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, 2015, 2016 and current month.

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

Formal things[edit]

Nominating[edit]

Guidelines for nominators[edit]

Please read the complete guidelines before nominating.

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

  • Licensing - Images licensed with solely "GFDL" or "GFDL and an NC-only license" are not acceptable due the restrictions placed on re-use by these licenses.
  • ResolutionImages (with the exception of animations, videos, and SVGs) of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are 'strong mitigating reasons'. 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:Beggar woman carved in pinewood Gröden.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2016 at 19:27:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Beggar woman holding a bag carved in swiss pine from Gröden end 18th/beginning 19th century

File:Duna Mayor, Valle de la Luna, San Pedro de Atacama, Chile, 2016-02-01, DD 173-175 HDR.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2016 at 17:43:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View at dusk of one of the highlights in Valle de la Luna, the Great Dune, San Pedro de Acatama, northern Chile.

File:Linares de la Sierra - Plaza de la Iglesia 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2016 at 15:38:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fountain on the church place of Linares de la Sierra, Andalusia, Spain

File:CoA Catherine de' Medici Petites Heures d'Anne de Bretagne.png[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2016 at 15:25:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

CoA Catherine de'Medici
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Book created by the Master of the Petrarch Triumphs - found, uploaded, restored and nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 15:25, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Something different today, from the french national online library. Here we have a (restored by me) manuscript illumination featuring the coats of arms of dowager queen Catherine de'Medici, widow of king Henry II of France. This was included ca.1560CE in a ca.1500 CE illuminated prayer book manuscript called Petites Heures d'Anne de Bretagne. One can see that they are CoA of a widow due to the Ordre de la Cordelière around the escutcheon. This chivalric order was created after the death of her husband king Louis XII of France by queen Anne of Brittany, for widow noble women. You have at left (dextre in french heraldry) the CoA of kings of France, and at right (senestre, yes, it is inversed) the CoA of Catherine, showing her descent (Boulogne, Medici, Tour d'Auvergne). During her life, she was Queen Consort, and a very powerful Queen Mother of the three last kings ( brothers Francis II of France, Charles IX of France and Henry III of France) of the House of Valois of the Capetian dynasty. Her death marks the end of the french Renaissance. The original version of this image is available as first upload for comparison, as I usually do.-- Jebulon (talk) 15:25, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Might be QI but I see nothing outstanding here. Edges aren’t straight. --Kreuzschnabel 17:07, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
    • Something wrong with your breakfast ? Face-smile.svg--Jebulon (talk) 17:20, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
      • What’s breakfast? --Kreuzschnabel 18:11, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
      • No matter, just a joke: as you opposed with the same words two completely different pictures, I thought you were angry, maybe due to the fact that someone had stollen a part of your breakfast, or something. Please don't care, that's a french kind of reaction.--Jebulon (talk) 19:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
        • The French and their food... Face-tongue.svg --w.carter-Talk 21:24, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As far as I can see, this is an excellent rendition of an old illumination. Most likely made on handmade paper (no straight sides, vellum usually have cut sides) in an age when rulers and set-squares were optional. Colors are consistent with those of the era and so is the gilding. Granted, it's been some years since I studied such manuscripts at the British Museum, but from what I recall this seems ok. Nice to see something unusual like this here. :) w.carter-Talk 18:27, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:44, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Градбата на Саат Кулата во Неготино 1.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2016 at 12:47:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Architecture of a wall of the hexagonal clock tower in Negotino, Macedonia

File:Blue-tailed damselfies (Ischnura elegans) mating female typica 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2016 at 08:57:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Blue-tailed damselfies (Ischnura elegans) mating; female form typica

File:Retzbach Maintal.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2016 at 07:38:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Main valley at Retzbach / Zellingen
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Imehling- uploaded by Imehling- nominated by Imehling -- Imehling (talk) 07:38, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment for sure: this is a nice point for a pano. But here he have several problems: (1) The depth of the red color is to big. (2) The left part of the image with the church is strongly unsharp. (3) The whole image is gloomy and some parts (especially the shadow areas) are very dark. (4) IMO the reflections are not that nice to show them in this way. The layout of this motive is not very coherent in my eyes. --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:16, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
    • I have uploaded a new version with more sharpness, different crop (less bush on the right side), slightly less red, less blown areas and brighter shadows. As for the reflections: I like them ;-) --Imehling (talk) 18:22, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Reluctant oppose Unsharp all over, and too many blown areas on buildings. Daniel Case (talk) 17:51, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Daniel INeverCry 19:47, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Teddy Leonard.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2016 at 06:56:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Canadian blues guitarist
  • You don’t need to oppose your own nomination, yet you’re free to do so. --Kreuzschnabel 14:30, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • I assume you only meant to "quote" some of the editors above with writing 'Oppose', but if you do so in that way here it means that you voted 'Oppose' for the picture. You can't vote both 'O' and 'S' on the same picture. Please sort this out. I also formatted the text for you. Don't start a line with a space or you get a box around the text, use : instead. Look in the editing window and you will see. w.carter-Talk 15:16, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Overexposed too, bright parts are blown. --Kreuzschnabel 14:30, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not sharp enough, jacket and background full of rainbow Chromatic aberration, white parts blown. If you want to see what level of sharpness is required here, please take a look at this musician at full size (100% not just full screen) and compare that with your photo. I would recommend that you first nominate your photos for Quality image to get them assessed and get some tips before you take them to FPC. w.carter-Talk 15:26, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
too unsharp you must be joking, not hard to tell your not a trained photographer.T Heart 13:36, 25 August 2016 (UTC) I am not opposing my own nomination... as stated obviously these images are being graded by untrained photographers T Heart 16:53, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Did you even look at the example (File:Hombre cantando por dinero en las cercanías del Hotel Humbodlt.jpg) that I linked to above? w.carter-Talk 18:40, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Better pose than the other one, but still unsharp in too many places. Daniel Case (talk) 17:49, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 19:55, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Pat-carey.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2016 at 06:53:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Canadian jazz saxophonist
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Imasku - uploaded by Imasku - nominated by Imasku -- T Heart 06:53, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- T Heart 06:53, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Also not very sharp to my eyes. As a musician, I'd like to support these photos, but I don't find them to be at FP level. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:32, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek:, did you mean to oppose? Daniel Case (talk) 15:55, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not sharp enough and very noisy. The bottom crop is a bit unfortunate. Sorry. --Cayambe (rest of sig broken by edit)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Mot sharp enough. Did @Ikan Kekek: mean to support? Charles (talk) 08:36, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Please see explanation on your first photo. w.carter-Talk 15:30, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Quality way too low for such a small image. --Kreuzschnabel 14:31, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for the same reasons as the first photo. w.carter-Talk 15:30, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Strong oppose per others. Poor technically and not really that striking a composition. Daniel Case (talk) 15:55, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
too unsharp you must be joking, not hard to tell your not a trained photographer.T Heart 13:36, 25 August 2016 (UTC) I am not opposing my own nomination... as stated obviously these images are being graded by untrained photographers T Heart 16:54, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
What a pity you’re the only trained photographer in here. Btw, may we see some samples of your work to adore? --Kreuzschnabel 17:11, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 19:55, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Chantry Island Lightstation Tower.jpg/2[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2016 at 06:48:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lighthouse Station
Out of date clock icon.svg
Nomination denied. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines because only two active nominations per user are allowed. --Jebulon (talk) 09:28, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Tren de la FCA en el trayecto Ollagüe-Uyuni, Bolivia, 2016-02-03, DD 94.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2016 at 06:32:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

FCAB railway dedicated to mining transport near Ollagüe and direction to Antofagasta (as part of the 1,537 km (955 mi) route Antofagasta - Calama - Ollagüe - Uyuni - La Paz).
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info FCAB railway dedicated to mining transport near Ollagüe and direction to Antofagasta (as part of the 1,537 km (955 mi) route Antofagasta - Calama - Ollagüe - Uyuni - La Paz). All by me, Poco2 06:32, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 06:32, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Nice picture, nice vanishing lines, but the unsharp reservoir waggon in foreground isn't very pleasant. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:02, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Agreed with Wladyslaw, most important wagon is blurry. --Ivar (talk) 07:11, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Interesting idea, of course, but I need a sharp foreground to support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:36, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 15:52, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination I was thinking about cropping it, but I'd lose half of it doing that, not worth it. Thanks. Poco2 17:17, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Bright Red Sun.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2016 at 01:12:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bright red sun seen nearly round in shape at dawn.
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because I am sorry but granuled (jpg artifacts), QI criteria overexposed.svg Overexposed and be careful - The Photographer (talk) 01:41, 25 August 2016 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Lyriothemis acigastra-Kadavoor-2016-06-26-001.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2016 at 23:20:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lyriothemis acigastra

File:Xanten RömerMuseum 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2016 at 21:43:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Facade of Thermae, RömerMuseum in Xanten, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Till Niermann - uploaded by Till Niermann - nominated by W.carter -- w.carter-Talk 21:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- w.carter-Talk 21:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow, simply amazing and I can feel the geometric art here --The Photographer (talk) 21:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:51, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per The Photographer. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:28, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:51, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Nice view, interesting light conditions. But it looks a bit to dark and underexposed for me. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:15, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:30, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Very interesting composition but a bit too dark -- Spurzem (talk) 09:41, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Upped the light a little bit per requests and cloned out the partial bird/UFO while I was at it. If Till Niermann don't agree with this, then I apologize and you can of course reverse it. The change was so very little that I did not see the need for a new version. We already have one alt version, no need for three since the change was suggested by two editor and I agree with it. If I was wrong in doing so, please let me know. w.carter-Talk 11:37, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thanks for optimizing, I'm far from opposing the enhancements. --Till (talk) 17:55, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
      • That was reassuring, thanks for letting me know. If you want to vote for your own picture, you can do so if you like. w.carter-Talk 18:08, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Alt version

Facade of Thermae, RömerMuseum in Xanten, Germany

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Fixed black UFO, sharpening problems, noise and severals distracting objects like irregular lawn. --The Photographer (talk) 03:26, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:47, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:51, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - The only difference I see is that clods of dirt on the grass were cloned out, but those don't bother me. I won't oppose this, though; it's fine, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:30, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support move to Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral on this for less confusion now that the UFO is gone on the first. - Thanks for fixing the UFO (or part of bird top center on the other pic) and the noise. The lawn did not bother me in the original version, looks like they have a problem with some rodents or other animals digging there, but that is part of the landscape. I'm fine with either version. w.carter-Talk 09:35, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Pelícano pardo de las Galápagos (Pelecanus occidentalis urinator), Punta Pitt, isla de San Cristóbal, islas Galápagos, Ecuador, 2015-07-24, DD 80.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2016 at 21:17:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Exemplar of brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis) watching in Punta Pitt, San Cristobal Island, Galápagos Islands, Ecuador.
Alt version

Exemplar of brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis) watching in Punta Pitt, San Cristobal Island, Galápagos Islands, Ecuador.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I preffer this version, for example, compares the eyes --The Photographer (talk) 21:39, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Lmbuga (talk) 23:25, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As always. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:29, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:20, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:49, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Is this legitimately an alt version? It is better, though, and I support it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:33, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thank you Miguel for this nom. I always was fond of this subject and still cannot understand the outcome of the first attempt. Poco2 06:37, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I see I changed my mind. What did it is that I thought about how detailed the picture of the pelican is, and the background looks OK at full-page size, though it still looks strange to me at full size. Best for me not to think about that part too much... -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question What do you mean ?--Jebulon (talk) 09:38, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --w.carter-Talk 07:28, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm confused. This image is already shown in the gallery as FP. Charles (talk) 08:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Same as Charlesjsharp... Strange.--Jebulon (talk) 09:37, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
    Jebulon, Charles: if it would be a Commons FP you'd see the FP star in the top right. As you can see in the FP template it is considered FP in the Spanish WP, but not in Commons. Poco2 15:20, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
    • Mmmmh, yes of course, I've noticed this, but anyway, this picture is now listed as Commons FP--Jebulon (talk) 15:30, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • I dont't get you Jebulon, Poco2 17:10, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Please have a look to the current categorization of this file...--Jebulon (talk) 17:19, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Are those cats for exclusive use of Commons FPs? That would be knew to me. I have though no problem with removing any categories containing "Featured" and not in "xxx Wikipedia" if there is consensus about that, but it isn't the place to discuss that, I guess. Poco2 17:47, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
The trees of Category:Featured pictures by country and similar, are only for Commons FP, because "FP's" on many wikipedia languages are not necessarily what we consider as the finest of Commons, making these categories rather trivial when sorted into. Thanks --A.Savin 18:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Chapel hill yellow in Palermo (Lantana Yellow).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2016 at 19:59:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Chapel hill yellow in Palermo (Lantana Yellow)

File:München - Olympisches Schwimmstadion1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2016 at 14:29:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Olympic Swim Hall, Munich

File:Bertha Lutz 1925.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2016 at 13:10:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bertha Lutz

File:Royal Albert Hall Rear, London, England - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2016 at 09:23:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Royal Albert Hall, London, England
  • Tsk, tsk, tsk... by now you should really know the answer to that and every other question as well. w.carter-Talk 17:56, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Estação da Luz 2015.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2016 at 03:41:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Estação da Luz 2015
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Brazil
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- The Photographer (talk) 03:41, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Probably not perfect, and I won't be surprised if someone finds some kind of fault with it, but my reaction is that this is wonderful and exciting! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:39, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I know that such a scenery is not easy to handle but the outside part is heavily overexposed. Then both corners are quite noisy and I feel that the whole picture has a slight magenta cast. Additionally it's not really symmetrical, you've been standing too much at the right side. I could live with these shortcomings if the picture had a big wow but I don't find it that pleasing after all. Sorry. --Code (talk) 05:57, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your review, however, It's not a hdr, you can't show the station interior without a external overexposition and in this case the interior is main subject. Btw, let me know if the noise is gone. --The Photographer (talk) 12:26, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Noise level is ok. The other issues remain. --Code (talk) 05:54, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. The image is a bit too bright in the middle but it is so impressive that I think it is right to support. -- Spurzem (talk) 08:15, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose you can take the picture in a better hour, not a excuse. The lines are not correct, you are not in the middle..., the colour is incorrect, and we already have a image with the same issue, far more interesting File:Estação Luz.jpg. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 17:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
I can not say that the other picture with the distorted trains and dark colors is more interesting. -- Spurzem (talk) 18:50, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done Overexposition and Anyway, thanks for your hour recomendation --The Photographer (talk) 19:26, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
✓ DoneYou can see that the rta example is too much overexposed, and the image on this nomination is much more big. BTW Your station example is in a different position in relation to the sun, you can't take a picture of Luz station (not HDR) without expose the exterior. However, I used another version and I think that it's fixed, please, let me know --The Photographer (talk) 18:57, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:MonumentoEcuestreaSanMartin-MDP-ago2016.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 22:07:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Equestrian monument to Jose de San Martin, Chica Beach, Mar del Plata, Argentina
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Sculptures
  • all by me Ezarateesteban 22:07, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ezarateesteban 22:07, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good mood. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:16, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 22:21, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Monument and tree. Well composed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:41, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Mild oppose Soft and unsharp in a lot of places, and I don't think they work so well backlit against a clouded sky, and frankly they don't work together well for me, as the tree and the monument seem to be competing with each other for my attention. Daniel Case (talk) 05:58, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Magenta cast, and I don’t approve of the lighting though I see the idea behind this. Too soft for a silhouette image. --Kreuzschnabel 17:16, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Eskibel - Paisaje.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 18:45:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landscape near Eskibel, looking towards Vitoria. Basque Country, Spain

File:Aeolian Islands at sunset.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 18:16:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aeolian Islands at sunset
  • O sorry, I thought it was a detail of a church ceiling (I joke Clin).--Jebulon (talk) 11:35, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes esteban, I know....is the beautiful,blue sky,red sky and island. Thanks --LivioAndronico (talk) 21:27, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting and beautiful -- Spurzem (talk) 20:54, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too many posterized and unsharp areas. Daniel Case (talk) 21:02, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Daniel is not posterized is the rarefied air ..... anyway where would unsharp? thanks --LivioAndronico (talk) 21:31, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose mostly per Daniel. It is rather noisy, there are practically no details at all on the sea, the sunset in itself is not extraordinary enough for an FP, the color especially around the islands is so posterized and saturated that at full size it almost looks like those psychedelic posters I had in my room during the 1960s, ok fond memories but not FP, sorry. --w.carter-Talk 21:48, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Daniel & WC. INeverCry 22:23, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Sorry, it's a nice sunset, but except for the colorful striations in the middle, the picture pretty much just sits there, and at full size, it gets worse to my eyes, as explained by others above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:45, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Lovely but the picture suffers from barrel distortion. I also wonder why it's that noisy at only ISO 100. --Code (talk) 05:50, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I was triying fix the noise, if it is not ok for you, please revert me LivioAndronico --The Photographer (talk) 03:59, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Túnel natural, Hartelholz, Múnich, Alemania, 2016-04-03, DD 05.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 17:24:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Natural tunnel with a viewer at the back :) in Hartelholz Forest, Munich, Germany.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Natural tunnel with a viewer at the back :) in Hartelholz Forest, Munich, Germany. All by me, Poco2 17:24, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 17:24, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:19, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 18:49, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:06, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice doggy (and tunnel)! :) But there is red CA on most of the branches at the top. w.carter-Talk 19:23, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks! And Symbol support vote.svg Support --w.carter-Talk 08:14, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Has an almost hand-painted appearance. Daniel Case (talk) 20:45, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Interesting motif, but I'm not really feeling the composition adding up at full-page size, maybe partly because of the crops, and the blurring makes a lot of branches look like they have snow on them at full size. That's too much (or maybe the wrong kind of) distortion, in my view. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I also wowed that there's something in Munich I've never even heard of - Hartelholz... Face-wink.svg --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:12, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 17:05, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lucky?? --Hubertl 20:55, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
    Right, Hubertl! Lucky!! :) Poco2 21:04, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
    Awww... --w.carter-Talk 21:13, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
    Is this the dog who doesn't swim? --Basotxerri (talk) 14:36, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
    Yes, the one who doesn't like swimming :) Poco2 15:19, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Loojangu värvid 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 15:11:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Muraste Nature Reserve
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Kristoffer Vaikla - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 15:11, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 15:11, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support Could be sharper, but I like the texture and mood. Daniel Case (talk) 15:40, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice catch of sun-rain. --w.carter-Talk 16:37, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wowed composition. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:16, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 18:20, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Basotxerri (talk) 18:38, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- --Isasza (talk) 18:44, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 18:58, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Reguyla (talk) 20:46, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I find this interesting enough to support. The composition strikes me as retro, reminiscent of some early photos (though of course those were black & white or possibly sepia). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:50, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:05, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 16:14, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Kreta - Kournas-See.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 08:39:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lake Kournas, Crete, Greece
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#Greece
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Wladyslaw, Lake Kournas is the biggest natural fresh-water lake in Crete. -- Wladyslaw (talk) 08:39, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 08:39, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful and very sharp -- Spurzem (talk) 09:47, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:35, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:16, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 18:47, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 18:59, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I again dislike an unsharp area in the foreground, this time in the near right corner, but it's a very small area. I also wish there were a little more room to the right as well as the left of the lake. But all that said, this is a beautiful photo, and I do think it deserves a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:55, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:04, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support clear composition Thennicke (talk) 09:56, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 02:58, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:14, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Trifolium pratense - Keila.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 06:16:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Red clover
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Red clover (Trifolium pratense), all by Ivar (talk) 06:16, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 06:16, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose WB if off, and the image looks oversharpened (see dark lines at the countours) --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:15, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Uoaei1: WB was not off, look at shooting time (or maybe you haven't seen orange light during golden hour?). Leaf edges of the red clover are sometimes dark red, look this Dew on red clover.JPG --Ivar (talk) 09:44, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I have also added the Category:Plants and trees at golden hour (set up some new cats since the first one was getting crowded) to the pic, same as I did to your previous flower. Perhaps you should remember to add that in the future to keep misunderstandings to a minimum. w.carter-Talk 10:45, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 15:04, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The droplets really make this golden-hour flower special. Daniel Case (talk) 15:17, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:17, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 18:48, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 18:59, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Thennicke (talk) 09:52, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Modelo didatico bovino correto.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 00:53:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Anatomy model of a bovine (cow), showing several organs and organic systems in left lateral view with the rumen highlighted in the foreground.
Alt version

Anatomy model of a bovine (cow), showing several organs and organic systems in left lateral view with the rumen highlighted in the foreground.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info It's not a correction, it's a restoration from original file, because, IMHO Arion nomination has destructive alterations like oversharpening, overexposition and color saturation, btw, I preffer a black background, remembering that it's only my opinion --The Photographer (talk) 03:52, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really a nice work, thanks! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 04:01, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This has evident relevance for Wikipedias! Joalpe (talk) 13:25, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:11, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As a Wikipedian, I thank you. :) w.carter-Talk 16:38, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:01, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ~nmaia [[mia diskuto]] 19:54, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, although to make this even much more valuable, parts should be labeled. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:58, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Thennicke (talk) 09:52, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg strong opposition what's that in the mouth of the animal? Did you invented a new part? And this is a anatomic model, colours are painted by the human, it's not oversaturated, it's the colour of the model, and could be any colour actually, it's a educational model... And it was not "destructive" was we do not have any lost of information. Next time, ponder your words, or at least bring truths... Btw, your cuts are not clear, and the reason is simple, you changed the background colour, but do not took into consideration the invasion that black creates, now we have harsh white knurled lines, and you also do not removed the invasion of magenta provoked by the model itself. Remembering that it's only my opinion. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 17:25, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
PS:I strongly suggest you bright down your monitor, the grey it's not even close to be black, and we do not have areas overexposed in the orginal image. Seeing those evidences, your monitor is probably away more bright that should be to work with images. If you do not believe me, check the histogram... grey vs black. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 17:38, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done Rodrigo please, we are here to learn, take it easy. --The Photographer (talk) 19:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
well, The Photographer, we are here to collaborate, not for learning, learning is the reward, and you started listing number of problems that was not there, and more, qualifying the contribution as "destructive". How this is collaborative? -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 12:25, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:2016.07.04.-26-Eilenburg-Ost--Distelfalter.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 17:04:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Colourful butterfly - Vanessa cardui.

File:Black Cliffs' Lake, Lagodekhi Protected Area, Georgia.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 14:11:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Glacier lake in the Caucasus mountains at the border of Georgia and Dagestan (Russia) 3000 m asl, it needs 3 days (by foot) to reach this beautiful lake from the closest settlement. For 6 months it is frozen.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Giorgi Balakhadze - uploaded by Giorgi Balakhadze - nominated by Giorgi Balakhadze -- g. balaxaZe 14:11, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- g. balaxaZe 14:11, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support Welcome to FPC, Giorgi Balakhadze! It's really a good start, but being a cell phone camera, the level of detail is somewhat limited. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 15:31, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Very weak support per Arion. Daniel Case (talk) 17:37, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I would suggest cloning out that black thing at top left in the sky. Good to see a nomination not shot with a multi-1000$ camera/lense. INeverCry 18:53, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It is a beautiful scene, but I think the level of detail should have been a bit better here for an FP. This is not your fault, it's just us being very picky here. I also think you should nominate these for Quality Image and one of them for Valued image. We would also appreciate if you could provide the coordinates for the camera location on the files so that they can be displayed on OpenStreetMap and Google Earth. Please look at this files page to see how that is done. w.carter-Talk 19:46, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:53, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice scenery, and the quality is quite good for a cell phone - but not enough for FP level. Details are too unsharp, and parts in shadow are too dark and noisy. --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:08, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 13:17, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 18:52, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - That's quite an impressive cell phone pic! But what is that black streak in the sky? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:02, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It can be an eagle or something like that. I don't remember I was concentrated on the lake.--g. balaxaZe 06:06, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
      • It doesn't come across as an eagle. If you'd be willing to remove it (clone it out), I would support a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yes beautiful place, but still we have our quality standards. Btw, the one below is better. --A.Savin 18:46, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Black Cliffs' Lake, Lagodekhi Protected Area, Georgia 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 13:50:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

This is a glacier lake in the Caucasus mountains at the border of Georgia and Dagestan (Russia) 3000 m asl, it needs 3 days (by foot) to reach this beautiful lake from the closest settlement.
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment well, given the miniscule size of the camera's sensor (4mm diagonal), the f-stop as such is more than adequate. The lack of sharpness (at least when compared to more advanced photographic systems) is due to the sensor itself. This being said, the picture's still good enough imo --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:47, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 18:55, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Striking, especially that cloud shadow. Also the effort of getting these photos (reading the description) rivals this nom. w.carter-Talk 19:21, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:47, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lack of details. I also miss something special in this scenery. --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:09, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For me this image is very good. Perhaps we could look for lacks but we should not overdo. -- Spurzem (talk) 13:14, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I think this image is beautiful, poetic and deserves a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:04, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Four-spotted chaser (Libellula quadrimaculata) female dorsal.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 12:57:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Four-spotted chaser
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Odonata
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 12:57, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Charles (talk) 12:57, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support An absolutely stunning creature, but I am a little bothered by the sharpness of that grass it is sitting on. It seems almost "attached" to the dragonfly's head. There is another sharp grass up right that could be blended in with the rest of the bokeh. Thoughts? w.carter-Talk 13:51, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done I've removed the bit of grass as you suggested. Charles (talk) 14:04, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Maybe a very very little bit oversharpened, and background a very very little bit noisy, but what a marvel ! I would like to know how to take such pictures ! Congratulations.--Jebulon (talk) 14:47, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 14:57, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 15:27, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 16:25, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 18:56, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:38, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 18:53, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very nice Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:15, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 03:02, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Lmbuga (talk) 23:31, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:16, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Frecce tricolori Air show Valtenesi del Garda Manerba .jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 06:54:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Frecce tricolori at the Air show Valtenesi del Garda

File:Junonia atlites-Kadavoor-2016-06-23-001.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 05:54:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Junonia atlites (Grey Pansy) mating pair

File:Zaadpluizen van Cirsium vulgare in mild avondlicht. Locatie, De Famberhorst 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 05:14:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:7N Djurgårdslinjen SSB A2 24.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2016 at 16:10:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Land vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created/uploaded/nominated by Alexandar Vujadinovic -- Alexandar Vujadinovic (talk) 16:10, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - as nom. - Alexandar Vujadinovic (talk) 16:10, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is a beautiful picture that brings back fond memories for me and certainly a QI or VI, but that modern tram behind the tram spoils the image for me and an FP should be perfect. (not suggesting it could be cloned out this time) This museum tram runs so often that it would be no problem to wait for one with no modern vehicles around it. The architecture around this stop is from the 19th century so the perfect setting for the tram otherwise. Also you got the geo tag wrong, it has this as on the bridge, but the stop and this pic is on Strandvägen at 59.331748, 18.092906 just before the bridge even if the stop is named after the bridge. Sorry, but thank you for showing it. :) w.carter-Talk 17:05, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the location data, I've updated the page now. As for the newer tram in the background, I waited for it on purpose because I thought it'd be fun to have the newest and one of the oldest in the same image - Alexandar Vujadinovic (talk) 18:53, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for explaining how you thought, perhaps others will see this the same way you do. Had it been a side-by-side or more shown of the new version, I would have agreed with you, but not as it is unfortunately. w.carter-Talk 19:41, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per WC. INeverCry 21:03, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, plus I don’t like the current collector to be cut off as it is part of the coach. Sorry if it sounds harsh but this strikes me rather as a tourist shot than a carefully composed image. I am sure this can be done better, in a less busy environment. --Kreuzschnabel 22:46, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschanbel. Daniel Case (talk) 06:31, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 18:57, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Gloucester Cathedral High Altar, Gloucestershire, UK - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2016 at 14:02:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The High Altar and stained glass of Gloucester Cathedral in Gloucestershire, England.
  • Diese "distorted"-Behauptung wird nicht wahrer vom ständigen Wiederholen. Ich warte immer noch auf Deinen Vorschlag, wie man solche Kircheninnenräume denn besser abbilden sollte. --Code (talk) 16:10, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • durch natürliche Projektion. --Ralf Roleček 16:21, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Aha. Und was ist das, "natürliche Projektion"? Ergänzung: Dein Bild hier wurde mit einem 10mm-Objektiv gemacht und hat eine geradlinige Projektion. Das Bild von Diliff wurde aus mehreren Bildern zusammengesetzt und entspricht einem 8mm-Objektiv, ebenfalls mit geradliniger Projektion. Deins ist ok, seins nicht oder wie soll ich das verstehen? Erklär mir den Unterschied. --Code (talk) 16:31, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
Hmmm, ich muß zugeben, darauf habe ich keine Antwort. --Ralf Roleček 17:12, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral See several discussions below. Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It really is beautiful and perfect, but IMO too beautiful and perfect, it doesn't look real, more like some computer animation from a film or a game with a huge budget and very good animators. Truly sorry. w.carter-Talk 17:13, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • @W.carter: Sorry, but I really don't understand why you opposed. Please, explain me. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:54, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • @ArionEstar: I explained it below to Ikan, is that enough or should I do this once again here? w.carter-Talk 13:58, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • @ArionEstar: Now this is turning into a philosophical discussion, by "too perfect" here I meant that it was so flawless that it looked unreal. Kreuz said it better in his explanation when he called it overprocessed and oversaturated. That was the "photography-speak" I was looking for. I am not wowed by this picture, it has perspective but it does not convey a sense of depth, the light is flat, the arches nearest the camera are far too distorted, the stained glass window at the end looks too bright. I don't find this image as stunning as the rest of his church pictures. But I will probably be explaining this "not-wowed" for the rest of my life if I keep up opposing this, so I move to neutral instead. I've learned my lesson. w.carter-Talk 14:21, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • @ArionEstar: Please don't change the words in your question after I have answered it. It means something different now and my answer does not match it. w.carter-Talk 10:21, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Don't worry about expressing your opinion... You might be right or you might be wrong, but you're entitled to a subjective opinion. You may have a point about the flat lighting anyway. It's not actually flat (there is plenty of contrast), but there was a huge range of luminosity in the scene and the only way to 'squeeze' it into a normal low dynamic range image is to compress it and sometimes that makes it appear flat even when it's not. As I said below, I think reshooting it when the lighting was more balanced would help, but for now, this image is what it is. :-) Diliff (talk) 11:17, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support perfect as always. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:46, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - It certainly looks real to me. W.carter, I have to shake my head in disbelief at the idea of opposing a photo because it's "too perfect". Because really great computer animators can produce a fine simulacrum of reality now, we're going to penalize the very greatest photographers for their level of perfection? I think that's not only absurd but really objectionable, and a totally untenable basis for opposing a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:40, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • @Ikan Kekek: We deal very much in subjectivity when casting our votes on these candidates, and describing why you don't think something that ought to be ok, is not, that's very difficult. That was the nearest I could come to explaining why the image did not appeal to me. Perhaps I should have used a language like 'flat light', 'too bright stained glass windows', 'arches nearest the camera looking distorted', 'even though it has perspective, it does not convey a sense of depth'. A perfect rendition of something is not necessarily a good photo. Would such a description be more satisfying? We all have our own way of describing why we like or don't like a photo. You often talk about "moving your eyes around the photo", an expression I have never understood, but I respect that as your way of describing how you take in a picture. Mine is often by using simile or metaphore. w.carter-Talk 20:02, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Those specifics make sense to me. In terms of moving one's eyes around the picture frame, see if you can find information about the linear arabesque. My father, a painter, cited a specific treatise, but I don't remember its name at present. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:39, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Ok, I'll see if I can look that up somewhere. And I'll use a more direct language in the future. We don't want things to get 'Lost in translation'. w.carter-Talk 07:36, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:01, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Diliff is the best church interiors photographer. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:13, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • That, I can totally agree with! :) But even the greatest masters sometimes create works that does not appeal to everyone. I don't like all Rembrandts just because they have his signature either. w.carter-Talk 21:21, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • An odd discussion indeed. I'm very surprised at being pummeled like this for having a different opinion than the rest of the community, I thought that was allowed. I'm starting to feel like a heretic in front of the inquisition for daring to not be wowed by a work of Saint Diliff The Magnificent! But if it saves me from being burned at the stake, I can change me vote to 'Neutral' so as not to hinder the speedy ascension of His work to FP. ;) --w.carter-Talk 07:31, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • w.carter: Ups, my last comment was way more harsh than I intended it to be. I should have added a smiley or two. I've realized that after re-reading it. I absolutely and honestly didn't want to attack you or your right to an dissenting opinion which I do - of course - respect. Therefore I'd like to apologize for my tone. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:35, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • @W.carter: Come on, this is ridiculous and you know it. Your opinion is always very welcome. But that doesn't mean that other's aren't allowed to reply on your comments as well. This is what we call a discussion. It's quite simple: If you don't want others to reply on your comments you shouldn't post them in the first place. However, I agree with you that language is often a problem here at FPC. I'm not a native English speaker as well and I often don't really know how to express my opinion properly. Thoughtfulness is the key, I think. --Code (talk) 09:30, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes, yes, I know. I enjoy a good discussion as much as anyone else and I can give as good as I get. Face-wink.svg No need to apologize for anything neither you or Martin, I have a very thick skin. Now I also know that speaking metaphorically may be nice when discussing art or the taste of a good wine, but not so much when discussing photos here. I should have tagged my comment above with a ";)" to clarify that I made that one smiling. (now fixed) And to explain a bit, part of my job is to go through hundreds of almost identical photos of something each day and decide which one is the best for a cover, an ad, a brochure, etc. So I'm more used to the "in or out" system, "neutral" is new to me. w.carter-Talk 10:14, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Though I usually am a great Diliff fan this is overprocessed in my eyes. Colours oversaturated (see all red areas, and even the blue books). Impressing level of detail of course but the look at 100 percent is too unreal for me. --Kreuzschnabel 22:50, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow, this is even better than I thought ... come for the quality church interior, stay for the German lesson Face-smile.svg. Daniel Case (talk) 00:39, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great // Martin K. (talk) 12:21, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment. From memory this was a tough interior to process. I don't think the colours are unrealistic, especially on the books. If anything, the stained glass was the hardest part to process and some parts are blown a little bit (even with 5 bracketed images with 2-3 stops between them!). I would like to visit again when the light isn't as harsh, I think the stained glass would look better that way. But it's still quite accurate I think. Diliff (talk) 11:12, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Insula Maioricae Vicentius Mut 1683.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2016 at 13:33:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

1683 map of Mallorca
Yep, looks terrible in FF but fine in Chrome. INeverCry 04:24, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - Wait. What is this about Firefox? And how will it look on smartphones, which a lot of people will use to view it? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:15, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing out the problem. This evening I will try to get rid of those ICC-Data tags that seem to be causing problems with Firefox. --Hispalois (talk) 12:07, 22 August 2016 (UTC) ✓ Done by El Grafo (see below).
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Alchemist. If it's hard to view, it's not a good photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:42, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sorry, but it's fine with me. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:05, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Arion. INeverCry 21:09, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'm not having a problem reading it. Daniel Case (talk) 00:28, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support any chance to fix the profile problem? IE and Safari work, FF doesn't. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:05, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
    • It was using a strange, non-standard colour profile called Metis DRS 2A0 CC24. Tried converting to standard sRGB using Gimp – new version looks normal to me in Firefox now (but @Hispalois: please feel free to revert my version if you've got a better solution). --El Grafo (talk) 13:48, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Your version fixed the issue. Thank you very much! --Hispalois (talk) 16:21, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This is not an original, just a 1946 reimpression. Far much less value--Jebulon (talk) 15:00, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree that an original would fetch much more money in an auction but regarding the encyclopaedic usefulness of the image I'd say there is not much difference. It should be noted that this was a true reimpression, from the original copperplates, not a facsimile. --Hispalois (talk) 16:21, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

File:13-04-13-st-poelten-landhausviertel-628.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2016 at 13:03:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. Pölten, Austria, Landhausviertel-Boulevard
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info St. Pölten, Austria, Landhausviertel-Boulevard - all by --Ralf Roleček 13:03, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ralf Roleček 13:03, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:19, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 14:21, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Great light, great lines, great perspective, great desolation, but still lacks something... w.carter-Talk 15:52, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special in the architecture, average quality. Too much ground and too few roof. --A.Savin 17:28, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol support vote.svg Support - I quite like this photo, but I'd love it if you could sharpen it a bit. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:44, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:07, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Savin. INeverCry 21:11, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Living myself next to St. Pölten, I have to say: boring architecture. Also too much floor on this picture. --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:44, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 18:59, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Sympetrum fonscolombii, female, Sète cf06.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2016 at 07:38:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sympetrum fonscolombii, female
  • Can't we have multiple FPs of the same thing? I've never heard anything about that. Anyway, the file:Darter August 2007-22 edit.jpg is an FP on the English and Croatian Wikipedia, not the Commons. --w.carter-Talk 22:23, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • It is only a 1.7 MP which may be good per that day's standard; but not of now. Jee 03:19, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:36, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great picture, great foreground and great background--Lmbuga (talk) 18:59, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Hersilia-2016-06-19-002.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2016 at 06:17:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tree trunk spider capturing a cicada
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A Tree trunk spider (Hersilia sp.) capturing a cicada. "Rather than making a web that captures prey directly, they lay a light coating of threads over an area of tree bark and wait hidden in plain sight for an insect to stray onto that patch. Once that occurs, they direct their spinnerets toward their prey and circle it; all the while casting silk on it. When the hapless insect has been thoroughly immobilized, they can bite it through its new shroud. They have lightning speed, giving the victim no chance to escape." C/u/n by Jkadavoor -- Jee 06:17, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jee 06:17, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 10:04, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:55, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 11:21, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:45, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yuck, but great picture. I know we have the {{Nsfw}} template for nudity and such, is there some similar arachnid warning? Face-tongue.svg w.carter-Talk 15:48, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • You can design one. Clin Jee 16:13, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I suppose this deserves a feature out of pure interest, but if it would work to sharpen the spider just a bit, please do so. It's a good-looking spider, though of course I feel for the cicada. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:50, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support The image is striking enough that although I would have cropped in more tightly on the, uh, action, it can still be featurable. Daniel Case (talk) 20:42, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:12, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I'm a little embarrassed by the proportions, I would have maybe prefer a vertical shooting and then a 45° rotation to have the trunk horizontal...though good picture! Christian Ferrer (talk) 22:38, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Tree trunk spiders usually seen on main trunk; not on branches. So making the trunk horizontal may reduce the EV. A portrait crop removing empty sky from both sides may possible. (This is a high speed action; just happened close to my range. I didn't made a single step; just raise the camera and shoot. Only later I found I'm able to capture all important moments, including the bite through shroud.) Jee 03:55, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support FP for sure and the slight lack of sharpness is not important for this type of shot. Charles (talk) 09:48, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:35, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 10:17, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 11:32, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 18:59, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Women model top.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2016 at 04:00:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Women model top
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/People#Sitting_people
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Patrick Subotkiewiez - uploaded and nominated by -- The Photographer (talk) 04:00, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 04:24, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent portrait. --Code (talk) 11:12, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good -- Spurzem (talk) 11:19, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent. --Pugilist (talk) 12:24, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ralf Roleček 13:02, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:18, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent quality photo! Looking forward to the male version. w.carter-Talk 15:55, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per others. Well composed, well lit, and I appreciate the depth of field. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:52, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A genuinely artistic seminude. Daniel Case (talk) 20:38, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I don't wanna spoil the nudist party but I don't find this picture particularly enticing. I'm pretty sure it does work well in black&white though --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:25, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:46, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Excellent, but what about the copyright ?--Jebulon (talk) 15:03, 22 August 2016 (UTC) Sorry, it is good.--Jebulon (talk) 15:53, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jebulon (talk) 15:53, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 10:17, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 11:33, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cute--Lmbuga (talk) 20:19, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:42, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Apis mellifera - Melilotus albus - Keila2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Aug 2016 at 19:33:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Honey bee and white sweet clover


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 21:04, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Jaguar E-Type series 1 coupé 1964.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Aug 2016 at 09:12:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jaguar E-Type series 1 coupé 1964
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by DeFacto - uploaded by DeFacto - nominated by DeFacto -- DeFacto (talk). 09:12, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- DeFacto (talk). 09:12, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, no. Great car and detail, unfortunate background, especially with that distracting message/ad in the window. Again we ask the impossible of photographers at FPC, such as walk on water, hover in the air or get the owner of the car to park it at a better location. Ok, I'm only assuming it is not your car, if it were I think you would have chosen a better location to shoot it. w.carter-Talk 10:09, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above, sorry --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:43, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, but per above. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 10:50, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the background is a good contrast to the wonderful car. -- Spurzem (talk) 12:16, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Well, you could "cheat" and clone the right window onto the left one to get rid of the ad and busy window. I mean we have accepted cars being cloned out in front of buildings, so why not part of a building cloned behind a car? And a toned down + desaturated version of the yellow is a good complementary color to the blue of the car. --w.carter-Talk 13:09, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. --Code (talk) 12:38, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Without prejudice to whether the retouching in the alt version is acceptable or not, the composition doesn't add up to me, though I actually prefer this version, which gives the eye more to move around. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:42, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 05:37, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

alt version[edit]

Jaguar E-Type series 1 coupé

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info, Martin Falbisoner, Alchemist-hp, Code: here's another version with an alternative background per w.carter's sugestion above. DeFacto (talk). 14:10, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support DeFacto (talk). 14:10, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Now this version is something I'd call striking. Please add a {{retouched|What you did}} tag to the new version though. (And remove that line per below.) w.carter-Talk 14:17, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done, added tag. DeFacto (talk). 17:27, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm sorry. Fake. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:19, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Just curious, what is the difference between this and cloning out an offending car, street lamp, trash, bottles or any other of the things we have asked photographers to get rid of here? w.carter-Talk 14:51, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Normally, I don't bother with objects that are cloned out, but in this case, part of the background (which is a crucial element for a photography composition) is fake. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:00, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Thank you for explaining. I was only wondering since you had no problem supporting this faked image, but here we all know that the pic is manipulated from the start so that might make it harder to accept. I guess it's up to each of us where we decide to draw the line as long as the cloning/manipulation is thoroughly declared on the file's page, something that is clearly done in this case. w.carter-Talk 16:14, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Cool pic! :) Thanks for showing it, now I understand exactly what you mean. Great explaining. w.carter-Talk 17:22, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request I see a thin line at the car at the coned place and everywhere cyan color points?! What's that? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 14:23, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done, @Alchemist-hp: I'm no retouch artist, but reprocessed the changes and it looks clean now. DeFacto (talk). 17:29, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 17:43, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I thought the car was so striking in the original that I didn't even notice the background. But this is just fine as an FP, despite the fact that a careful eye will see signs of the cloning. Daniel Case (talk) 18:54, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Aceptable retuch --The Photographer (talk) 20:18, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:19, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I'm just not comfortable with editing of this magnitude. --King of ♠ 23:39, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for reasons given above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:42, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per King --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:53, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Whatever the outcome of this nom may be, it is very interesting and enlightening to hear the community's view on corrections and what levels are acceptable. --w.carter-Talk 16:03, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 16:49, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent, and very good new background. Smart idea well completed. If this image was nominated at first without explanations, it should have receive more supports. Why "punish" honesty ?--Jebulon (talk) 15:43, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Main subject and reality are not altered --The Photographer (talk) 01:53, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 11:37, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, per orhers and clearly unfortunate and uggly background--Lmbuga (talk) 20:23, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Lotus Temple-Panoroma-Visit During WCI 2016- IMG 6471.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2016 at 17:29:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Lotus Temple, located in New Delhi, India, is a Bahá'í House of Worship completed in 1986.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Bijay chaurasia - uploaded by Bijay chaurasia - nominated by Bijay chaurasia -- Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 17:29, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 17:29, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice motif. Could surely be featurable if only the light was better. Looks very dull this way. Additionally the picture needs a perspective correction. --Code (talk) 18:06, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Code. INeverCry 20:16, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, which is a pity because idea and location are striking. Can this be taken from a higher point of view to have less sky within the frame? --Kreuzschnabel 04:57, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I have to agree with the others. Please try photographing this temple again on a somewhat brighter day. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:40, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Very weak support I agree with Code and Ikan but frankly this picture captures the symmetry effectively enough. Daniel Case (talk) 05:51, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Weak support. No sunshine but good impression. -- Spurzem (talk) 07:32, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'll support it without any reservations. The building itself is awesome, taking the pic on a sunny day would most likely have blown much of the detail on the white roof and reflections from the pool could have wrecked havoc on the composition. Plus I welcome FPs of buildings from different religions, not just churches. --w.carter-Talk 09:56, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:41, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 10:53, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 12:45, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice shot--Biplab Anand (Talk) 13:54, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:55, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, with regrets...--Jebulon (talk) 15:51, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Alt version

The Lotus Temple, located in New Delhi, India, is a Bahá'í House of Worship completed in 1986.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This version has E++ in shadows, perspective correction and color temperature alteration. --The Photographer (talk) 03:50, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I'm not sure. This version definitely looks better at full-page size, but at full size, its focus looks perhaps too soft in places. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Commanderij Sint Pietersvoeren 2016 1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2016 at 15:49:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Hans Erren - uploaded by Hans Erren - nominated by Hans Erren -- Hans Erren (talk) 15:49, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Hans Erren (talk) 15:49, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I would like it a little bit darker und with more contrast. Further the town-gate is leaning left. -- Spurzem (talk) 16:09, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done vertical lines rotated to true vertical, autocontrast changed using irfanview; it was a very bright morning so the intense colours are real. Hans Erren (talk) 21:04, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 21:09, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A QI perhaps, but first it's kind of unsharp at depth, with visible CA; second, the composition does not stand out enough for me. Daniel Case (talk) 02:16, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Still seems overexposed (as pointed out by Spurzem already) with washed-out colours, this probably can’t be fixed. Composition does not strike me this way, I’d crop most of the foreground out (try a 16:9 ratio at full width) to focus on the building. But the main issue is the image quality (sharpness) which is way too poor to be featured I’m afraid – the photographer is in dire need of better gear to execute his good ideas suitably. --Kreuzschnabel 05:03, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Surely doesn't suck, but not an outstanding photo worthy of a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:42, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 06:54, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Trabant P 601 S, Bj. 1986 (Foto Sp 2016-06-05).JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2016 at 11:28:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Trabant P 601 S, Baujahr 1986
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Probably no “Wow” for some others but beautiful for me: One of the famous DDR “Trabbis” built in 1986 at a vintage car rally near Koblenz in 2016; created, uploaded and nominated by Spurzem (talk) 11:28, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral -- Spurzem (talk) 11:28, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support No, not a "Wow" but a "Yay!". The picture has a happy easy air about it that I like. The light is good and the car is acutally going somewhere, not just sitting there. The background is right for a timeless, carefree Sunday afternoon drive and is not drawing attention away from the car. Even the color of the flowers by the road matches the car. I would welcome a little crop at the bottom though since asphalt is seldom that exciting to look at. Nice shot. w.carter-Talk 12:10, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 14:29, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well, imagine that ... last week I compared an Opel with a Trabant, and look what happens? We get a picture of a Trabi that's just as featurable! Daniel Case (talk) 18:52, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
@Daniel Case: I remembered. Best regards -- Spurzem (talk) 19:02, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose We have Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Opel Rekord P1, Bj. 1958 (Foto Sp 2016-06-05).JPG already. How many models of cars are we going to feature with this same exact composition? Just these 2, or will there be a whole series? INeverCry 20:22, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Please show me the direction that it is not allowed to present nearly the same motive once more or that it would be not allowed to feature! -- Spurzem (talk) 20:46, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
I've seen FPCs opposed here a number of times because they were too close in composition to images of the same location or subject. This image is featurable on its own, but how many cars in this identical composition would be featurable? If we feature 2, why not 5 or 10, as long as it's a different car each time? Please remember though that this is my opinion and my single vote. My supports and opposes are no big deal. Just one guy's opinion. INeverCry 20:56, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps this composition for cars ("shells for humans") is the equivalent of gastropods with black background ("shells for snails") as a pleasing way to show the different models/species in FPs? w.carter-Talk 03:08, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
You definitely get points for cleverness on that one. Face-wink.svg But car after car, in the same basic lighting, on the same road, shot from the same vantage point?... They'll all have the honor of my one little oppose if they're brought here to FPC... Face-tongue.svg INeverCry 03:55, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support yes, I'd like to see the next hundred different cars ... --Alchemist-hp (talk) 04:25, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
    If that'll get him 100 FPs, I'd roll out 100 motorcycles after that... Face-wink.svg INeverCry 04:47, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
    And I would absolutely support you on that project.Face-smile.svg Since I originally come from the writing side of this project, I don't see it as giving someone 100 FPs, I see it as getting FPs for 100 different articles (or rather hundreds of articles since they could be used for multiple languages). Also, hey, we all have our signature photo subjects... --w.carter-Talk 09:09, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
    +1 Face-smile.svg --Alchemist-hp (talk) 10:48, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, may be QI but not outstanding enough for a feature IMHO. At just 6 megapixels it shows poor detail or sharpness, and there’s visible motion blur on all the details. I’d crop half of the bottom space out as well, there’s too much below and too little above the car. --Kreuzschnabel 05:10, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like this picture and consider it a good feature. In addition to being a quality photo, the Trabant, as the proletariat's car in East Germany, is historically important. And on the question of featuring numerous cars in similar compositions: Why not? We feature numerous church interiors with similar compositions, too. A worthy photo is a worthy photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:46, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • All the flower + bokeh are pretty standard too. w.carter-Talk 10:57, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:39, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 12:20, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support W. carter and Ikan make good points. I think I was being too rigid about this. INeverCry 21:22, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ralf Roleček 21:43, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per all of Kreuzschnabel's points. --King of ♠ 23:41, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Could be positioned better, good anyway. --Mile (talk) 16:46, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As I remember very well 1989, this photo is much "Wow" for me (Yes I'm old, I was born before the building of the Wall) . This is not a car, this is a Trabbi, ladies and gentlemen. An iconic vehicle, full of symbols, with a great historical value. Technically very good, if not excellent.--Jebulon (talk) 16:06, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:12, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 19:04, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 21:08, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support not spectacular, but a very clean and good and outstanding car image --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:18, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:2016.06.24.-04-Viernheimer Heide-Viernheim--Krabbenspinne-Thomisus onustus-Weibchen.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Aug 2016 at 16:52:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A crab spider - Thomisus onustus, female.

File:Lynx rufus - Zoo Sauvage de Saint-Félicien - 2016-07-19.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Aug 2016 at 16:49:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A bobcat (lynx rufus) at the Zoo Sauvage de Saint-Félicien
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Letartean - uploaded by Letartean - nominated by Letartean -- Letartean (talk) 16:49, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Letartean (talk) 16:49, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice idea and well done, yet I think the DoF is very shallow, at least the head should be in focus more or less. Don’t want to oppose for that though since the composition is striking. --Kreuzschnabel 17:00, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Good composition but I would like more sharpness at throat and body of the cat. -- Spurzem (talk) 17:23, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's a cat. That's all I need. Face-wink.svg INeverCry 19:05, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A bobcat, to be exact :-) --Kreuzschnabel 19:20, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:07, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yes it's a feline, prrr... And you'd think that would be enough, but as a cat lover and having been owned by a cat, I know that these fine beings have high standards regarding their looks, fur must be perfect and immaculate, and an FP should also portray them in the absolutely best manner. No fuzzy hairs! ... Seriously, it's a great image and a great pose, but for an FP there should be more DoF, here it is so shallow that the face looks almost detached from the rest of the body. Very unfortunate. >^o^< w.carter-Talk 20:37, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
    To be clear, it's not a cat, it's a bobcat. Really not as common. Letartean (talk) 00:56, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
    I once had someone here at FPC call a prize Bengal kitten shot at a Moscow cat show "an ordinary cat"... Face-tongue.svg INeverCry 03:52, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
    Of course I know what kind of Felidae it is, but I call all members of that family "cats", even Bengal tigers. Face-wink.svg And IMO bobcats are the coolest and greatest of all felines, hence I was very reluctant to 'oppose' this (and on top of that 'promote' that creapy spider above), but here it is all about the photo. w.carter-Talk 08:28, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Not sharp enough, in my opinion. Rarity is not so much of a factor when you are photographing an animal at a zoo. Try to get a clearer photo of the feline. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:27, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Unfortunately the shallow DoF spoils it for me - only the head is in focus. —Bruce1eetalk 06:24, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 19:03, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

File:2016 Gebaeude Grosser Feldberg ks01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Aug 2016 at 14:59:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Buildings and towers on the Großer Feldberg, Taunus
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by -- Kreuzschnabel 14:59, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Buildings and towers on the Großer Feldberg, Taunus, Germany. At last managed to be there for sunrise this morning. Got them all in first sunlight, the leftmost mast casting its shadow onto the rightmost tower nearly horizontally. I also like the shadow of the near low barrier covering the entire path. Stitched panorama of 6 exposures, therefore high level of detail.
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral as author -- Kreuzschnabel 14:59, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Admirable sharpness -- Spurzem (talk) 16:56, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive light. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:07, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support w.carter-Talk 18:52, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting shapes and light. INeverCry 19:06, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Love the stark shapes against the sky. Daniel Case (talk) 04:17, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Clear lines, restful composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:29, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice atmosphere. However, white dust speck in mid-air.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:51, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Isasza (talk) 19:05, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Right vertical lines are tilted (the left vertical lines aren't tilted): It needs perspective correction. Good (perhaps excelent)--Lmbuga (talk) 23:36, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Lmbuga: Have a second look please. The building’s edges on the right just aren’t vertical. The narrow windows are. --Kreuzschnabel 17:21, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
      • Symbol support vote.svg Support You're right. Sorry--Lmbuga (talk) 18:55, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
        • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very good DoF with that conditions--Lmbuga (talk) 19:06, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Åkerbräckans kyrkogård och södra hamnen i Lysekil.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2016 at 21:59:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Southeast Lysekil
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Sweden
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Not quite sure if composite images like this with the sort of unnatural sharpness in odd places that comes from stitching are allowed as FPCs. If not, please let me know. It was fun to make though, so I'll give it a try. A small treat is all the annotations on the file page. Take a look. :) - All by me -- w.carter-Talk 21:59, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- w.carter-Talk 21:59, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very nice. I have a similar photo by you in my queue of possible FP nominations. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:10, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks! Sounds intriguing. Btw, have you found the oil tanker on top of the roofs yet? :) --w.carter-Talk 07:48, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • In the distance! I'm not sure I noticed it before. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:37, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 18:57, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The cloud line puts what is otherwise a QI of a Swedish harbor over the edge. Daniel Case (talk) 02:56, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • I actually agree with you, and many FPs are all about capturing a special moment, either by sheer luck or infinite patience. The boats in the right places and no cars on the road were also very lucky (ok, I did wait for the sailboats with spinnakers to come out from behind the cliff and the freight boat to approach the dock) and hard-to-repeat-things. w.carter-Talk 08:54, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:08, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not very engaging composition, specially at bottom, + white in background a bit blown Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:50, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose With Christian -- Thennicke (talk) 02:48, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ralf Roleček 21:47, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Neither scenery nor composition are exciting enough --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:53, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no wow. Kruusamägi (talk) 20:54, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition does not strike me, looking arbitrary --Kreuzschnabel 17:23, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Trski ohridsko ezero 2014.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2016 at 21:54:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Reed near the Ohrid Lake in Struga, Macedonia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Darkocv - uploaded by Darkocv - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:54, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:54, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - It looks beautiful but both the sky and water seem a little strange to me. Is it overexposed? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:12, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose overprocessed --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:15, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose overprocessed ... --Alchemist-hp (talk) 06:47, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good composition, good colors – beautiful for me -- Spurzem (talk) 11:10, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Overprocessed, grainy sky and there is something weird going on in the upper right part of the sky at full size. Colors are interesting though. w.carter-Talk 11:25, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Spurzem. --Dэя-Бøяg 19:05, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 20:43, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Even if it weren't overprocessed, I don't think the composition worked quite as well as the photographer had hoped. Daniel Case (talk) 02:54, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Ara bleu (Planète Sauvage, Pornic).JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2016 at 21:37:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Ivor Novello.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2016 at 16:48:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ivor Novello

File:Odocoileus virginianus fawn, Owen Conservation Park, Madison, Wisconsin.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2016 at 11:09:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

White-tailed deer fawn (Odocoileus virginianus), Owen Conservation Park, Madison, Wisconsin
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by John Benson - uploaded by Bruce1ee - nominated by Bruce1ee -- —Bruce1eetalk 11:09, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- —Bruce1eetalk 11:09, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose These are skittish and hard to shoot creatures so hiding behind bushes to get them is a must, but having its front legs substituted by an unsharp plant is a no-go for me. The fawn is adorable and very sharp, still the composition is very unfortunate. --w.carter-Talk 12:38, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It is a pity. But the front legs should be to see. The blurred plant instead of that is very disturbing. -- Spurzem (talk) 13:10, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Too bad, otherwise it’s a fine shot. --Kreuzschnabel 14:03, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others; the placement of that plant in the front is unfortunate. Daniel Case (talk) 16:47, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 20:24, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I have to agree with the others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:29, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg moderate Too many bad vibes... this is a very good shot - only the unfortunate placement of the plant prevents it from being truly awesome. On the other side: As the fawn is utterly skittish by nature, being partially hidden by plants helps convey the idiosyncratic trait of this animal to the viewer - without hiding too much in the end. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:12, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive I find. You could crop the blurred plants on the right side a bit. The blurred plant in the foreground I first doesn’t noticed it so it's hardly a problem for me even if it's a bit unlucky. My focus when I look at the picture is on the deer and the atmosphere of the picture. --Hockei (talk) 07:27, 20 August 2016 (UTC)


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]

Sat 20 Aug → Thu 25 Aug
Sun 21 Aug → Fri 26 Aug
Mon 22 Aug → Sat 27 Aug
Tue 23 Aug → Sun 28 Aug
Wed 24 Aug → Mon 29 Aug
Thu 25 Aug → Tue 30 Aug

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

Tue 16 Aug → Thu 25 Aug
Wed 17 Aug → Fri 26 Aug
Thu 18 Aug → Sat 27 Aug
Fri 19 Aug → Sun 28 Aug
Sat 20 Aug → Mon 29 Aug
Sun 21 Aug → Tue 30 Aug
Mon 22 Aug → Wed 31 Aug
Tue 23 Aug → Thu 01 Sep
Wed 24 Aug → Fri 02 Sep
Thu 25 Aug → Sat 03 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 Assessments template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
      • Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
      • The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
      • You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
    • Add == FP promotion ==
      {{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.
    • Add on the file page its respective categories for Featured pictures of... like Category:Featured pictures of objects, Category:Featured pictures of landscapes, of people, of Germany, of Paris, etc. This is the only part of the process that needs a user who is not a bot to complete it.
  5. As the last step (whether the image is featured or not; including {{FPX}}ed, {{FPD}}ed and withdrawn nominations), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/August 2016), 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/August 2016.
  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.