Commons:Featured picture candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Shortcut
COM:FPC
This project page in other languages:
Skip to current candidates Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates


FPCandiateicon.svg

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

Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and current month.

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

Formal things

Nominating

Guidelines for nominators

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 and SVGs) of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are strong mitigating reasons.
    • Graphics on Commons are not only viewed on conventional computer screens. They may be used in high-resolution print versions, and the images may be cropped to focus on portions of the image. See Commons:Why we need high resolution media for more information.
  • Scans – While not official policy, Help:Scanning provides advice on the preparation of various types of images that may be useful.
  • General quality – pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality.
  • Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer. Digital manipulation for the purpose of correcting flaws in an image is generally acceptable, provided it is limited, well-done, and not intended to deceive.
    • For photographs, typical acceptable manipulations include cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and color/exposure correction. More extensive manipulations, such as removal of distracting background elements, should be clearly described in the image text, by means of the {{Retouched picture}} template. Undescribed or mis-described manipulations which cause the main subject to be misrepresented are never acceptable. For images made from more than one photo, you can use the {{Panorama}} or {{Focus stacked image}} templates.
    • For historic images, acceptable manipulations might include digitally fixing rips, removal of stains, cleanup of dirt, and, for mass-produced artworks such as engravings, removal of flaws inherent to the particular reproduction, such as over-inking. Careful color 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, watercolors, 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 description 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). Lack of shadow detail is not necessarily a negative characteristic. In fact, it can be part of the desired effect. Burned highlights in large areas are a distracting element.
  • Composition refers to the arrangement of the elements within the image. The "Rule of thirds" is one useful guideline. Horizons should almost never be placed in the middle, where they "cut" the image in half. Often, a horizon creating a top or bottom third of the space works better. The main idea is to use space to create a dynamic image.
    • Foreground and background – foreground and background objects may be distracting. You should check that something in front of the subject doesn't hide important elements and that something in background doesn't spoil the composition (for example that the streetlight doesn't "stand" on someone's head).
  • Movement control refers to the manner in which motion is represented in the image. Motion can be frozen or blurred. Neither one is better than the other. It is the intention of representation. Movement is relative within the objects of the image. For example, photographing a race car that appears frozen in relation to the background does not give us a sense of speed or motion, so technique dictates to represent the car in a frozen manner but with a blurred background, thus creating the sense of motion, this is called "panning". On the other hand, representing a basketball player in a high jump frozen in relation to everything else, due to the "unnatural" nature of the pose would be a good photograph.
  • Depth of field (DOF) refers to the area in focus in front of and beyond main subject. Depth of field is chosen according to the specific needs of every picture. Large or small DOF can either way add or subtract to the quality of the image. Low depth of field can be used to bring attention to the main subject, separating it from the general environment. High depth of field can be used to emphasize space. Short focal length lenses (wide angles) yield large DOF, and vice versa, long focal lenses (telephotos) have shallow DOF. Small apertures yield large DOF and conversely, large apertures yield shallow DOF.

On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, color, 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.
  • Color is important. Over saturated colors 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 color AND texture, etc.
  • Noise refers to unwanted corruption of color 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 better 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

Please nominate videos, sounds, music, etc. at Commons:Featured media candidates.

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).

Simple tutorial for new users

Tutorial: Nominate on COM:FPC
How to nominate in 8 simple steps
STEP 1


STEP 2


STEP 3


STEP 4


STEP 5


STEP 6


STEP 7


STEP 8

NOTE: You don't need to worry if you are not sure, other users will try their best to help you.


Adding a new nomination

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}}

Strongly recommended: Please add a gallery page and section heading from the list at Commons FP galleries. Write the code as Page name#Section heading. For example: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports

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

Note: Do not add an 'Alternative' image when you create a nomination. Selecting the best image is part of the nomination process. Alternatives are for different crops or post-processing of the original image, if they are suggested by voters.

Voting

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 the 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

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 a 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

General rules

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

Featuring and delisting rules

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 (or 7 Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist votes for a delist) 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 when the bot has counted the votes and before the nomination is finally closed by the bot; this manual review can be done by any user familiar with the voting rules.

Above all, be polite

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

Table of contents

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.

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

Featured picture candidates

File:Mount Murchison.jpg

Voting period ends on 24 May 2021 at 05:58:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mount Murchison

File:Ilustración de Victoria Aguirre Anchorena (mujer Argentina).jpg

Voting period ends on 23 May 2021 at 17:12:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ilustration of Victoria Aguirre Anchorena
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/People#Paintings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created/uploaded by Rocío Mikulic - nominated by Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 17:12, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ezarateesteban 17:12, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Am I understanding this correctly that this is a digitally created portrait of the artist Victoria Aguirre Anchorena? I mean, it can't be made by her since she died in 1927, so who made this digital portrait? The description need to be clarified, the gallery probably changed if this is a computer-generated image and the categories needs to be sorted out. --Cart (talk) 17:50, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
It's part of contest Commons:Ilustratona made by the uploader, based on several pictures of the women, but without copying nothing of them. Ezarateesteban 17:59, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

PS:The ilustration is made in a paper and next digitalized Ezarateesteban 18:03, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

  • Ok, thanks for the explanation, I am very well aware of the process of making a portrait illustration. You need to add that to the description on the file page for clarification, and please fix the categories. Was she know for her cosmetics? Otherwise I find it a bit odd that a female painter is depicted as if she is putting on rouge instead of painting on her work. --Cart (talk) 18:24, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done Ezarateesteban 18:33, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pepe piton (talk) 18:38, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Señoritaleona (talk) 20:47, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Scann (talk) 21:03, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Since this is digital art, the only criterion would seem to be whether the viewer considers it good art or not. And I don't. It's silly, per Cart's comment, her face is strangely shaped for no apparent artistic reason, and there's a bunch of what we could call posterization instead of a lifelike gradient or something. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:40, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

File:Green heron in PP (14296).jpg

Voting period ends on 23 May 2021 at 14:27:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Green heron in Brooklyn

File:Tulipa bakeri 'Lilac Wonder' 09-05-2021. (d.j.b).jpg

Voting period ends on 23 May 2021 at 06:45:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • ✓ Done. Photos re-stacked. Thanks for the review.--Famberhorst (talk) 11:19, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment one more error on bottom right corner (note added). --Ivar (talk) 13:16, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done. Correction. Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:13, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Background has been replaced with artificial background. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:07, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • I don't think so. Artificial backgrounds have the same info all over when you pull the levels to extremes (saturation and light); they are homogenous. This is what this photo looks like when you do that and there are plenty of blotches and information in the background. To compare, I made an artificial background for the photo, and with the same enhancement settings it looks like this. There is a big difference. You can download the photo and do this test yourself in Photoshop. --Cart (talk) 15:46, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • All I am doing is reading the statement on the file page. Check it out Cart. May be that is wrong, and if so I will change my vote. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:48, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Yes, I see that, thanks Charles for pointing it out, I only went by what I see in the photo and it doesn't seems to be added in a computer. I wonder if something hasn't gone lost in translation here. Famberhorst, when you write "artificial background", do you mean that you photographed the flower against a black wall or paper as opposed to a natural environment outdoors? Artificial for me is when the background is added later using color in the computer. We might be talking about two different things here. --Cart (talk) 21:06, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • The pot with the flower was placed against a dark background and then photographed.--Famberhorst (talk) 04:38, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Thank you for clarifying. So only a language misunderstanding and how to use the 'retouched' template. I see that you have removed the text from the template. The template can be completely removed since it is not needed for the very small corrections you have made. It should only be used for bigger alterations in the computer. --Cart (talk) 06:33, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

File:Staring Down Hurricane Florence.jpg

Voting period ends on 23 May 2021 at 04:51:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Eye of Hurricane Florence

File:Veery in CP (43277).jpg

Voting period ends on 22 May 2021 at 19:07:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Veery in Central Park

File:Ulmus laevis flowers - Keila.jpg

Voting period ends on 22 May 2021 at 16:32:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ulmus laevis

File:Mount Shasta as seen from Bunny Flat.jpg

Voting period ends on 22 May 2021 at 15:43:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mount Shasta as seen from Bunny Flat Trailhead in May 2021

File:Jinji Lake Suzhou November 2017 002.jpg

Voting period ends on 22 May 2021 at 01:44:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jinji Lake, Suzhou
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#China
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ 01:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♥ 01:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose We have lots of photos of modern buildings taken from across a river/waterway, and I don't think this is exceptional. The weather or other conditions mean there isn't much detail and the sky isn't a pleasant colour. -- Colin (talk) 10:51, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unbalanced composition with a too bright back attracting all attention of the viewer (which could have been ok, but the bottom part suffers from it) --RolfHill (talk) 11:46, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose The haze seems to blur out the background buildings in an unflattering way. Also, I wish we could see the "pants" structure of the pants building, but I realize that angle may not be possible. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 13:33, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 19:03, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I do not share the opposing criticisms above, it is well balanced and composed, a very good quality, and a pleasant atmosphere. I think it is above almost night city images that we have. Though I would have a bit more processed it with e.g. maybe a bit more of saturation to accentuate the color vs gray contrast. Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:36, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Downsized? Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:07, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
    No, perspective-corrected and cropped. -- King of ♥ 02:17, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing so special for FP. -- Karelj (talk) 21:55, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The background on the right is not very interesting but I like the rest. --Ermell (talk) 21:22, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support The opposes have a point at thumbnail, but it looks better to me at full size. Suzhou's skyline doesn't get as much photographic attention since Shanghai and Lujiazui aren't so far away, but it's still pretty good. Daniel Case (talk) 01:48, 15 May 2021 (UTC)

File:Buff-banded Rail 1 - Newington.jpg

Voting period ends on 21 May 2021 at 15:47:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Buff-banded Rail
  • To clarify, the extremely special and very expensive lens used here and on a lot of JJ Harrison's bird photos, allows the photographer to select a very narrow band of perfectly sharp DoF while the rest of the image (foreground and background) becomes a smooth bokeh. If the bird is photographed in flight up in the sky, this effect is hardly noticeable, but at ground level it can look somewhat surreal. It's a style choice; some like and some don't. More info about the lens here. --Cart (talk) 19:33, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Can we please avoid making personal negative comments ("I've never liked John Harrison's blurred forgrounds"). This is absolutely standard at an advanced level of wildlife photography. See this and this, this, this and this, etc, etc, etc. -- Colin (talk) 21:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Ahum, this is not about getting down and dirty for a low level of shooting; Charles himself recommends it both here and here on current nominations. It's only this specific lens with its bokeh capabilities that's bugging him. We've heard it several times before (Like here for example). --Cart (talk) 23:05, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
No disrespect, Charles, but there is low and there is on-the-ground low. That lizard photo was either taken on sloping ground [it was Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:37, 13 May 2021 (UTC)] or from about knee height (otherwise we'd see sky or distant shrubs/trees in the background). The links I gave show some examples of the difference achieved when you get really really low. I remember reading a discussion from JJ with Diliff many many years ago that described crawling along mud flats on one's belly for a very long distance. The lizard photo was taken from 2.4m according to the EXIF with a 470mm equivalent lens giving a field-of-view of 4.4°. This photo I don't know the distance but the 1500mm equivalent lens has a tiny field-of-view of 1.4°. The difference of low height + distance here means we have a long section of foreground compressed into a thin slice. It wouldn't I believe, look a whole lot different with a 500mm lens vs 1500mm equivalent. The effect is largely due to angle-of-view: the linked websites show many very similar images shot with fairly standard telephoto lenses.
But importantly, I don't think it is healthy to negatively single out a person by name, as though this is "John Harrison's blurred forgrounds". Reviewers here might personally associated that look with one photographer, but that says more about reviewers at FPC and their experiences and observations than it does about that photographer. And negative comments like these make advanced photographers despair and decide to contribute to websites where their skill and talents are appreciated, not questioned. -- Colin (talk) 09:12, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Following the discussion Cart links to I had a long offline discussion with JJH and totally accepted the results produced by his lens. I vote to promote many of his excellent images. I just don't like the blurred foreground look, though I have not opposed this nomination. And, I have never pretended to be an advanced photographer, Colin. I claim to be a wildlife portrait photographer, nothing more. Oh! in case you wondered, Colin's "No disrespect" means "Disrespect" these days. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:37, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

File:Kobylá nad Vidnavkou (Jungferndorf) - small chapel.jpg

Voting period ends on 21 May 2021 at 14:45:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:تاق‌بستان.jpg

Voting period ends on 21 May 2021 at 10:44:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taq-e_Bostan
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Iran
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by AliHeidari2 - uploaded by AliHeidari2 - nominated by POS78 -- POS78 (talk) 10:44, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- POS78 (talk) 10:44, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose can't support due to lack of clarity of composition. This image would have been better taken at a different time without the shadow covering part of the door. I would also prefer a more direct angle, more like this. Buidhe (talk) 16:56, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above RolfHill (talk) 11:58, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Maybe if it were just the archways, the trees and the reflections. As it is it asks us to take in a lot. Daniel Case (talk) 01:25, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

File:Pasola.jpg

Voting period ends on 21 May 2021 at 09:05:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:TR Izmir asv2020-02 img58 Salepçioğlu Mosque.jpg

Voting period ends on 20 May 2021 at 20:46:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dome interior of Izmir Salepçioğlu Mosque

File:Soffione - Pappo di dente di Leone, infruttescenza di Tarassaco.jpg

Voting period ends on 20 May 2021 at 16:12:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dandelion Pappus, Dandelion infructescence
  • That's not a rule. It would rather depend on the plant and the composition. --Cart (talk) 17:15, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good but not exceptional, as such a common subject would require to be a Featured Picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:18, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above --Commonists 12:17, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too ordinary, quality issues (overexposure, missing detail) RolfHill (talk) 12:01, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Background too busy, per others. Daniel Case (talk) 20:59, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

File:Lower Antelope Canyon November 2018 006.jpg

Voting period ends on 20 May 2021 at 00:57:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lower Antelope Canyon
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose The upper part is blurred, in the middle there are strange halos, some red or white spots (however, these can be corrected). If you don't open the pic it looks very nice, but it has flaws, sorry. --Commonists 12:41, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
    Unfortunately that's the limitation of depth of field. I'm already using f/11, and focus stacking and/or a narrower aperture is not possible because tripods are not allowed inside. -- King of ♥ 02:56, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Per Charles. -- -donald- (talk) 12:55, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
  • @King of Hearts: Remove the dots I've put in the notes and that's fine by me, even if a crop of the blurred part would be better, but not necessary, however infinitely better.Thanks. --Commonists 10:34, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
  • IMO still FP. Thank you for the improvements. --XRay 💬 03:51, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
  • even better! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:14, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

File:Three-eyed lizard (Chalarodon madagascariensis) male Toliara.jpg

Voting period ends on 19 May 2021 at 17:32:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Three-eyed lizard (Chalarodon madagascariensis) male, Toliara
  • OK if you don't mind getting covered in dust slithering around on the ground like a snake! Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:29, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

File:Torre del Pian dell'Isola in Rignano sull'Arno risalente all'anno 1100 D.C. circa.jpg

Voting period ends on 19 May 2021 at 11:31:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tower of Pian dell'Isola in Rignano sull'Arno dating back to the year 1100 AD. About

File:Meridian Idaho Temple.jpg

Voting period ends on 17 May 2021 at 20:05:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Temple of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Meridian, Idaho.
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#United States
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:05, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:05, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think summer is unfortunately not the ideal time to photograph a south-facing building. If it's too close to sunrise/sunset, then the facade will be in shadow. If it's too close to noon, then the lighting and sky will be boring. I think you tried to straddle the difference by shooting at 4 PM, but it could have been much better any other season. -- King of ♥ 21:46, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Works for me. There's just enough contrast, and the bright, simple sky brings out the whiteness and shapes of the facade. Very well-composed, too. It probably wouldn't have worked without the contrast of the gardens, though. My father had a book of very good pictures of Mormon temples from I guess the early 20th century, and this photo reminds me of photos in that book. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:03, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There's something else that's a little harder to put my hands on: There's a kind of metaphorical purity to this photo. If you look up photos of LDS temples, most of them are white. I feel like this light accentuates the whiteness, and I don't have to be (and am not) LDS in order to appreciate the statement being made by the setting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:07, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Actually, that "ethereal" mood is the point :-) You describe it very well. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 23:22, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good EV Buidhe (talk) 00:36, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support An interesting building (I don't share their ideas), high key photography, a very appealing contrast between the facade and the green vegetation. --Cayambe (talk) 06:46, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The lighting seems wrong to me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:39, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Frank and Cayambe --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:02, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's not the most perfect moment of the day and year to take this photo --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:22, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothig special for FP nomination. -- Karelj (talk) 21:34, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Definitely a QI, but I agree with King of Hearts that this light is not right. Actually, like a lot of Mormon temples, this would work a lot better with a deep blue sky behind it ... I remember seeing the Idaho Falls temple from across the Snake River on the afternoon of the eclipse with IMO just the right lighting and getting a few shots of it ... I haven't yet been able to process them but I see FP potential. Daniel Case (talk) 01:08, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above RolfHill (talk) 12:13, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 13:22, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

File:Our Lady church in Marvejols 25.jpg

Voting period ends on 17 May 2021 at 13:45:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior of the Our Lady church in Marvejols, Lozère, France

File:Lac de Montriond 06.jpg

Voting period ends on 17 May 2021 at 13:42:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lac de Montriond in commune of Montriond (Roc d'Enfer in the background), Haute-Savoie, France

File:Mohammad Helal Ali امامزاده هلال ابن علی 04.jpg

Voting period ends on 16 May 2021 at 20:25:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hilal ibn Ali Shrine
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Iran
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Mostafameraji - uploaded by Mostafameraji - nominated by Shiasun -- Shiasun (talk) 20:04, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Shiasun (talk) 20:27, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support An excellent image under difficult lighting conditions. Would make the first night-time image in the gallery Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Iran. @Mostafameraji: Will be useful to add an English translation of the Description and Caption. --Tagooty (talk) 01:47, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Travia, Saeed Toosi a prominent Qur'an reciter and alleged child sexual abuser is seen in this picture! --Gnosis (talk) 07:52, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment As things stand, I'm at least slightly inclined to oppose, in spite of the great content, because of photo quality issues. In particular, the magenta chromatic aberration on the near right minar should be eliminated. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:45, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The perspective correction is not done properly, leaving the central verticals and all the horizontal tilted. The magenta/green CA is also prominent on all the books. --Cart (talk) 09:14, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Wonderful view, strong CAs in many places. (Yes, I am the 3rd one saying this, but the CAs really spoil the photo IMHO, sorry, this is why I repeat it.) --Aristeas (talk) 11:18, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting keep.svg Fixed I have removed as much CA as possible (automatic and manual), you have to have a very light touch because of all the lights in green and magenta (corrections are prone to spill over), and tweaked the perspective. Made in two steps in case someone thinks these are too big adjustments for overwrites, please revert if you think so. But now I think the photo is good to go. You may need to refresh (F5) your cache. --Cart (talk) 12:17, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support this version. It isn't perfect but this view during a broadcast ceremony is of much higher interest than an ordinary view of this mosque would be, and the mosque itself is quite impressive to begin with and unusual for being open-air. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:45, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Commonists 19:26, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:47, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:10, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Ermell (talk) 21:32, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:20, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I do not feel comfortable voting for a picture of a child abuser. Saeed Toosi has the main role in this picture and all these people are listening to him, so his presence in the picture cannot be considered small and minor. I do not even need to look at Wikimedia policies, everything related to child sexual abuse is a red line. --IamMM (talk) 07:54, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support @W.carter: Thank you very much for your great effort to rescue the photo from the CAs! – I understand and respect IamMM’s reservations, but for my simple European eyes this is mainly a photo of the illuminated mosque and of the praying congregation, so (in all respect) I think it is venial to promote the photo even from an ethical point of view. --Aristeas (talk) 08:42, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
    @Aristeas: I do not insist that others agree with this, and I also confirm that this image has no other problem to be chosen than the presence of Mr. Toosi himself. But at the same time, I still can not accept that having technical standards is a good/enough reason to consciously place a photo of a famous child sexual abuser on the main page of Commons. In response to your argument , if my Persian eyes saw a eye-catching and impressive photograph of a historic European church in which a priest accused of similar acts was lecturing, I would still strongly oppose it regardless of cultural or geographical differences.--IamMM (talk) 09:42, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
  • The main point of FPs is not to place them on the main page of Commons, that is a side-effect for very few FPs. There are always FPs not chosen for POTD on the main page for a number of reasons. Massmurderers, other offenders and their doings seldom make it to POTD. FPs exist so that we can get good pictures for all the different parts of the WikiProjects. Neutral Wikipedias are striving to be as good encyclopedias as possible, and it would look rather strange if only articles of pleasant things had good photos, while offensive stuff had bad or no pictures at all. I have supported many images of things I don't like or agree with here, simply for the sake of the encyclopedic value of them. If you have an ethical problem with any image, I think it would be better if you voiced your concern at POTD instead. --Cart (talk) 10:03, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
  • I have added some English to the photo's description. Perhaps someone speaking Arabic can tweak it for the better. I also noted that Mr. Toosi is present in the photo. Information like that is helpful if you want to state why a photo might not be appropriate for POTD. --Cart (talk) 10:51, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
  • (You mean someone who can read Farsi.) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:14, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
  • That works too. There are descriptions in both Arabic and Farsi on the file page. You can see that if you open the 'edit' window. I just picked the language that was entered first. --Cart (talk) 07:52, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Yes, I see this. Silly remark by me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:55, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
  • @IamMM: I completely understand and respect your point of view! I am so sorry, my “European eyes” was liable to be misunderstood. I did not want to assert any cultural or geographical differences regarding crime, justice, or ethics – child sexual abuse is a terrible crime, period, and should be regarded and prosecuted everywhere on the world regardless of cultural or geographical differences. What I wanted to say was just that simple people like me who are not familar with the distinctive features of Islamic prayer and especially not with the sophisticated practice of Qur’an recitation, do not even see that this photo emphasizes or features any special person -- all I see are many persons praying together in an illuminated, beautiful mosque. But I get the feeling that the more I write the more I am getting in trouble. I just wanted to review a photo, I did not want to harm anybody, I did not want to defend child sexual abuse or any other crime, and it’s probably best that I stop to write anything here before I get blocked or prosecucted. Should I leave Commons? Sorry to all of you and all the best to all of you. --Aristeas (talk) 10:10, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
  • FYI. I hope you are satisfied now. --Aristeas (talk) 10:13, 9 May 2021 (UTC) Thank you, IamMM, for your clarification (answered there) and sorry to all of you for the confusion. Probably this was a series of entangled misunderstandings. Sorry again and all the best. --Aristeas (talk) 11:22, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
  • According to the Wikipedia article Saeed Toosi was acquitted, therefore the comments of IamMM could be considered libel. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:56, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
  • The story of how Saeed Toosi was acquitted and the role of the Iranian leader in preventing the trial is one of the reasons for the sensitivity of the case.[1][2] Following the Iranian judiciary's refusal to hear the case, the families of the child victims went to the Turkish judiciary to pursue their complaint, and legal action is ongoing (according to MP Mahmoud Sadeghi). The English Wiki article is inaccurate in this regard.--IamMM (talk) 11:04, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Drama, drama... Seriously, as a neutral Wikipedian I might support even a picture of Marc Dutroux, if we got a featurable one (yet by now there is no photo whatsoever, alas). So I'm going to judge as a neutral Wikipedian actually should judge. The picture is not bad, but the sharpness is maybe just barely OK for QI, the composition with the barely cropped towers is average, there is vignetting, and the green lighting does not really add something to the Blue hour mood, as it probably should do. --A.Savin 11:56, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I understand IamMM's objections, but you can barely distinguish Toosi in the middle of the image. I don't really see this image as promoting him. Daniel Case (talk) 14:55, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 08:33, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Per A.Savin but the light is good and the scenery, too RolfHill (talk) 12:18, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

File:شهر قم از نگاه دوربین عکاسی - تصاویر باکیفیت از قم - کلانشهرهای ایران- مصطفی معراجی - والپیپر 06.jpg

Voting period ends on 16 May 2021 at 20:04:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Iranian Islamic architecture used in Imam Hasan al-Askari Mosque Minarets

File:שקיעה סתווית מעל מבצר עתלית.jpg

Voting period ends on 16 May 2021 at 19:22:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

שקיעה סתווית מעל מבצר עתלית.jpg
  • I might take a shot like this, but I wouldn't nominate it for FP. The composition is too unbalanced for such an ordinary scene. --Cart (talk) 08:32, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Nope, sorry. The photographer is trying to cramp too much into the compo, the anchor is one item too much. Also it is taken with slightly bad timing and too close, making the person dark and big (had he been turned slightly to the sun to catch some light, it would have been better) and his reflection in the sand is cut at the head, more or less crop would be better. Imagine this photoshopped version :-) --Cart (talk) 09:54, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose cropped too tightly on the right. We have better FPs of boats during sunset Buidhe (talk) 11:16, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Buidhe RolfHill (talk) 12:20, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support After some thought, I think the qualities suffice for an FP. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:15, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

File:Stonechat (Saxicola rubicola) male, Beaulieu, Hampshire.jpg

Voting period ends on 15 May 2021 at 10:43:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Your preferred image doesn't have as much definition or sharpness. And too much wood for me. I wouldn't put it up for FP these days. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:16, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
Charles, we're talking about capturing the moment, good light, good colours, good composition. Pixel peeping the other photo just shows that the point is being missed. -- Colin (talk) 08:09, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
FPC has certainly lost good composition to identify-species and technical perfection over the years. I'm thrilled that Rhododendrites is bringing it back for bird photos. --Cart (talk) 19:47, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment You might consider cropping out half the sky above the bird. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:52, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
  • I've made a suggested crop on the left Ikan Kekek leaving eye on rule of thirds. What do you think? Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:02, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
  • That looks good except that you could leave just a tiny bit more room to the left of the plant. But I also still think removing some of the sky above the bird would be good. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:07, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
  • let's see if others have an opinion, before cropping. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:10, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Can we please put the rule of thirds to death at FPC. Or at least, anyone who quotes it should be required to refrain from opposing another image due to "composition". It's a poor guide for newbies who don't know any better yet. Since FPC serves as a teaching environment for some new photographs, it would be sad if they felt this "rule" had any merit. -- Colin (talk) 08:09, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
  • The rule of thirds does have merit. Since when was FPC supposed to serve as a teaching environment? Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:20, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
  • FPC was not designed to be a teaching environment, nevertheless it has become that. New photographers come here to learn from comments made about photos and to make their first tentative nominations all the time. I can think of a number of users who have improved their photography skills thanks to this forum. The page views for this forum, plus the list, in English only is at an average of about 450/day. Add to that the 32 other languages that redirects here. A lot more people than the voters read these comments. --Cart (talk) 11:25, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good image, but lacking wow factor. --Tagooty (talk) 02:36, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Regardless of any theoretical backing, I agree with the proposed vertical crop as it looks pleasing to my eye. -- King of ♥ 21:27, 7 May 2021 (UTC)


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)

Mon 10 May → Sat 15 May
Tue 11 May → Sun 16 May
Wed 12 May → Mon 17 May
Thu 13 May → Tue 18 May
Fri 14 May → Wed 19 May
Sat 15 May → Thu 20 May

Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)

Thu 06 May → Sat 15 May
Fri 07 May → Sun 16 May
Sat 08 May → Mon 17 May
Sun 09 May → Tue 18 May
Mon 10 May → Wed 19 May
Tue 11 May → Thu 20 May
Wed 12 May → Fri 21 May
Thu 13 May → Sat 22 May
Fri 14 May → Sun 23 May
Sat 15 May → Mon 24 May

Closing a featured picture promotion request

The bot

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. 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

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")|gallery=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 gallery 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 gallery and section of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images.
    • Add the template {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
      • If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
      • If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessments template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
      • Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
      • The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
      • You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
    • Add == FP promotion ==
      {{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.
  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/May 2021), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.

Closing a delisting request

  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/May 2021.
  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. Edit the picture's description as follows:
      1. 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).
      2. Remove the image from all categories beginning with "Featured [pictures]" (example: Featured night shots, Featured pictures from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, Featured pictures of Paris).
      3. Remove the "Commons quality assessment" claim (d:Property:P6731) "Wikimedia Commons featured picture" from the picture's Structured data.
    3. Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.
  5. If this is a Delist and Replace, the delisting and promotion must both be done manually. To do the promotion, follow the steps in the above section. Note that the assessment tag on the file page and the promotion tag on the nominator's talk page won't pick up the /replace subpage that these nominations use.

Manual archiving of a withdrawn nomination

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    In the occasion that the FPCbot will not mark withdrawn nominations with a "to be reviewed" template and put them in Category:Featured picture candidates awaiting closure review just like if they were on the usual list, put the following "no" template:
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=X|oppose=X|neutral=X|featured=no|gallery=|sig=--~~~~}}
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    becomes
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], not featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. Open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/May 2021), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.