Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Basilica dei Santi Apostoli (Rome) - Ceiling.jpg

File:Basilica dei Santi Apostoli (Rome) - Ceiling.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2016 at 20:48:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Basilica dei Santi Apostoli (Rome) - Ceiling.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Basilica dei Santi Apostoli (Rome) - Ceiling.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
•  Info All by LivioAndronico ^(talk) 20:48, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
•  Support -- LivioAndronico ^(talk) 20:48, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
•  Support - Glary in some places on the left but still quite good enough for a feature. I really like the ceiling fresco. Could you please give the name of the painter in your description? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:21, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Hubertl 07:26, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
•  Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:01, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose too dark. -- RTA 15:59, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

 Done Maybe a good reviewer ask before vote,but isn't your style --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 16:56, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

• But RTA is right, both are underexposed. --Mile (talk) 17:14, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

• Is better that you check another time. Anyway with photoshop is easily fixed and should not be based on things easily solved (unless it is not in bad faith) --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 17:47, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

•  Comment - If a photo is too dark, it should be judged on that basis. If it can be easily fixed, that's up to you, not the reviewer. And if you upload a new version, you should ping everyone who's already voted. You post a lot of excellent photos, but you are way too thin-skinned in your reactions to comments. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:34, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

• No Ikan Kekek,it is common practice when putting suggestions and not vote until you make the change. Moreover, I would ask you not to give comments if you do not know the whole story of a person you're new here. In addition, the photo remains here days and is easily controlled by all, and how often you do, change your mind. Also a photographer already knows what it is easy to change and what is not, such as Jebulon has done in this case. Then if you think you do not vote more my photos do not worry that it does not create me no failure, thanks.--LivioAndronico ^(talk) 20:28, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

• And more three cases [1],[2], [3] the many of negative judgments to which I have not objected when the criticism is real I accept--LivioAndronico ^(talk) 20:36, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

• I react to what I see, and I also reserve the right to oppose photos and then rescind my opposition once changes are made. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:41, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

• Unfortunately nobody change anything, except your judgment--LivioAndronico ^(talk) 21:22, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

• I have no idea what you're talking about, but it's really best to keep ugly personal conflicts out of this thread. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:26, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

• Then you see what you do and you will understand. Anyway I do not know what you mean for "ugly personal conflicts", I'm just answering your allegations --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 21:36, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

"you are way too thin-skinned in your reactions to comments" yeap, and he believes that he is important enough to people pursue him. We can't point the obvious, we can't put our opinion.
About be easy, it's not, if we do not have the raw file the noise you will rapidly increase with small adjusts, and even using raw file this improvements are limited, so you should do in camera do receive the best quality possible. -- RTA 14:15, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

• Of course I can annoy if people like you invent the things. Sure I cleared my photo and is full of noise now! Fortunately there are people who understand of photos --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 17:10, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

q.e.d. and this attacks are okay now on the community? -- RTA 17:35, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Sure sure,all is a attack for you --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 17:57, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

"Fortunately there are people who understand of photos", don't come with bs this is a attack... -- RTA 12:18, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

No....this is the truth --LivioAndronico ^(talk) 16:02, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

•  Support INeverCry 21:09, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:49, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:36, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Poco² 21:16, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Halavar (talk) 23:20, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
•  Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:45, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:49, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 22:01, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects