.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2015 at 16:30:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Long Room Interior, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2015 at 21:41:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Long Room Interior, Trinity College Dublin, Ireland - Diliff.jpg
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Benh (talk) 21:41, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not sure what David was waiting before nominating here. A beautiful place beautifully grabbed. -- Benh (talk) 21:41, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    • Ha, I only uploaded it a week ago and am in France at the moment (not a photographic trip, just here for a wedding and won't have a chance to catch up with you, unfortunately), so I didn't have a chance. Thanks for the nomination though, it's one of my favourites and I had been waiting patiently for Wiki Loves Monuments to come around before uploading it. Diliff (talk) 12:43, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support Great interior of library! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:50, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Obviously, a great picture of a great place. Yann (talk) 22:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I can´t say nothing more than the others. --Kameraprojekt Graz 2015 (talk) 00:43, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:27, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Book pr0n. --Code (talk) 05:04, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 06:34, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 06:42, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:13, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Outstanding. --Laitche (talk) 08:53, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 09:04, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- KTC (talk) 10:03, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A couple of books for your next vacations! --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:59, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:34, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Diliff (talk) 12:43, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wow, indeed. --Cayambe (talk) 13:39, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

LEI0190 188 Leica Standard Chrom Sn. 24429 1937 -38-M39 Front view-5809 hf.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2015 at 21:39:22 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by Kameraprojekt Graz 2015 -- Kameraprojekt Graz 2015 (talk) 21:39, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Every picture is made with focus bracketing and -stacking (between 15 and 23 single shots).
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kameraprojekt Graz 2015 (talk) 21:39, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg weak oppose Here I find the reflections really distracting and annoying because they are very visible but cut. Maybe because of the whiter background. - Benh (talk) 21:46, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Benh thanks for the hint, indeed, it was a wrong layer with too hard edges. Please have another look now. --Kameraprojekt Graz 2015 (talk) 00:39, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 22:51, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 06:43, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:35, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Inward shadow isnt good, should go outward. Can be fixed without reshoting. Now strong choped shadow is also distracting. Side view and front view can be shown in one, also other two if isometric projection would be used and better angle. No need for 4 photos. 2 would do. --Mile (talk) 13:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There are no shadows, Mile. What you see is the mirroring on a white glass plate. --Hubertl 14:23, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:41, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Wooden building, 7 Cité du Midi, Paris 1 September 2015.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2015 at 21:03:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Flowers in front of the Palm House, Kew Gardens.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2015 at 20:02:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A front view of the Palm House at Kew Gardens showing the flowers planted in front
It was kind of a big display, big enough that only a panorama (which I wasn't set up to make) would have done it full justice. I couldn't get any lower without losing the perspective at the bottom, hence the apparent cropped corner. Daniel Case (talk) 02:18, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
As for the geotag, ✓ Done. Daniel Case (talk) 02:22, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment both side are leaning out, purple CAs at left and right --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:24, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
New version uploaded; I have tried to address both issues. Daniel Case (talk) 05:52, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose oversaturated red flowers, composition and light are not outstanding. --Ivar (talk) 06:49, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ivar. --Laitche (talk) 09:08, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The angle perhaps is a bit unusual. Otherwise it's a nice photo of a great institution. --Tremonist (talk) 12:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Dülmen, Kirchspiel, Karthaus, Kriegerdenkmal -- 2015 -- 5349.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2015 at 18:53:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

War memorial in the hamlet Weddern, Kirchspiel, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
@Yann: This is called subject bokeh, so that's reverse blurred part is a subject (not background). It's one of bokeh's technique. Here you are. But I think this bokeh is too much and the subject is too small in this frame :) --Laitche (talk) 01:21, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
However, the hamlet is also the subject in this case... --Laitche (talk) 10:36, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice blurred background. --Ralf Roleček 10:52, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks interesting, XRay. --Tremonist (talk) 12:38, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Rometsch lawrence2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2015 at 10:36:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rometsch lawrence
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Palauenc05 - nominated by Σπάρτακος -- Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:36, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:36, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good photo of a beautiful car. It's parked somewhere in the meadows? --Tremonist (talk) 12:26, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 13:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice subject but distracting reflections and the background, sorry. --Laitche (talk) 14:12, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    • @Laitche: "distracting reflections of the background", maybe ?--Jebulon (talk) 15:27, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
      • @Jebulon: Yes, of and and, also building in the hood (bonnet), other cars in the hubcaps are distracting too, Regards. --Laitche (talk) 15:38, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
        • Ah ok. Thanks for answer. I personaly don't find it so disturbing.--Jebulon (talk) 16:06, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
          • @Jebulon: BTW, what about the red and white truck of this photo (in the reflection), nothing disturbing? :) --Laitche (talk) 16:50, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
            • Why this question ? No, not so disturbing. I suppose reflections on sheet metal of vehicles are almost unavoidable... But I'm not very interested by cars, and completely ignorant in this matter.--Jebulon (talk) 16:59, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
              • @Jebulon: Thanks, just wanted to know others opinion :) --Laitche (talk) 17:15, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose IMHO the background ruins it.--Jean-Éric Poclain (talk) 15:30, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. Exploringlife (talk) 16:45, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fine with me --Ivar (talk) 17:37, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A very good photo of a very rare care -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 18:25, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not a very exciting lighting, and unfortunate setting. Not a fan of photos of cars taken at short to moderate focal lengths. - Benh (talk) 19:41, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. Nothing wrong with how the car itself is photographed; it's definitely a QI. However, the background does it in ... it almost fades into the dark area underneath, and the chaotic patterns of the nature around it are undeniably distracting from the vehicle's classic lines and contours. Daniel Case (talk) 20:06, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the background is ok to me. But wide-angle and too high position of photographer. QI ok but in my eyes not FP. --Ralf Roleček 10:55, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Russian Imperial Family 1911.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2015 at 08:19:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nicholas II of Russia with the family (left to right): Olga, Maria, Nicholas II, Alexandra Fyodorovna, Anastasia, Alexei, and Tatiana. Livadiya, 1913. Portrait by the Levitsky Studio, Livadiya. Today the original photograph is held at the Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg, Russia.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Boasson and Eggler St. Petersburg Nevsky 24 - uploaded by Michael Romanov - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:19, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:19, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great document. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 08:36, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 08:37, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A bit noisy, but it may still be OK. There are a few spots and scratches to remove before being promoted (see notes). Regards, Yann (talk) 08:57, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    I am aware of the spots and scratches but the problem is that removing them may harm the originality of the photograph.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:29, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    I don't think there is any need to keep such defects. I remove such spots and scratches from old pictures all the time. I can help, if you like. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:43, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    If you think it would be better to remove them, your help is welcome. Best regards.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:01, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    The texture in background have been gone with bad restoring, I think that's the serious problem more than spots and scratches. If there is the original, start from the original would be better :) --Laitche (talk) 15:19, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    Of, but where is the source? Regards, Yann (talk) 20:47, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    I would say that the original one was taken from here.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 22:30, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    Certainly not from this small thumbnail. Yann (talk) 22:57, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    I meant if the high resolution original exist, that would be better to start restoration from the original... --Laitche (talk) 01:44, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 10:22, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:40, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:19, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. A very unique photo document. --Michael Romanov (talk) 13:25, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good and....unfortunate family --LivioAndronico (talk) 13:46, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Sdobnikov A. (talk) 14:15, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support FP-worthy. --Laitche (talk) 14:27, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Per Yann. I can help too. Too many spots and scratches everywhere. Don't worry about the restoration and the loss of quality: the photo was already restored before publication ! (the the left upper corner) ! Anyway, something very better is possible. This nomination is a very good idea, btw I love Tatiana Nicolaievna, she is really pretty and beautiful...--Jebulon (talk) 15:37, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Needs restoration, but it's beautifuly taken (framing, pose, lighting), and the artifacts don't really stand in the way when looking at it. Curious if anyone familiar with early 1900s photographic process could tell how long the people had to stay still. Quite a feat IMO. - Benh (talk) 19:52, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Iconic historic image; restoration certainly welcome but this is in fairly good condition already. Daniel Case (talk) 02:25, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 05:11, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

File:St. Stephan, Würzburg, Nave from Matroneum 20150814 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2015 at 06:25:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. Stephan, Würzburg
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info c/u/n by me, DXR (talk) 06:25, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yay, it's WLM time... Here is one of my favorites of the work I did in August. To me, the church is rather interesting because it is old, but actually has a very modern feel to it. Shot from the location of the organ, the rectangular nave becomes a bit tunnel-like, just to end in a more typical choir. The bottom crop was a bit tricky (there is no natural place to put it due to a missing second break in rows). I'm looking forward to your comments. -- DXR (talk) 06:25, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support more than useful. Very fine work! --Hubertl 07:08, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very interesting view. --Code (talk) 07:36, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--ArildV (talk) 08:36, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:19, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Imposing view. Exploringlife (talk) 16:43, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:59, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice seeing one fit into a square (and with a mostly bright interior) for a change. I suppose it could be a little sharper, but frankly it's consistent throughout and I could see how you'd prefer to leave it this way instead of running the risk of oversharpening. Daniel Case (talk) 18:47, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 09:08, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 10:36, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:02, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Vana-Vigala mõisa viinavabrik 03.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2015 at 15:47:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vana-Vigala manor distillery
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Kruusamägi (talk) 15:47, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 15:47, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • WeakSymbol support vote.svg Support Playing with light and shadow is quite interesting. The effect is nice, even though minor quality problems (respective to sharpness e. g.) are visible. --Tremonist (talk) 12:22, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow for me. Too much going on for any play with light and shadow to be noticeable. Daniel Case (talk) 16:45, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Dome of cappella sacripante in Sant'Ignazio (Rome) HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2015 at 15:19:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dome of cappella sacripante in Sant'Ignazio (Rome) HDR
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by LivioAndronico (talk) 15:19, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LivioAndronico (talk) 15:19, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 18:50, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The wow makes it, the quality is improveable. --Hubertl 19:53, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:30, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Livio, I'm going to be rough, but you need to learn how to process pictures. I'm trying my best to give you advices, and I know that language is a barrier between us (english is not a natural language for any of us). This picture has wow, but has obvious CA. I personally can spend several days on a picture alone, just to remove artifacts, so while I don't mean that I set standard, IMO you should make some efforts. CA is easy fix in LR which has the calibration for your camera + body. You're just a checkbox away from a much cleaner work. Again, you don't really need to constantly have two active noms, and should take a little more time in processing your pictures. On the other nom, which I'm about to look at the RAWs, it should be a matter of playing with WB slider only. Back to this picture, it's also too dark. And while the ray is definitely a central part of the composition, the paintings are as important and should be exposed properly (and not cut in the corners) . - Benh (talk) 21:58, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Remove CA,anyway If a photo you do not like (to you or others) put your vote and that's fine. Do not make me the lecture, I have two pictures in FP? If the rules allow it,I do it. Do You must give me your advice? No. Maybe your advice not believe them interesting or useful. So put your vote and not make a Dramma. Thank you. --LivioAndronico (talk) 22:35, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • It really upsets me that you take it that way. All I want is you're autonomous. Given your throughput, you can't seriously expect someone to process pictures for you most time. And what upsets me even more is that all issues I find on your picture are easy fixes which makes me feel you're only after FP stars and not actually improving your pictures. I'm not the only one to have warned you. Now if you don't want the discuss, I can play it that way too. - Benh (talk) 23:00, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Maybe it's a job for you while for me is just for fun. That's all --LivioAndronico (talk) 23:35, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose IMO, this kind of picture should be perfectly centered, this is not the case. A FP candidate should be seriously categorized, this is not the case. It should be geocoded too... I don't hesitate to support when I'm convinced, but without any drama, it is not possible here. Maybe next time ?--Jebulon (talk) 23:02, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I have genuine image-based reasons, but I'm not going to waste my time typing them in only to get insults back. -- Colin (talk) 07:08, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment If LivioAndronico wants continue participating here, here can start by apologizing to Benh. Further such rudeness and I shall be asking for him to be permanently banned from FPC. This is a forum where real human beings participate, not some online game collecting tokens. Many editors have given image taking/processing advice and many editors have spent time helping LivioAndronico process his images and earn him FP stars. Yet those editors are insulted and get upset. I don't believe that image contributions should excuse bad behaviour to the point where the community turns a blind eye. This has become a persistent pattern, and no user should have to put up with this kind of abuse by another user who is just here "for fun" and not to engage respectfully with others, make friends and learn. -- Colin (talk) 07:08, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Sure, and you have a lot of friends here. I have not insulted anyone and therefore I make no apologies. It's not that you have to accept the advice if you do not find interesting or useful! Anyway go ahead ...--LivioAndronico (talk) 07:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Benh. And I also have to agree with Colin in every word he says above. --Code (talk) 07:44, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:40, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It is impressive, even if there were some tiny flaws. The light beams come in nicely. --Tremonist (talk) 12:16, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think the light beams are minus factor in this angle. --Laitche (talk) 14:45, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:20, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Since it seems to be agreed that the crepuscular rays (something we do not get in many church ceiling shots) are the real subject of the image, I'm OK with the lack of centeredness and the uneven exposure (which could be a lot worse). Daniel Case (talk) 18:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks Daniel, at least someone understood my picture, now I'm happy--LivioAndronico (talk) 18:55, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Bombus cryptarum - Solidago virgaurea - Keila.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2015 at 07:14:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cryptic bumblebee
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Cryptic bumblebee on the european goldenrod, all by Ivar (talk) 07:14, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 07:14, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Unusual position. Unsharp areas (the animal's legs for instance). --Tremonist (talk) 13:49, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support now. --Tremonist (talk) 12:14, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info new version uploaded. --Ivar (talk) 16:02, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 18:52, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Bzzzzzzz… 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:31, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I really love your very technical comments, Arionestar...Smile--Jebulon (talk) 17:04, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alex Florstein (talk) 21:34, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:40, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but I just don't find it an interesting composition ... too cluttered. It also seems like the WB is off, and some of the petals at left seem overexposed. Daniel Case (talk) 16:44, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but I feel that the WB is too warm --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:25, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment perhaps it is a little too warm, but golden hour was already approaching. --Ivar (talk) 11:44, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Jaguar head shot-edit2.jpg[edit]

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

Jaguar headshot
  • I think that the jaguar is doing an impression of Jalexander-WMF as he's about to eat a sockpuppet for dinner. --Pine 07:01, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

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

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

Spot-winged Glider (Pantala hymenaea), Cerro Brujo, San Cristobal Island, Galapagos island, Ecuador. The common name in English is due to the 2 spots on the wings near to the body.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Odonata
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Spot-winged Glider (Pantala hymenaea), Cerro Brujo, San Cristobal Island, Galapagos island, Ecuador. The common name in English is due to the 2 spots on the wings near to the body. All by me, Poco2 18:17, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 18:17, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Damsels annual season in FPC Clin--Jebulon (talk) 21:26, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Great details and excellent background but body and lower part of the head are in shadow plus this pose is not attractive for this subject, imho. --Laitche (talk) 23:25, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Can be Tramea calverti or it's siblings; waiting for confirmation. :) Jee 03:48, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • It is a Tramea sp. female; that's all, Asian experts can say. You need to consult an expert who knows South American species. Jee 05:10, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
@Jee:I think your comment is not reply to my opinion, so I've arranged your comment. It's ok? --Laitche (talk) 07:49, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
It was not a reply; but there is "some inspiration" which trigger my anxiety to research. A Pantala will not perch/pose this way. :) Jee 07:57, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
@Jee:I suspected the pose thing but seems the comment was insufficient words :) --Laitche (talk) 08:14, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Scene is attractive enough to my mind. Shadows are neglectable. --Tremonist (talk) 13:34, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great detail. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:32, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support on aesthetics alone. Great interplay of shapes and lines, on top of nice bokeh. Daniel Case (talk) 01:58, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Procedural Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose until ID is confirmed. Jee 02:13, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    Jee: I'm not sure how to proced here. I suggested that it is Pantala hymenaea and you suggested that it is Tramea calverti. As far as I can see you can find both in the Galapagos.[1] [2] I cannot say which one is it. If you suggest it is Tramea, then I can change the naming, you are an expert in comparison to me. Or should be wait for someone, or rather ping someone, who can confirm it? Poco2 21:29, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
    It is a pity ID please is not initiated so far. I made a request at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Insects. Jee 01:24, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
    I have also asked here. Poco2 16:42, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lacks wow: the awkward angle of the insect detracts from any beauty of its shape and colour.--Fotoriety (talk) 06:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For Fotoriety --Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:26, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

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

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

Kettbach at the street "Strandbadweg" near Hausdülmen, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 15:51, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 15:51, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 16:23, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral nur ein Tipp: bei solchen Bildern ertrinkt der Blick sofort, er geht unter: es fehlt ein Vordergrundelement, ein Ast, eine Ente, ein paar Blätter, irgend etwas ... Grüße, --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:20, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • You've basically right. There was just nothing as an element in the foreground except a bridge railing. That looks not good.--XRay talk 17:35, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support I might under other circumstances be bothered by the blown area around the sun, but it seems that steps had been taken to reduce it, and it doesn't distract from the perspective in any event. (BTW, why the FoP notice? What's in the image that could require it?) Daniel Case (talk) 23:05, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 01:12, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 09:42, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For this kind of photo, I want this level of composition, colors and the sharpness :) --Laitche (talk) 11:29, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 13:32, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Maybe I'm mad...but I love the composition --LivioAndronico (talk) 15:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 18:56, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For Laitche --Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition looks unbalanced to me, maybe a tighter crop on the bottom would improve it. The image also looks a bit too dark. --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:05, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Tikjda Main du juive.jpg[edit]

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

One of Djurdjura summits.

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

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

Two columns of the Temple of Zeus Olympian
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 10:22, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Two columns of the Temple of Zeus Olympian, evening light, Athens, Greece. ...and the Pica pica-- Jebulon (talk) 10:22, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like this photo.--Vikoula5 (talk) 10:56, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Mountain looks awful noisy, like it was taken with a DP/S. Plus the cropped tree on the left is awkward and distracting. Daniel Case (talk) 04:15, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • We must not look at the same picture, I don't see any... unless you are talking about the bushes/trees on the hill?? - Benh (talk) 06:42, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
See that black scrape on the lower left side. Daniel Case (talk) 23:00, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Still don't get what you mean. Now it's on the tower? Anyways, my point was that there's no noise, and if some discern any because they have lynx like sight or whatever, it's certainly not awful noisy. - Benh (talk) 19:46, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jebulon, I like it. --Tremonist (talk) 13:53, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
    • Thank you. So do I too. Smile--Jebulon (talk) 17:03, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Composition could be better (maybe more colums), but good for me. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:05, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

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

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

SHORT DESCRIPTION

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SHORT DESCRIPTION
All by -- CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 19:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 19:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 02:38, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:40, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I am sympathetic to the problem of shooting large buildings and not being able to get far back. The result is often an extreme wide-angle view with enhanced perspective and distortions. Here the two hoops are a give-away and the top one is almost at 45-degree angle, whereas it should be horizontal. File:DITIB-Zentralmoschee Köln - April 2015-7493.jpg from across the road has much less distortion and shows the second minaret (?) but then there is more street furniture and there are more trees in the way. The front face of the building is also in shade, and the stone (concrete?) is a bit utilitarian. -- Colin (talk) 09:15, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 17:31, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin --El Grafo (talk) 08:36, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 09:35, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin. And resolution could be higher, the sign can't be read. The containers on the left are distracting. --Tremonist (talk) 14:00, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A bit tight of a framing. But beautiful building! - Benh (talk) 14:43, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alex Florstein (talk) 21:36, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin. --Laitche (talk) 14:07, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin etc.--Jean-Éric Poclain (talk) 15:26, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

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

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

Church of the Assumption in Nowa Bystrzyca

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

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

Rhinocypha bisignata

File:TAXI.jpg[edit]

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

TAXI in night traffic.
  • I cant see any. Put note. --Mile (talk) 08:08, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • This is not a "party", this is a series of support votes ! --Jebulon (talk) 09:06, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting. Jee 05:26, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose I'm not sure that's a posterization or not but "A" is spoiling this calm mood. (I know that is light source but too bright.) --Laitche (talk) 09:11, 1 September 2015 (UTC) Symbol support vote.svg Support New version. --Laitche (talk) 09:59, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 09:37, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:04, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 15:33, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK now. --Yann (talk) 19:24, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Тајга (talk) 21:55, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:44, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kind of picture which can have many uses. Nicely done. - Benh (talk) 20:27, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Changed to oppose, based on poor cloning job. - Benh (talk) 20:29, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • back to support. The right edge of the "A" was already "broken". Sorry for being a bit too hasty in my comments. - Benh (talk) 20:31, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

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

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

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Hungarian Parliament building in Budapest. Created and uploaded by Andrew Shiva - nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 11:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 11:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition and lighting. I'm a bit surprised with the lack of details in the dark areas, it's more "smeary" than anything else. And the highlights are also a bit clipped. Not enough to spoil it! - Benh (talk) 17:20, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great picture and an impressive camera gear. --Code (talk) 04:46, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as Code --Hubertl 06:36, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Great! --Brateevsky {talk} 09:35, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - thanks for the nom...--Godot13 (talk) 15:57, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great lights, not a typical photo of the Hungarian Parliament. Einstein2 (talk) 18:32, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support The clipped lights are not a deal-breaker given their overall size in the picture. Daniel Case (talk) 22:59, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 09:37, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There are much better light options for parliament. Even in daylight. When I saw EXIF, I see this could be in much better quality. Medium format used at f/6.3 in panorama mode is a bit small even for APS-C sensor, regarding both, lens and sensor (diffraction disc). Looking for sweet spot of lens I saw they are amazing 4000 eur ...but I got it - f/8. So two stops too far. Then I checked how many pixles has this model, first I met the price again 4-5000 eur. Its 40 MPx. From my mind, I guess you are at least some 5 stops to far, perhaps 10 would be more close. That's why also the qualiy is not there as it should be. Automatic programe on 10.000 eur camera ? --Mile (talk) 10:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
    • Thanks for your comments Mile. If I wanted to take a typical night shot, then I wouldn't have waited until dawn to take it.--Godot13 (talk) 22:54, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:06, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon (talk) 17:02, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:17, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

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

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

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Guaratiba morning.jpg[edit]

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

Early morning on whaling coast, Bahia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Jonathan Wilkins (edited by Poco a poco) - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:24, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:24, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I could imagine a bit less processing, but given what Paco had to work with I think he did the best he could. Daniel Case (talk) 01:47, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Case. --King of ♠ 07:15, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Wonderful composition. Sorry, but IMO it needs more sharpness. --XRay talk 09:14, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per XRay. I find some palmtrees too dark (no details)...--Jebulon (talk) 11:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good for me. Yann (talk) 21:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice composition and the light but not enough sharp and too much green CAs. --Laitche (talk) 09:03, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Daniel and Yann. --Tremonist (talk) 14:08, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Тајга (talk) 23:07, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:17, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ταπυροι (گپ) 12:14, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

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

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

Mealt Waterfall with Kilt Rock, Isle of Skye.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The waterfall from Loch Mealt on the Isle of Skye falls 55 metres to the sea. Behind is Kilt Rock, 90 metres tall, so-called because the combination of basalt columns upon a sandstone base resembles a kilt. All by Colin -- Colin (talk) 17:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support High resolution photo of two notable natural features of Skye. The viewpoint is the very edge of the cliff nearby, and there is no better vantage point on land. -- Colin (talk) 17:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support WOooooooOW! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:51, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 18:14, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose So good while in thumb but when opened some huge portion on left side is out of focus. Makes some 20 % of photo area, too much. --Mile (talk) 19:31, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Mile, more like 12.5% is the near-by grass, and many photos contain far more featureless sky. In the distance, you can see the Isle of Lewis some 25 miles away, and the rocks below the waterfall are quite lovely. -- Colin (talk) 21:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment So its 12,5 %. What is the purpose of being Feautered then ? Simple push on touchscreen on that area and all would be solved, since is stitched anyway. Shouldn't Feautered wannabe photo deliver at least some minimal technical advantage ? Building megapixles shouldn't move that margin. --Mile (talk) 07:26, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
    • You must not know other cameras than your Olympus then ;) (They don't all focus with a tap on screen). And not "all would be solved", it's likely distant objects would be out of focus. But I think settings are not optimal and maybe a better focus point could have been chosen to achieve en:Hyperfocal_distance. - Benh (talk) 07:44, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
      • Benh, I agree using f/8 could have improved the in-focus area a bit, and the point of focus seems to be a little further than I intended. The grass does come really close so I suspect I wouldn't get it sharp enough to satisfy. The bokeh is rather busy, so perhaps a different lens would render it more pleasingly. At the end of the day, the grass is not the subject, which is in focus. I'm leaning as far as I safely can out from a metal barrier at the cliff edge, and it is 600 miles away by car, so that's all I've got. -- Colin (talk) 11:01, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
        • It's not the subject but it's close enough to be a little distraction IMO. But yes, I didn't mean "go back and reshot it" :) Just my review and advices for a next time (but I'm pretty sure you didn't really need them) - Benh (talk) 16:25, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per mile,maybe a crop --LivioAndronico (talk) 20:04, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
    • I think the reason the out-of-focus area appears large and obvious to you is the very 54MP high resolution so that at 100% the web browser shows only a tiny portion of the image. But please remember that when viewed at 100% on a 100dpi monitor, this image is 2.3 metres tall and 1.5 metres wide, which would run nearly the whole height of a UK standard sized domestic room. I hope that when looking at an image that big, you stand back a little and don't study the bottom left corner with your reading glasses on. Reduced 50% to 13.5MP the close-by grass isn't nearly such a large area on-screen when you view the bottom of the image. Reduced further to 6MP, say, and the area considered unsharp is very small indeed, and not at all unusual. A crop would unbalance the composition, for the sake of pixel peeping. -- Colin (talk) 20:23, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Yes 54MP actually are true, they are not convinced, then, I leave to others the judge Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral --LivioAndronico (talk) 20:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 20%? I opened it and mesure the out of focus area, I would have more say not more than 12% of a 54mpx image, so that stay a lot of good pixel. No doubt in the finest of Commons. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:03, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The out-of-focus areas are not too distracting IMO. --King of ♠ 07:17, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Remember: we are not judging Mile's opinion, but a picture...--Jebulon (talk) 11:24, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
    • True, Jebulon, but opinions have a habit of sticking to an FP once stated: "per XXX" often follows and is hard to shift, and less commonly the opposite happens if people reject the complaint. I'm happy for people to look critically, pre-informed of any potential issues, rather than a pile-on support that might not be warranted. I think it healthy to discuss a picture as well as any opinions made, provided things stay friendly. I don't think any of us believe we are experts at taking pictures or judging a picture, and the question of "what is a featured picture" is always up for discussion. I always think the audience for these pages is bigger than just the person who votes and the nominator -- so there are things others, lurking perhaps, can learn here such as avoiding having too much busy out-of-focus area or considering the use of hyperfocal distance to maximise the in-focus-areas. -- Colin (talk) 12:10, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
      • I agree, Colin. I just want to notice that very often, a "support" (or an "oppose") vote is due to the disagreement with the opinion (of the expression of the opinion) of another reviewer, not exactly aboit the picture by itself... It is a trap IMO. That's why I did not vote at first view, but only now. Let's wait, we get the time !--Jebulon (talk) 16:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose the issue for me is not just the size of the out-of-focus area, but because it's placement on the foreground and this is too distracting for me. Otherwise it's very nice. --Ivar (talk) 13:29, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Aside from irrelevant technical issues, everything is wow so it's FP, no question. --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 21:15, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose per Ivar. Daniel Case (talk) 03:18, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • I personally like to have control about how things render on pictures I take, unless I post them to Instagram or Facebook. Not a useless conversation IMO. - Benh (talk) 22:23, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as Moroder and Chr. Ferrer.--Hubertl 06:38, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I've been thinking about it. It's definitely impressive but I would rather have the single shot version promoted because of its bigger DOF. 18mpix is far more than enough for most uses, and there's still that one in case someone wants to cover a whole building with a poster. - Benh (talk) 06:54, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Benh, one issue with the single shot photo is that the slightly slower shutter has made the waterfall more of a continuous white flow, and I think it much better in the nomination. -- Colin (talk) 16:51, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
      • Fine with me. I'm one of those who like long exposure waterfall shots. But up to you. Let go this nom first and see then. - Benh (talk) 20:03, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Technical issues are never irrelevant, IMO, but aside from that, per Moroder Clin--Jebulon (talk) 16:35, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Ralf Roleček 09:39, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
    • Would you please explain why ?--Jebulon (talk) 17:05, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
      • The water is the main subject of this photo but i do not like ist. The Photo is in the most parts technically very good but the water is in parts sinmpe white, other parts are "not sharp, not typical water-unsharp". may be the exposure time ist to short. DOF is too short in left corner. --Ralf Roleček 18:23, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
        • Thanks for answer and explanations.--Jebulon (talk) 19:21, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:09, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For Mile --Σπάρτακος (talk) 10:44, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:30, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

A comparison, not for voting[edit]

Single frame at 18mm

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

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

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

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

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

Eurasian Roller (Coracias garrulus semenowi)

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

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

Asian Brown Flycatcher (Muscicapa dauurica)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Bernard Dupont - uploaded by Josve05a - nominated by Josve05a -- Josve05a (talk) 11:44, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Josve05a (talk) 11:44, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:12, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I was to oppose, but seeing EXIF its compact camera, wont mind some more noise. --Mile (talk) 17:06, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but background a little dark. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:37, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 18:17, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's really nice, but too much noise for me, sorry. --Ivar (talk) 07:30, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:12, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice framing and surprisingly good quality for a super-zoom bridge camera, but: 1) Sharpness is not that great. 2) Background could use some de-noising. 3) Flash usage produced some strange kind of blue-ish red-eye effect. That in combination with the centred catch light makes the bird look totally perplexed to me (reminds me of that flash-thingy they use in MIB). --El Grafo (talk) 08:01, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Red-eye effect, asian brown flycatchers have brown eyes and too noisy. --Laitche (talk) 13:22, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

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

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

The Church of the Society of Jesus (La Iglesia de la Compañía de Jesús) is a Jesuit church in Quito, Ecuador. The exterior doesn't give an idea of the beauty of the interior, with a large central nave, which is profusely decorated with gold leaf, gilded plaster and wood carvings, making of it the most ornate church in Quito. The temple is one of the most significant works of Spanish Baroque architecture in America and considered the most beautiful church in Ecuador. The pipe organ is located in the choir, over the main entrance, and is the second biggest pipe organ in Quito that is still working. The piece, used in special festivities, was built in the United States in 1889 and has 1104 tubes in total.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Church of the Society of Jesus (La Iglesia de la Compañía de Jesús) is a Jesuit church in Quito, Ecuador. The exterior doesn't give an idea of the beauty of the interior, with a large central nave, which is profusely decorated with gold leaf, gilded plaster and wood carvings, making of it the most ornate church in Quito. The temple is one of the most significant works of Spanish Baroque architecture in America and considered the most beautiful church in Ecuador. The pipe organ is located in the choir, over the main entrance, and is the second biggest pipe organ in Quito that is still working. The piece, used in special festivities, was built in the United States in 1889 and has 1104 tubes in total. Note: high quality images of this temple are rare as photograhs are strictly prohibited without a special permission of the authorities. All by me, Poco2 10:27, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 10:27, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 10:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support strongly. I know perfection is not of this world, but you are not very far from it, my friend. That's a big wow, if I may say. --Jebulon (talk) 10:57, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
    wow, coming from you, thank you! I've to say that I explictly performed this picture following the comments (of Benh and yours) of this other nomination. Commons does help! a lot! :) Poco2 11:02, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Isn't the ceiling a bit overexposed? But anyway, as Jebulon says. Yann (talk) 11:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great details. --Laitche (talk) 11:15, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent job... the more so as it is not that easy to take pictures in that church. Poco will understand me :-) --Cayambe (talk) 13:19, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
    Cayambe: As I stated above, and you remember, you usually cannot take any pictures in that church. I had to do some paperwork and convince some people to be able to use my camera. Poco2 13:40, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Oh sorry, I hadn't read your note above, having just looked at the image.--Cayambe (talk) 13:52, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Active corruption ? Smile What was the price ?--Jebulon (talk) 15:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Nothing wild, as said, paperwork and a friend of mine who is local and very persuasive :) Poco2 16:43, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
OK. Passive corruption then.--Jebulon (talk) 20:03, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 17:03, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:23, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another great pipe organ pic. And congratulations to Paco for making the extra effort! Daniel Case (talk) 01:39, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A triple PRO for your efforts. --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 02:45, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 12:27, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 12:34, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 14:09, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:09, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 06:39, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 09:39, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:13, 1 September 2015 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 11:05, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings

File:Hommikune udu Kakerdaja rabas.jpg, featured[edit]

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

Morning in Kakerdaja bog
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Abrget47j - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 10:21, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 10:21, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wonderful mood! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 10:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice mood. Could you remove the dustspots? --Laitche (talk) 11:13, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good one. --Mile (talk) 17:07, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but there is some CA in the upper left corner. --Code (talk) 17:14, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support I guess it's been fixed. So very painterly ... Daniel Case (talk) 19:13, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Picturesque. --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 02:53, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 07:17, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Subtle nice lighting and mood. Like a painting ! - Benh (talk) 08:04, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice. But: Please remove the CAs top left. --XRay talk 09:13, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Removed CAs in the upper left corner and uploaded new version. --Laitche (talk) 10:22, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 12:52, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:11, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 06:39, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request Please add a more detailed description and if possible a geo location. -- -donald- (talk) 07:10, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 07:25, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 09:44, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:14, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent mood. Great shot! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:59, 1 September 2015 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 11:03, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural

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

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

Frescos of Ignatius of Loyola HDR.jpg

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

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could you put alternative, the middle shot. I think HDR spoiled it. --Mile (talk) 17:14, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Why HDR for this? The dynamic range is not higher than it could be captured by a single shot, I guess - no windows, lamps or other bright areas. There are also some ghostly contours, see note. --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:29, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:08, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:15, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

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

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 20:01, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Would you mind if we to turn to panorama ? Pictures that are very tall looks so strange. --Mile (talk) 20:04, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Colors are more natural than in HDR. I like this more. --Mile (talk) 20:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Whatever. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:10, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Again, I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled? --Jebulon (talk) 20:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Much better. The ghostly contours are gone, and the colors also look better for me. --Uoaei1 (talk) 21:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support You can see the improvement in the thumbnails. Daniel Case (talk) 01:42, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, better. --Yann (talk) 11:50, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:12, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WP needs it very badly  ;-). But, please give a better file description. --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 21:21, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 06:40, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 07:26, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Also ok. --Tremonist (talk) 14:15, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

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

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

Observation tower on Góra Wszystkich Świętych
Symbol support vote.svg Support Love the the lines and the colors. Daniel Case (talk) 01:42, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • @Daniel Case: ✓ Done --Jacek Halicki (talk) 19:37, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Little wow to me. I'm not quite sure how you framed it: did you try to center it? Looked for rule of third line? Really looks like a quick snapshot to me. Also tilted. - Benh (talk) 08:07, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I did not found the words, now Benh helped me...--Jebulon (talk) 11:27, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 17:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 09:44, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as per Benh. Yann (talk) 10:35, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A good photo for me. --Tremonist (talk) 14:17, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alex Florstein (talk) 21:37, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Benh, lighting situation doesn't really convince me. --El Grafo (talk) 08:07, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Cicindela duponti in Kadavoor.jpg[edit]

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

Cicindela duponti
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jee - uploaded by Jee - nominated by Christian Ferrer --Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:37, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:37, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alex Florstein (talk) 07:50, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 08:42, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 08:53, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:15, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 10:19, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is a bit dark Poco2 11:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
    • I disagree. -- Colin (talk) 11:52, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
    • The actual lights here is more dull. Jee 12:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent. -- Colin (talk) 11:52, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:23, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 14:32, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 17:08, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Superb. --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 02:51, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Vengolis (talk) 04:55, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sorry Jee, but it's a weak support. It is a very good photo, but the editing isn't quite consummate IMO. I agree with Poco as you know. --Hockei (talk) 12:20, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Hockei Poco2 12:27, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 12:53, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 14:11, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:13, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 06:41, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:16, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Poco and Hockei: I just made a new edit using curves instead of brightness and contrast. Will revert if not better. Adding an O to avoid speedy promotion. Jee 03:42, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
    • New image looks fine. It is a lot cooler, as well as brighter. -- Colin (talk) 07:26, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
      • Agree, that was an improvement Poco2 15:47, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
    • Sorry, but I'm not really convinced. What I see is an increased contrast and changed colour or white balance. It looks colder and the black or dark brown parts are deeper or more black than before (e.g. between the feelers). The colour in the version before I find better. I just would brighten it a little bit, not more. (Just my opinion. SMirC-wink.svg) --Hockei (talk) 16:45, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Червоні карпатські гори.jpg[edit]

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

Carpathian Biosphere Reserve, Zakarpattia Oblast, Ukraine
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Carpathian Biosphere Reserve, Zakarpattia Oblast, Ukraine, created by Vian - uploaded by Vian - nominated by Christian Ferrer --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 07:42, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 07:55, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. --Yann (talk) 08:45, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great! --Laitche (talk) 09:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WOW --LivioAndronico (talk) 09:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Color banding in the sky, especially at left, and looks unnatural to me. This is discussible. But what is not is the following: please dear reviewers, be more careful in reviews, how can you support as FP such a picture, with at least 6 very visible dustspots in the sky ???? I'm afraid we need to be more serious in assessing, I recommend, for those who don't know, some stages at the QIC pages...--Jebulon (talk) 11:46, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Perhaps that banding is caused by jpeg compression, I can remove the banding with Photoshop but when save it as jpeg, the banding appear again. (Tiff is no problem.) --Laitche (talk) 13:54, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There is so big wow for me that I didn't noticed the little qualities issues, great and fp even with those qualities issues. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This kind of hemisphere-stratosphere border can be seen above 15-20 km, here original curve was moved so far to show up the banding, beside at least 3 smudges in the sky. Main oppose is : its not real. --Mile (talk) 17:01, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unnatural colors (sky), too pale. --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:32, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others; unnatural color. Daniel Case (talk) 19:00, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A pity… 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:36, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I removed many light dustspots and tried to minimize banding problem. Please check and revert, if it's not better. --Ivar (talk) 13:18, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 13:31, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
A real improvement, thank you very much Ivar --Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:53, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I support (although very weak) my suggested crop. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:49, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
I don't want to crop the work of an other photographer and I don't want an alternative too, thanks. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:46, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for a FP, the colors are not realistic enough. --Hubertl 06:42, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support die farben wirken unnatürlich und genau davon lebt das Bild. Gerade das gefällt mir. Es muß nicht immer alles realistisch sein, wir akzeptieren ja auch Panoramen und HDR. --Ralf Roleček 09:46, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Exactly the art of photography is a visual art. (genau die Kunst der fotografie ist eine visuelle kunst). Successful here. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:02, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love it! Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 12:11, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:18, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • I Symbol support vote.svg Support (although very very weak) due to majestic composition. Almost a painting! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:00, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

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

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

1898 poster, lithography, 67 x 49 cm.


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 10:57, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic media

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

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

Krafla power plant
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Industry
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Villy Fink Isaksen - nominated by Benh (talk) 20:53, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well if you don't nominate it again, I do. I love it. You could probably make it even stronger by tweaking clarity and recovering some details in the sky, but just my opinion. And it's already so good. -- Benh (talk) 20:53, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support thanks Benh. I have made some adjustments, and hope it is okay now. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 04:30, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:54, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 07:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice view. --Laitche (talk) 09:34, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Indeed. My pleasure to support, as (almost) promised...--Jebulon (talk) 11:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support And 7… 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:16, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 06:46, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:19, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 10:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 10:56, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Industry

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

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

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

File:WolayerSee.jpg[edit]

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

Nature reserve Wolayer See and surrounding area in Carinthia.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by GeKo15 - uploaded by GeKo15 - nominated by لا روسا.--لا روسا (talk) 18:45, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- لا روسا (talk) 18:32, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great scene, but overuse of polarizer is evident, resulting in an unevenly exposed sky, too dark in places. Daniel Case (talk) 18:52, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is also oversharpened Poco2 19:26, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't believe a polarizer was used. The variations don't have that pattern. And at f/13 and 1/250 sec, it would be darker (unless this was brightened afterwards of course, but I don't think either). Also high altitude = darker blues in the sky from my experience. But to get back to the point : the sky is posterized, generally screwed and has strange artifacts/blues halos at some edges with the mountains. The whole picture could be better processed. Nice scenery though...- Benh (talk) 20:37, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For me the posterization is not too bad. Agree with Benh, if the settings are accurate there's no way a polarizer was used. --King of ♠ 00:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Whatever. My point was that the sky looks unnatural for some reason. And what a shame given that it looks like a Yes album cover. Daniel Case (talk) 06:27, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Benh. I would like to see this image better processed. The posterisation may be due to the JPG being saved with ProPhotoRGB colour profile -- the 8-bit JPG format can't handle that profile without serious information loss. -- Colin (talk) 11:45, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. --Tremonist (talk) 14:24, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Calopteryx Splendens.jpg, featured[edit]

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

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Clément Bardot - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:03, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:03, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 11:05, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:05, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 15:20, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- KTC (talk) 15:42, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great capture Poco2 19:27, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love the irridescence on their legs. I love the bokeh. And I love most that, given what they're doing, the legs make a little heart shape. Daniel Case (talk) 19:52, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A bit of déjà vu but this one stands out with its better point of view and composition (lagging behind in quality but it's fine with me) - Benh (talk) 20:46, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Like this styles are the in thing among today's fashion-conscious odonata 💚 --Laitche (talk) 21:07, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:18, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:02, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The focus on female head is fine. There is slight alignment issue; so the male head is not that much sharp. A very good posture and these big damselflies are not very approachable. Jee 06:31, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 08:00, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:15, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Vengolis (talk) 04:56, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 06:47, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:00, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 08:14, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jean-Éric Poclain (talk) 15:24, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:19, 3 September 2015 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 10:54, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Arthropods

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

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

SHORT DESCRIPTION


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 10:52, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects

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

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

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

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

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

High pressure cleaning of pressure vessel parts.
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/People#People_at_work>
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by CEphoto, Uwe Aranas - nominated by El Grafo -- El Grafo (talk) 15:29, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Spotted at the recent Photo challenge. I know, that piece of wood in the lower left corner is a bit disturbing, but I think it's an awesome shot neverheless. -- El Grafo (talk) 15:29, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nothing is disturbing. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:06, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 16:35, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 17:18, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support Has a great gritty documentary quality to it. Daniel Case (talk) 17:53, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Strongly. The board in forground, and the overexpo back of the man are a pity, but they are very little flaws. This picture is absolutely wonderful for me. Many thanks for sharing it, Uwe !--Jebulon (talk) 20:13, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I reduced the highlights to cope with the bright back. Thanks for the hint, Jebulon! --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 15:31, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Well done ! I'm still enthousiastic.Thanks.--Jebulon (talk) 18:28, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
I agree, it's even better now. Pretty sure this will turn out to be one of my personal POTY finalists. Pleased to see others seem to like it as well! --El Grafo (talk) 18:47, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Jebulon. --Johann Jaritz (talk) Johann Jaritz 04:21, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Jebulon --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:22, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 09:19, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 09:36, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- GoMinU (talk) 11:00, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:12, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice pressure. --Laitche (talk) 11:26, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:10, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 17:08, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support one of everyday heroes --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 19:05, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support There is a lot of dynamic in there! Poco2 19:30, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Benh (talk) 20:48, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 06:33, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent documentary photography, very good.--ArildV (talk) 07:54, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 08:03, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow. Great capture! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:01, 1 September 2015 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 10:50, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: People

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

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

Grey heron, Osaka, Japan.


Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 10:48, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Birds

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

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

Unimog 405/UGN road-rail vehicle used in remodeling, renovation and modernization of Neunkirchen railwaystation in Austria.
Pictogram voting info.svg Info GoMinU, es freut mich, dass du an diesem Foto Gefallen gefunden und es ehrt mich, dass du dieses hier nominiert hast. Auch ich finde das Foto durchaus gelungen und auszeichnungswürdig, da die Maschine, die ich während des Arbeitseinsatzes (also in Bewegung) fotografiert habe, in für mich bestmöglicher Qualität abgebildet habe. Die dunklen Bereiche sind gut durchgezeichnet und alle Details der Maschine sind gut zu erkennen. Ich habe mir aber seit geraumer Zeit abgewöhnt, meine Bilder auf den Jahrmärkten QI oder FP zur allgemeinen Belustigung zur Schau zu stellen, da es manchen Benutzern Freude bereitet, mit "sachkundigen" Bemerkungen den Fotografen die Freude am Fotografieren zu verderben. Abgesehen davon, dass ich im Gegensatz zu Daniel Case keinen CA in der Oberleitung sehe, frage ich mich, ob sowas bei einem Foto, das die Maschine zeigen soll, von Bedeutung ist? Ähnliches gilt für die von XRay angemerkte "Überbelichtung". Auch hier frage ich mich, ob der höchst unwichtige Hintergrund, der sich nicht vermeiden lässt, oder die Maschine von Bedeutung ist. Vermutlich hätte man mit entsprechenden Bildbearbeitungsprogrammen und längerer Spielerei den Hintergrund etwas besser hinbekommen, frage mich jedoch ob das noch etwas mit dem eigentlichen Objekt (die Maschine), dem Fotografieren und der Leistung des Fotografen etwas zu tun hat? Daher, Hubertl, was macht dich so sicher, dass es "far away beeing FP" ist? Die Kandidatur kann daher gerne beendet werden. Die Kritiker können ja gerne bei google nach besseren Fotos dieses Spezialfahrzeugs mit aufgesetzter Schraubmaschine suchen... Schöne Grüße --Steindy (talk) 23:13, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Die Oberleitung ist lila. Ich bezweifle sehr, es ist, dass Farben in der Realität Face-smile.svg. Daniel Case (talk) 00:57, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Daniel Case wenn du die Oberleitung lila siehst, solltest du dringend deinen Monitor neu kalibrieren. Ich sehe nur helles blaugrau und habe diese Farbe soeben auch abgetastet. Und selbst wenn es lila, rotbrau oder rötlich wäre, wäre es korrekt, denn bekanntnlich besteht eine Oberleitung weltweit aus Kupfer und Kupfer ist bekanntlich rötlich. Wenn man also eine Kritik abgibt, so sollte diese aus Respekt vor dem Autor auch korrekt und nicht von persönlichem Glauben geprägt sein. Genau das habe ich zuvor ausgeführt und genau dies ist es, weshalb ich bei diesen Kasperle-Theater bei QI, FP oder VI nicht mehr mitmache. Zu deiner Ehre sei gesagt, dass du nicht der Erste bist, der ahnungslos ist und "solche CAs" sieht... Schönen Gruß --Steindy (talk) 19:23, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Die Meinungsverschiedenheiten über die Zertifizierungsstellen abweichend, es ist immer noch nur ein ganz gewöhnlicher Zusammensetzung. Daniel Case (talk) 01:50, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
From the composition and the quality of the object itself it is a valuable picture. Therefore QI and VI. But not the picture as a whole. But this is the requirement for FP. In my opinion - beside some repairable faults - it does not meet these requirements at all. I never disrepected your work, Steindy, and you know it! --Hubertl 08:10, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Hubertl, es ist mir durchaus bekannt, dass du meine Arbeiten anerkennst. Ich bleibe dennoch bei meiner Meinung, dass das Foto, das nichts anderes als den Zwei-Wege-Unimog samt aufgesetzter Schraubmaschine zeigen soll, in allen Details fein durchgezeichnet, scharf und von bestmöglicher Qualität ist. Oder gibt es daran etwas auszusetzen? Alles andere außer dem Gleis, auf dem die Schraubmuttern festgezogen werden, ist uninteressantes Beiwerk und die Position der Maschine, den Sonnenstand und das Wetter kann ich mir nicht aussuchen. Daher wäre es mir sogar lieber, wenn dieses Beiwerk noch deutlicher in den Hintergrund treten würde, was allerdings nicht möglich ist, da man sowas nicht in einem Lichtzelt fotografieren kann. Aber seis drum, ich lege ohnehin keinen Wert mehr darauf, ob eines meiner Bilder QI, FP oder auch VI ist. Was für mich zählt ist, dass dieses Foto ebenso wie einige andere vom Umbau des Bahnhofs Neunkirchen mit Handkuss für eine Publikation angefordert wurde. L.G. --Steindy (talk) 19:23, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Ich gehe da durchaus mit Hubertl d'accord. Meiner persönlichen Erfahrung über die letzten paar Jahre nach unterscheidet sich Commons FP in seiner Ausrichtung deutlich von z.B. KEB auf de.wp und FP auf en.wp. Ich denke dass liegt unter anderem daran, dass es mit VI und QI zwei weitere Auszeichnungsgrade gibt. Edukativer Nutzen spielt bei Commons FP tendenziell eine deutlich geringere Rolle als bei WP, schließlich gibt es dafür ja schon VI. Hohe Qualität allein reicht auch nicht aus, dafür gibt's QI. Commons FP muss sich von QI und VI absetzen, was dadurch erreicht wird dass man einen "WOW-Effekt" fordert (vgl. COM:IG). Der kann auf unterschiedlichste Art und Weise hervorgerufen werden und ist eine ziemlich subjektive Angelegenheit. Die Frage ob ein Foto unabhängig vom Inhalt als "Bild and sich" funktioniert hat hier bei Commons FP meiner Erfahrung nach einen viel wichtigeren Stellenwert als sonst irgendwo im Wikimedia-Universum (von den Photo challenges vielleicht mal abgesehen). Nach meinen ersten beiden erfolglosen Nominierungen (die bei Wikipedia beide vermutlich ganz gute Chancen gehabt hätten) habe ich mir nach längerer Beobachtung der FP-Kandidaten eine Faustregel zurechtgelegt. Ich frage mich: 1) Kann ich mir vorstellen, dass das Bild beim "Picture of the year" Wettbewerb eine halbwegs anständige Figur macht? 2) Kann ich mir vorstellen, dass jemand der keine besondere Beziehung zum dargestellten Gegenstand hat sich das Bild großformatig ausdruckt und eingerahmt im Wohnzimmer an die Wand hängt? Wenn die Antwort in Richtung "eher nicht" tendiert, nominiere ich nicht. Bisher hat das ganz gut geklappt.
TL;DR/english summary: Wow-factor is important at Commons FPC. --El Grafo (talk) 13:16, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, far away beeing FP. Did you ask Steindy before? --Hubertl 11:24, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Hubertl. QI for sure, very good pic of a hi-lo, but compositionally it's nothing special and the CA on the overhead lines in the background is not a good thing. Daniel Case (talk) 17:17, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry. IMO partial overexposed.--XRay talk 17:19, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

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

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

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

Spiral stairs.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Spiral stairs. All by --Mile (talk) 07:48, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mile (talk) 07:48, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 08:21, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice compo and light. --Laitche (talk) 10:51, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great dynamic, even when the light situation is not absolutely perfect and a bit unrealistic. --Hubertl 11:25, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:36, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:43, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support And 7 --LivioAndronico (talk) 13:02, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support I was going to weak-oppose but then I looked at the metadata and realized just how difficult this one must have been. Daniel Case (talk) 17:15, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 17:20, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's a stacking image, isn't it? --Laitche (talk) 20:08, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Laitche the lack of lens info in the EXIF makes me suspect a Samyang fisheye lens. That would explain the large depth-of-field. -- Colin (talk) 09:09, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:24, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Perhaps a little more chroma noise reduction on the grey parts, but understandable given the high ISO. -- Colin (talk) 09:09, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 09:38, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great shot! Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 11:49, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great!--Soundwaweserb (talk) 13:28, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. --Code (talk) 17:37, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wonderful perspective Poco2 19:32, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 08:09, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 10:49, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent!--Vengolis (talk) 04:59, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great.--ArildV (talk) 10:45, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Benh (talk) 06:45, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 15:22, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Obsuser (talk) 15:20, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jean-Éric Poclain (talk) 15:51, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very nice --ΝικόλαςΜπ. (talk) 18:30, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Тајга (talk) 18:58, 2 September 2015 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 26 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 10:47, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors

File:Siriema.jpg[edit]

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

SHORT DESCRIPTION

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

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

Swaledale Ewe
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff. I thought I'd go for something a bit different. An older photo of mine that was actually previously nominated and almost passed but for lack of votes. I think it's a characterful animal portrait. You have good detail of the animal (a relatively rare domestic breed of sheep native to the hills of northern England) and an idea of the typical landscape it inhabits with pleasant blurred background. -- Diliff (talk) 16:17, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 16:17, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:17, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Its good, but some more space around should make it. --Mile (talk) 17:35, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
    • I no longer have access to the original file (from memory this is not cropped anyway), so I'm not able to give more space unfortunately. Diliff (talk) 17:43, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Very weak oppose Tada, it's an oppose! A fine QI, but missing that little something for me. The tight crop "tips the scale" toward oppose (hope I use the expression right). - Benh (talk) 20:54, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:25, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 07:00, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's a really impressive portrait! --Tremonist (talk) 12:47, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Tremonist. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:14, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I wasn't convinced at thumbnail size (too static, tight crop, centered,...) but the expression and detail is very good Poco2 19:34, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:09, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Einstein2 (talk) 19:21, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

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

A female northern cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis) at Owen Conservation Park, Madison, Wisconsin, United States
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by John Benson - uploaded by Bruce1ee - nominated by Bruce1ee -- —Bruce1eetalk 08:05, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- —Bruce1eetalk 08:05, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Good sharpness with acceptable size, the problem is the right crop, the bird cannot breath, he is looking far to the right but there is nothing shared with the viewer. Poco2 09:16, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful little creature! --Tremonist (talk) 12:08, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but I prefer tight crop at the left and top. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:37, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well-done picture, great bokeh, nice sharp detail on the bird (is that the remnants of a bug in her beak?) We have one as a pet (legally, but it's sort of a long story), and I showed the picture to my wife and she went "Awwww ..." (and this with the bird in question not too far away, although it's a little prettier than this one (it looks young). So it gets my !vote. Daniel Case (talk) 17:07, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Nice but disappointed crop... --Laitche (talk) 20:29, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 07:03, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose per Poco and Laitche. I think this image is oversharpened too?! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:48, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:18, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

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

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

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

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

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2015 at 15:29:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church and rainbow in Akureyri, Iceland
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Villy Fink Isaksen -- Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 15:29, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 15:29, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The rainbow itself is nice, quite strong, it almost looks too intense, but the foreground (road, signs,...) spoils the composition IMHO, sorry Poco2 17:34, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice, but no FP --Atamari (talk) 20:30, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Poco. I want an image like this to be a featured picture. The church is beautiful. The rainbow, especially against a land background, is as beautiful as it is rare. But unfortunately two beautiful things together do not automatically add up to an even more beautiful thing combined (per Circle of Iron: "Two birds tied together have four wings, yet they cannot fly"). Besides, the road in the foreground adds some extra distracting clutter. Daniel Case (talk) 20:36, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Works for me. --King of ♠ 02:57, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's an extraordinary photo with a rainbow this intense! The church as foreground works as a composition for me, too, as it does for King. --Tremonist (talk) 12:17, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice, absolutely --Shuhrat Sa'diev (talk) 11:03, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support What Villy Fink Isaksen could do? Relocate the rainbow? Great mood. I cahnged the FP category to Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:20, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
    • He could clone out the disturbing signs and poles...--Jebulon (talk) 18:36, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting question.svg Question @Jebulon: How? 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:52, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't know whether it is a FP or not. But I'm strong against such a practice SMirC-beware.svg. Reality is reality! Independently of I would crop it 16:9. Then at least the lower road sign would be away. --Hockei (talk) 18:51, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment What is reality ? Philosophycal question... In postprocessing, just remain honest and don't deceive the (re)viewer--Jebulon (talk) 19:24, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done cropped to 19:9 --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 19:24, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done again - a new and a better crop! --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 16:24, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes! I find the crop very good and It is a good quality picture. Anyway, I don't know if FP, sorry. --Hockei (talk) 16:51, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Route du désert vers Cox Gassi.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2015 at 08:47:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

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

Alternative[edit]

Road in Algerian Sahara

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


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Laitche (talk) 10:44, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

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

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2015 at 15:58:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Armillaria mellea, Honey Fungus


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 10:41, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Fungi

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

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2015 at 06:02:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Male early bumblebee


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Laitche (talk) 10:40, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera

File:Incomplete Graffito.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2015 at 17:39:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

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


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 10:37, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]

Sat 29 Aug → Thu 03 Sep
Sun 30 Aug → Fri 04 Sep
Mon 31 Aug → Sat 05 Sep
Tue 01 Sep → Sun 06 Sep
Wed 02 Sep → Mon 07 Sep
Thu 03 Sep → Tue 08 Sep

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

Tue 25 Aug → Thu 03 Sep
Wed 26 Aug → Fri 04 Sep
Thu 27 Aug → Sat 05 Sep
Fri 28 Aug → Sun 06 Sep
Sat 29 Aug → Mon 07 Sep
Sun 30 Aug → Tue 08 Sep
Mon 31 Aug → Wed 09 Sep
Tue 01 Sep → Thu 10 Sep
Wed 02 Sep → Fri 11 Sep
Thu 03 Sep → Sat 12 Sep

Closing a featured picture promotion request[edit]

The bot[edit]

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

Manual procedure[edit]

Any experienced user may close requests.

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|category=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}}
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    featured or not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    becomes
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. If it is featured:
    • Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate category of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
    • Also add the picture to an appropriate subpage of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images.
    • Add the template {{Featured picture}} or {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
      • If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
      • If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessements template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
      • Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
      • The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
      • You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
    • Add == FP promotion ==
      {{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.
    • Add on the file page its respective categories for Featured pictures of... like Category:Featured pictures of objects, Category:Featured pictures of landscapes, of people, of Germany, of Paris, etc. This is the only part of the process that needs a user who is not a bot to complete it.
  5. As the last step (whether the image is featured or not; including {{FPX}}ed, {{FPD}}ed and withdrawn nominations), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/September 2015), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.

Closing a delisting request[edit]

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    '''Result:''' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg)
  2. Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
    delisted or not delisted
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted ===
  3. Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/September 2015.
  4. If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
    1. Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
    2. Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes). Also, remove the image from all categories like Featured pictures of ....
    3. Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.