Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/August 2008

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


This is an archive for Commons:Featured picture candidates page debates and voting.
The debates are closed and should not be edited.


Contents

Image:HerengrachtAmsterdamBrug.jpg, not featured[edit]

Herengracht, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Massimo Catarinella - uploaded by Massimo Catarinella - nominated by Massimo Catarinella -- Massimo Catarinella (talk) 13:32, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Massimo Catarinella (talk) 13:32, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose regretfully because I like the place and the mood. I think it was taken a taaaad too soon ; buildings are too dark compared to the sky. Buildings are leaning outward as well. Benh (talk) 13:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The buildings are leaning outward, because they were built in this manner. In Dutch we call it 'op vlucht staan'. The picture was taken with a Manfrotto tripod, which has a integrated leveling bubble, so there is no tilt present. I have taken pictures later on, but on those pictures the buildings were even darker. Canals in Amsterdam are not well lit. This is why its so hard to take a picture here at night.. Massimo Catarinella (talk)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I've seen that an Autoequalisation in Corel Photo Paint gives a better result. --Alex:D (talk) 14:49, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral, fifth-day rule => not featured. Lycaon (talk) 13:07, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Flower Impatiens.JPG[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

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 it has insufficient DOF and a poor composition. 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.

Lycaon (talk) 16:24, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg Silfiriel (talk) 16:08, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Khp.jpg[edit]

Kentucky Horse Park

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 lack of wow. 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.

Dilaudid 08:52, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Libellule sur roseau.JPG[edit]

Une libellule sur un roseau

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 it is not identified and not sharp enough. 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.

Lycaon (talk) 09:57, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Subject is not in focus. Too much going on in this photo to bring the subject to immediate attention. - TheWB (talk) 12:30, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Chincoteague Pony Swim 2.jpg[edit]

Chincoteague Pony Swim July 30, 2008

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 poor overall quality. 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.

Dilaudid 22:55, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Hovering Gulls.JPG[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

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 the topic is too small and not properly identified. 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.

Lycaon (talk) 11:58, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg QuestionWhat exactly do you mean by "the topic is too small"? I didn't identified the bird firmly because, it's not my field of expertise, although I am sure it's Mediterranean Seagull. How to fix this? But if the photo doesn't have what it takes to be a quality image, just say so, I like negative critics. Should I rename the photo to "A pair of hovering Mediterranean Seagulls" Am I boring you?-- Silfiriel (talk) 15:03, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
    The image is 95% blue sky, so the topic (gulls) is too small. Furthermore, though I'm no ornithologist neither, I'm not convinced by the id. It could as well be Larus ridibundus as L. melanocephalus. Lycaon (talk) 17:53, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I was considering the option that the seagulls are "Larus ridibundus", but their habitat even with migrations spans from Westernmost Europe to North America, while the photo is taken on the Balkan Peninsula, which is surrounded by the Mediterranean Sea, Eastern Europe.The City of Ohrid, about 150km far from the Adriatic Sea.
    • Thanks for this contribution! Not gaining the Featured Picture status doesn't necessarily mean it's not a fine photograph and as such, a valuable contribution. If the photo is cropped so that the birds take up most of the space, the size would drop below the recommended limit of 2 megapixels (see our image guidelines). We need to be sure (not only guess) what our Featured Pictures portray. Furthermore the images need to be categorized appropriately and accurately to reflect the sematics of the photograph. I now categorized this as Category:Unidentified subjects so that others can help identify the birds. It's not always up to just one person to construct everything that consists a featured level picture – that's why we're a community :) –Dilaudid 18:00, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Bk parrot-2, Kristiansand Zoo, Norway.jpg[edit]

Parrot from Kristiansand Zoo in Norway.

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 there is heavy CA fringing on the beak and the bird is not identified. 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.

Lycaon (talk) 12:30, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Bamberg Altes Rathaus BW 1.JPG, not featured[edit]

Old town hall Old City Hall on a river.JPG

Original, not featured[edit]

  • I am not sure how that part of the bridge is called, its purpose is to break ice, so I guess it may be called icebreaker. I have never seen a house built on top of it. Maybe there are parts of the world where it is a common sight, and you have been there. Just my 2c. Barabas (talk) 18:42, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow--Sensl (talk) 19:08, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose due to poor technical quality: Not sharp at full resolution. —αἰτίας discussion 21:44, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 09:59, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Edit1, not featured[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Barabas (talk) 22:47, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- interesting subject, good composition Ianare (talk) 05:04, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Certainly a "wow" from me, but the sky is quite grainy and it's not very sharp. Naerii (talk) 10:35, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Noise very low to my opinion, nice light, good exposition. J-Luc (talk) 13:59, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no wow--Sensl (talk) 00:38, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Alvaro qc (talk) 02:29, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The subject is interesting, but I get no wow from this picture. Maybe you could try a night shot? Or at a different time of the day in order to use shadows to give a little more volume to the building? --S23678 (talk) 13:34, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. --Estrilda (talk) 20:42, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Not much wow, but good quality... Can't decide. Leo Johannes (talk) 14:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 18:09, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Orange flower with water.jpg, not featured[edit]

An orange flower, with dew collected in the bulb.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Rootology - uploaded by Rootology - nominated by Rootology -- rootology (T) 17:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- rootology (T) 17:17, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Zero wow--Sensl (talk) 19:06, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose distracting background, nothing special. —αἰτίας discussion 21:41, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very colorful.--RekishiEJ (talk) 01:58, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Confusing composition + lacking crispness and detail --Richard Bartz (talk) 03:01, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great! --Micha L. Rieser (talk) 12:54, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. Alvaro qc (talk) 18:11, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Cannot be promoted as nothing is identified, and as such not properly categorized. Lycaon (talk) 05:45, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment White flowers look like some type of Chrysanthemum and the Orange flower could be a Chrysanthemum but reminds me of another bulb or daisy type flower but can't think of it's name. Bidgee (talk) 12:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sadly, i have to agree with Lyacon. Apart from that, this is IMO definietly a great picture which should be featured - it 'sparkles of life'; the colors is amazing, and it is good quality too.

Leo Johannes (talk) 13:17, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 18:11, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Morelia-viridis.jpg, not featured[edit]

Morelia viridis

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Micha L. Rieser - uploaded by Micha L. Rieser - nominated by Micha L. Rieser -- Micha L. Rieser (talk) 23:26, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Micha L. Rieser (talk) 23:26, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looks good in thumb and the tight crop plus the sober centrical composition is surely a matter of taste -but- the large washed out (slight OE caused by a harsh neon lamp light, I assume) area on the upper left part of the snakes back and the missing brilliance in quality and crispness is KO criteria here 4 me. --Richard Bartz (talk) 02:57, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Richard is right: good but not excellent. --Mbdortmund (talk) 10:38, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Technically maybe not perfect, but great WOW 4 me. --Karelj (talk) 20:18, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose subject not rare enough to forgive technical issues as outlined above Ianare (talk) 05:20, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. I like it. Thierry Caro (talk) 11:53, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wash-out is borderline but doesn't seem blown. A little photoshopping could help with the graininess at full size, but encyclopedicness and wow make up for the technical problems. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 10:51, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Barabas (talk) 18:21, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unfortunate lighting advertises this as a zoo pic. Lycaon (talk) 05:46, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Lycaon. --S23678 (talk) 02:06, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow and encyclopedic (although it does not care that much whether the image is encyklopedic or not; remember that Wikipedia is just one of our projects; if an image would be good in a news article, I think it would be same important as it would be good in aqn encyclopedic article). Leo Johannes (talk) 18:22, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree with Leo Johannes. -- IvanTortuga (talk) 19:15, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 7 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 18:12, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Gestreifte Quelljungfer01.JPG, not featured[edit]

Cordulegaster bidentata

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- Böhringer (talk) 20:26, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Böhringer (talk) 20:26, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice --Mbdortmund (talk) 23:25, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- would support but needs english description Ianare (talk) 04:55, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • added basic english info
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It needs a description, which in this case, is provided in 2 languages. The FPC page is available in 25 languages. English descriptions (even if practical for a lot of voters) are not mandatory, since it would restrict the use of FPC process to people fluent in English. Le multilinguisme de Commons est une richesse plutôt qu'un handicap! --S23678 (talk) 14:49, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I'm not asking for a full translation of the text, but at least some basic info. I'm sure there are plenty of users here that can do this. For this image I was able to do it, but it would be better if a speaker of the language were to do it. (maybe it's not really a dragonfly, but something that looks like one, for example). Je suis bien d'accord avec toi à propos du multilinguisme Ianare (talk) 17:00, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not sharp enough--Sensl (talk) 00:35, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support not sharp ? J-Luc (talk) 07:55, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the background distracts. Alvaro qc (talk) 17:53, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not sharp enough and yet somewhat oversharpened (pale haloes). Lycaon (talk) 05:47, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really cool, and that is more important than quality, I think. Leo Johannes (talk) 13:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I wish the crop would be a little tighter it being an animal photo and all. But besides that I like it. --IvanTortuga (talk) 19:16, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 14:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Kobarid1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Kobarid

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded & nominated by Miha (talk)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Kobarid, Slovenia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info There is also a darker version with more visible light-shadows game...
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Miha (talk) 08:26, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral First of all the darker version is too dark. This one is the better version. The picture is well done. The composition is good. The trees in the foreground and the houses give a good feeling for the size of the mountain. But its is lacking wow. Maybe you should have done this picture later or earlier in the day when the light is not so harsh and the colours are little bit warmer. There are also a lot of dust spots visible --Simonizer (talk) 09:01, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, I agree with Simonizer about the quality of the light. --Aqwis (talk) 12:08, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support It is nice and has lots of encyclopedic value (but the light could be better.) This is only a weak support. --MacMad (talk) 17:59, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral as per above. MacMad
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not enough wow and rather dark. Also needs geo-coding, of course. Lycaon (talk) 05:52, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Lycaon. Well geocoding isn't nescessary I think, but the image is really too gray. Perhaps with sun lower on the horizon it would be better. And less clouds of course. --Aktron (talk) 13:51, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 2 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 14:21, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Fire in kiuas.jpg[edit]

A fire in kiuas, a specialized stove used in Finnish sauna.

Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because of over and underexposure, poor crop and unsharpness 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.

--S23678 (talk) 00:36, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Sea of phones.jpg[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

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 it is too small 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.

Lycaon (talk) 17:58, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Dicepción Neonato.jpg[edit]

Photography very difficult to take. It is unknown origin and parentage of this newborn used for drug trafficking.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Photography very difficult to take. It is unknown origin and parentage of this newborn used for drug trafficking. created by User:The Photographer - uploaded by User:The Photographer - nominated by User:The Photographer -- libertad0 ॐ (talk) 18:26, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- libertad0 ॐ (talk) 18:26, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Can you please add a more detailed image description? And can you or someone else please translate it to en? I'm not really sure what is shown here (or better: If I see what I think I do). --norro 19:01, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thaks you. That's ready --libertad0 ॐ (talk) 13:12, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because it has a very low overall quality (details, color, TV capture artefacts) 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.
As well, I think that it has low value, by being more shocking (wide open abdomen and head, blood on the table and instruments, story about being stuffed for drug smuggling, etc) than educative/useful. --S23678 (talk) 13:58, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Anolis equestris - bright close 3-4.jpg, featured[edit]

Anolis equestris

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Anolis equestris - created, uploaded, and nominated by Ianare (talk) 05:14, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ianare (talk) 05:14, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The animal is well defined, and the contrast is crisp. --Jtornado (talk) 19:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose crop--Sensl (talk) 00:32, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question do you have a suggestion on cropping ? Ianare (talk) 14:48, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
No, I do not.--Sensl (talk) 20:34, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support same comment as on QIC page :) incredible details, but not very appealing background. This still deserve to be promoted (for better visibility by all wikipedias) in my opinion. -- Benh (talk) 13:49, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Border case for me. Good colours and sharpness, but unfortunate crop (would have liked to see all of the animal). Lycaon (talk) 05:49, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice colors and contrast, wow feeling. Leo Johannes (talk) 13:29, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Why do we always have to have a picture showing the entire animal? We don't, the crop is fine for such a nice picture. This will illustrate its tree-of-life article very well. -- Ram-Man 13:50, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I dont have anything about cropped animals either but in this case a vertical picture format would be better IMO --Simonizer (talk) 14:25, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Vertical would be better. --Daniel Baránek (talk) 19:01, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 08:54, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Crinum Lily.JPG, not featured[edit]

Crinum Lily

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by IvanTortuga - uploaded by IvanTortuga - nominated by IvanTortuga -- IvanTortuga (talk) 19:45, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- IvanTortuga (talk) 19:45, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Focus is inconsistent. Also, the dark left 1/4 of the photo doesn't do anything for me. I think it would look better with that section cropped. - TheWB (talk) 20:10, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Also the brown/dying flowers in the background does not look so good. /Daniel78 (talk) 21:32, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quite bad composition, very noisy, nowhere sharp. —αἰτίας discussion 15:26, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 09:12, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Nagoya Castle(Larger).jpg[edit]

Nagoya Castle

Original, not featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This is a 3x3 segment stitched panoramic in Rectilinear Projection. Downsampled to Full HD size.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by base64 - uploaded by base64 - nominated by base64 -- Base64 (talk) 14:36, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Base64 (talk) 14:36, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Why such a drastic downsampling? You're jumping from 9X10 Mpx (less overlap and crop) to slightly over 2Mpx. From the guidelines: "it is important that nominated pictures have as high a resolution as possible" --S23678 (talk) 14:57, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree with above. The result (size mainly) is not very worth the a 3x3 pictures stitch, and all the steps you went through to. I guess this could have been a one shot catch, and a downsampled version would have given the same quality. Still a very nice building (and probably even better if a twice as big version is given). -- Benh (talk) 15:56, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Vassil (talk) 16:49, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support well done. —αἰτίας discussion 19:38, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The nomination speaks only about technique. Can you explain how the photograph we see is better as a result of the technique? Fg2 (talk) 21:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The major reason for the stitch is for the perspective correction. --Base64 (talk) 01:57, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • There's no need for stitch to achieve perspective correction. Benh (talk) 21:20, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No details in anything, bad lighting, very low quality of a common subject--Sensl (talk) 00:34, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Size --Base64 (talk) 01:57, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 11:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Larger size, featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I'm such a fool. In this image, even the "golden fish" on the top can be seen. Please don't say "no details in anything". This is 8MP, bigger than the 2MP original--Base64 (talk) 01:57, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by base64 - uploaded by base64 - nominated by base64 -- Base64 (talk) 14:36, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Base64 (talk) 14:36, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- I fully agree with you. J-Luc (talk) 07:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- I like the quality! --Specious (talk) 09:45, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- high resolution and good quality, almost no tourists in the shot Ianare (talk) 15:21, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose "golden fish" is it what they are? Details are not good even trees are not good. the lighting is bad (sky). low quality. I do not like composition with ropes. What is "perspective correction" anyway? Why not to do it more natural?--Sensl (talk) 20:29, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I suggest you read all this in English Wikipedia(en:Nagoya_Castle) before posting such comment. "On top of the castle are two golden imaginary tiger-headed fish, called kinshachi (金鯱); this motif is used as a talisman for fire prevention. They are said to be a symbol of the feudal lord's authority. " Why are there ropes?, those are not ropes. During World War II, the upper part of the castle is destroyed. The rock on the bottom is not. Back in 1525, there wasn't effective en:Lightning protection system and drainage pipes penetrating the bottom rocks. There are not occasional but permanent, refer to the image in 2005 Image:Nagoya_Castle_01.jpg. As Wikipedia said, the castle is open for public exhibition, with air-conditioning and elevators. Finally, If you don't even know what is perspective correction, I suggest you take a look at COM:QIC which there are 5 images require perspective correction. --Base64 (talk) 01:27, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This image is so clear, my instinct was to clone out the drainage tube that goes from the roof to the ground which is much much smaller than the fishes that are there. I suggest that Sensl needs to perhaps wipe their monitor off (the occasional cleaning of the viewing mechanism is helpful for seeing things in the display). -- carol (talk) 20:42, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support really good, sharp and clear, good composition. --Mbdortmund (talk) 21:51, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose First, praise for sharpness and clarity, and for getting good color in the shachi. Automatic exposure often overexposes them, and they become nearly white; you've done well to avoid that. But second, in my view, the photo is dull. It's dark and dreary, not in a moody or interesting way, but in a way that begs for lightening. I suggest adjusting levels and curves to add light to the building (which I see as the subject of the photo) and the foreground. Even Photoshop's Auto Levels should help, and with work you can make this picture sing. While still keeping great color and detail in the shachi. I'll gladly support it when the "wow" is there. This photo has the makings of a real winner. Fg2 (talk) 02:05, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thank you for your greatly useful comment, I did a in-place upload to correct the over-blue colour balance and adjusted the shadows. --Base64 (talk) 03:04, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support That makes the mood much more appropriate (in my opinion). Thanks! Fg2 (talk) 06:07, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Naerii (talk) 18:53, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Vassil (talk) 06:51, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very impressive and outstanding quality. –Dilaudid 19:18, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--libertad0 ॐ (talk) 20:03, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A pity about the weather, but good quality. --Estrilda (talk) 20:56, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support-- Looks very nice. --Lošmi (talk) 14:29, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 11:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Azow Sea Sunset.JPG[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Канопус Киля - uploaded by Канопус Киля - nominated by Канопус Киля -- Канопус Киля (talk) 15:17, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Канопус Киля (talk) 15:17, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • In this image the beatiful Azov Sea Sunset. Канопус Киля (talk) 15:18, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sunset is nice and the sea is nice also. But yet, there is no central part of the image where should the wiever focus on (such problem is having also one beatiful image of Norwegian lake). I have here also some similar images, also with such nice sky, but I haven't even uploaded them because of what I have written here. Sorry, but such image I can't support as FP. --Aktron (talk) 15:26, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sunsets pictures are always nice cause sunsets are nice. But i can't see anything what makes this picture more special than other sunset pictures --Simonizer (talk) 14:13, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not enough wow for a sunset. Lycaon (talk) 08:29, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because it has little value. From the guidelines: almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others' 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.

--S23678 (talk) 15:34, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Unknown Berries.JPG[edit]

Honeysuckle Berries

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 the subjet is not identified. 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.

Dilaudid 06:58, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Sorry guys I figured but I just skipped out being kind of dumb about it. It's a Lonicera sp. then again is sp. to vague for featured pictures? --IvanTortuga (talk) 19:15, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:SEM Lymphocyte.jpg[edit]

Electron microscopic image of a single human lymphocyte

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 it is too noisy. 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.

Lycaon (talk) 08:08, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This should be deleted anyway because it was nominated by an IP address, should it not? --MacMad (talk) 05:34, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • IPs are welcome to nominate images and comment on them. For voting however, you have to be logged in. Lycaon (talk) 06:07, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Conditional Support - conditional on demonstrating that SEMs, by their nature, are that noisy. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Pork packing in Cincinnati 1873.jpg, featured[edit]

Pork packing in Cincinnati, Ohio (1873)

Note: The image has 5.37 MB!

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Pork packing in Cincinnati. Print showing four scenes in a packing house: "Killing, Cutting, Rendering, [and] Salting." Chromo-lithograph of the cartoons exhibited by the Cincinnati Pork Packers' Association, at the International Exposition, at Vienna. Entered according to Act of Congress in the year 1873 by Ehrgott & Krebs in the Office of the Librarian of Congress at Washington, D.C. Created by Ehrgott & Krebs - uploaded by Alex:D - nominated by Alex:D -- Alex:D (talk) 13:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support These "telling pictures" are representative for that trade and time and, above that, the fine quality of this chromolitography, makes it a quality image. -- Alex:D (talk) 13:56, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This picture is worth a thousand words --Romwriter (talk) 20:50, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - J-Luc (talk) 08:13, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like to see results of all these manufactures on my table... --Karelj (talk) 14:49, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support yes ! Peter17 (talk) 18:53, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice and valuable! --Beyond silence 23:59, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Keta (talk) 14:56, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose tilted. Lycaon (talk) 16:28, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
    There's nothig I can do, it's a typographical error. Only the upper border and the top and bottom margin of the images are a little bit tilted. Side and bottom borders and left and right margins are straight. --Alex:D (talk) 21:05, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
    Pity, nice image otherwise. Lycaon (talk) 05:56, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Agree with Romwriter (talk · contribs) – a very valuable picture. --odder 22:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality and historical value, reminds me of The Jungle. Cirt (talk) 06:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support When this type of image it's important to respect the technical limitations of the era. A very slight tilt of tenths or hundredths of a degree often occurs. When restoring, I'll correct for errors that result when a brittle document cannot lie flat, but I'll leave this kind of slight misalignment. It's truer to the period to retain these little hints that the work was done by hand rather than automated. Durova (talk) 10:24, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose titled. Канопус Киля (talk) 21:49, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

result: 10 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 13:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Aeshna cyanea freshly slipped Q1.jpg, featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Aeshna cyanea freshly slipped on a Equisetum arvense
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- Böhringer (talk) 20:00, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Böhringer (talk) 20:00, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wow wow wow wow !!!!! Benh (talk) 20:57, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Definitely. Too bad this version doesn't show the time needed for transformation. --Alex:D (talk) 22:06, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support J-Luc (talk) 08:13, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow, what a great series! I'm just wondering, did you keep the white-balance constant for all shots? --Chmehl (talk) 08:36, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
ja --Böhringer (talk) 20:09, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. Then it is the different lighting that changes during daytime that we can see in the pictures. --Chmehl (talk) 20:21, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Supergeil --Richard Bartz (talk) 10:45, 27 July 2008 (UTC) *** und das von dir :-) danke (Böhringer)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nominated the other version at en Wikipedia Muhammad 16:34, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great work - Keta (talk) 17:48, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. :) -- Laitche (talk) 21:05, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice story --Simonizer (talk) 21:24, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great job. --Karelj (talk) 14:51, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support well done. —αἰτίας discussion 16:53, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support Craziest shit I've seen in a long time! Picture of The Year material. –Dilaudid 19:16, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The scariest thing I've ever seen. Incredible. --Silfiriel (talk) Log in to vote! --Simonizer (talk) 00:07, 29 July 2008 (UTC)Now I did! --Silfiriel
  • Symbol support vote.svg 718smiley.svg Awesome! Alvaro qc (talk) 04:47, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice series! - TheWB (talk) 12:18, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - great work. Jonathunder (talk) 03:50, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--libertad0 ॐ (talk) 20:01, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - great job! --Micha L. Rieser (talk) 00:44, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great value and sharp. Cirt (talk) 06:21, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent. The other version is more educational, but this one is easier to view. It's a toss-up. Both are FP material. -- Ram-Man 19:51, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lycaon (talk) 08:52, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S23678 (talk) 00:11, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very clear and sharp photo, and wonderful encyclopaedic material as well!!! SriMesh | talk 04:47, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportWow, great shots! ;-) - Giacomo1970 (talk) 17:37, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Brilliant. Plani (talk) 06:44, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 26 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 13:40, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Lock on the Cayuga-Seneca Canal.jpg[edit]

A lock on the Cayuga-Seneca Canal

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A lock on the Cayuga-Seneca Canal. Created by Kathleen Conklin - uploaded by Natl1 - nominated by Natl1 -- Natl1 (talk) 21:03, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Natl1 (talk) 21:03, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Quite good, but it could be better. --Aktron (talk) 22:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Over saturated. -- carol (talk) 23:06, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Carol --S23678 (talk) 19:50, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The subject of the picture is the lock. But this is actually not visible. I'd prefer a picture where you can see the closing doors of the lock for example. --AngMoKio (talk) 19:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg Natl1 (talk) 21:45, 4 August 2008 (UTC).

Image:Anolis equestris - bright full.jpg[edit]

Anolis equestris

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, and nominated by Ianaré Sévi
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support some people wanted full body rather than cropped ... --Ianare (talk) 03:12, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose distracting background --Simonizer (talk) 11:49, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Sorry, thought the other one didn't make it ... this one isn't as good anyway. Ianare (talk) 13:23, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Wishie.jpg[edit]

Western Salsify Wishie

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by SriMesh - uploaded by SriMesh - nominated by User:SriMesh -- SriMesh | talk 23:37, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- A large puff-ball wishie of the Western Salsify Tragopogon dubius showing the achenes with their feathery pappus. Cropped from
    Larger pic
    ‎ Feel it is as sharp, and as wonderful a picture as this previously featured image of a small wishie at Image:Dandelion clock.jpg (Wishie, clock or Blow-ball. The flower head matures into a spherical "clock" (also known as a "wishie") containing many single-seeded fruits (achenes). Each achene is attached to a pappus of fine hairs, which enable wind-aided dispersal over long distances. )SriMesh | talk 23:37, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because it is too small 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.

--S23678 (talk) 00:32, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Checked the page you referred to. Size should be 2 Mega pixels according to guidelines, my adobe photoshop program says this cropped version is 2.09 Megapixels in size.SriMesh | talk 02:09, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • The cropped version is 882x828 px = 0.73 Mpx and the uncropped is 3.78 Mpx... I don't know where you got that 2.09 Mpx. --S23678 (talk) 03:02, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment 882 × 828 pixels which should equal ~ .7 pixels. In my opinion, the camera manufacturers have done a dis-service to their customers selling cameras according to "mega-pixels" when it is just more honest and a less used lingo to say the largest pixel area that can be obtained from that camera. Photoshop is telling you how much disc space that image is taking and how much needs to be downloaded to display in internet connections. Also, I tried this before, claiming the disc spaced used definition of file size instead of the area measurement of the file size. (size hint: 1200 x 1600 pixels is too small for the nit-picker(s) here, whose personal camera makes larger photographs than that.) -- carol (talk) 03:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Ok Dokey. Now that I understand that ( I think ) a bit better, I believe this image fits the photo size requirements. I get 2240532 pixels, so I could crop it in a bit more yet. The image still is in focus, and shows the awesome detail of the achenes with their feathery pappus....
Wishie from next image on camera hard drive
.

Pictogram voting delete.svg SriMesh .

Image:Geum triflorum.jpg[edit]

Three-Flowered Avens Three-Flowered Avens edit

Original

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 the main subject is obstructed and the composition is weak in its symmetry. 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.

––Dilaudid 07:33, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Cropped version

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 the main subject is obstructed and the composition is weak in its symmetry. 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.

––Dilaudid 07:33, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg SriMesh .

Image:Warszawa-pod Blachą.jpg, not featured[edit]

Copper-Roof Palace, Warsaw, Poland

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created,uploaded and nominated by Sfu (talk) 07:25, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Simonizer (talk) 21:22, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Was this nominated before? Maybe same subject but different user. I seem to remember this shot though. --Dori - Talk 03:54, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
    I think you do remember the QI nomination from april. --Sfu (talk) 05:24, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the light. Ziga (talk) 08:44, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice quality and lighting, unfortunately no wow enough for me, sorry. - Keta (talk) 10:05, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As above. --Karelj (talk) 14:53, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above, additionally technically not that good at full resolution. Altogether not good enough. —αἰτίας discussion 16:52, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive and well depicted. –Dilaudid 19:11, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support any vote please --Sfu (talk) 13:37, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Tilt --S23678 (talk) 15:01, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad quality,light. Канопус Киля (talk) 21:48, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 08:53, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Weinberg-Ipsheim-BurgHoheneck SK 0001.jpg, featured[edit]

Vineyard Ipsheim

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Simonizer (talk) 12:21, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Simonizer (talk) 12:21, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice composition, a bit dark on the foreground, but good enough for me. - Keta (talk) 10:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark. --Karelj (talk) 14:55, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good composition; nice picture. Well done. —αἰτίας discussion 16:48, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- TheWB (talk) 17:15, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Alvaro qc (talk) 20:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice composition and weather conditions ; ) --S23678 (talk) 13:42, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark. An FP should already wow as a thumb, this one only does at full res. Lycaon (talk) 16:26, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice and beautiful light. /Daniel78 (talk) 21:42, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It is dark. But beautiful in its darkness. --Aktron (talk) 13:53, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Due mainly to the excellent composition. -- Ram-Man 19:52, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It is dark, but it composed very nicely. --MacMad (talk) 05:36, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 08:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Donostia Igeldotik.jpg, featured[edit]

Panorama of Donostia

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Keta -- Keta (talk) 17:46, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Panoramic image of the city of Donostia from top of mount Igeldo. - Keta (talk) 17:46, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Keta (talk) 17:46, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Simonizer (talk) 08:19, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Grandísima la foto. Estoymuybueno 12:38, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good picture, well done. —αἰτίας discussion 16:39, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - TheWB (talk) 18:41, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Alvaro qc (talk) 04:44, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, beautiful composition. --Aqwis (talk) 12:09, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice place, nice panorama! -Tobi 87 (talk) 13:08, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not technically perfect, but great colors and composition. --S23678 (talk) 13:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Love the Panorama! Bidgee (talk) 13:12, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Picturesque and beautiful. Cirt (talk) 06:20, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice colors --Böhringer (talk) 21:23, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow mitigates minor technical issues. It looks the way I remember it, though the sea was quite a bit rougher last time ;-). Lycaon (talk) 08:51, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 08:56, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Matterhorn (from Gornergrat train).jpg[edit]

Matterhorn

  • Pictogram voting info.svg InfoView on the Matterhorn from the Gornergratbahn, Switzerland. Created, uploaded and nominated by Lycaon (talk) 20:19, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lycaon (talk) 20:19, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Not so bad, but I think it is quite dark. --Aktron (talk) 22:27, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Some colour correction could improve this picture --Simonizer (talk) 11:42, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great subject, but a bit too dark. Here's a FP of the Matterhorn (Deletion Candidate IMO), but with better exposure. --S23678 (talk) 15:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination ...this version ;-). Lycaon (talk) 16:15, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Well if you are fixing it, perhaps you can also straighten the photo. Matterhorn seems to be leaning to the left. Maybe it's the way it is, but it doesn't look leaned on chocolates :). Ok I am not joking, I just rotate it a little to the right and it looks much better. However, at full size, it looks really blurry, nothing is sharp enough. --Silfiriel (talk) 20:29, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Stamford Bridge stadium.jpg

Image:High-Resolution Iris Picture.jpg[edit]

A high-resolution image of a human eye/iris. This eye/iris in question belongs to Colin Sasseen and was taken by Jake Maheu using a Canon Powershot A410.

Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because of the burnt out area. 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.

––Dilaudid 07:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:jolie-maison-morbihan.jpg[edit]

Maison bretonne de charme

Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because of overexposed highlights and tilt. 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.

Dilaudid 07:30, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Vancouver dusk pano.jpg, featured[edit]

Vancouver, BC dusk panorama

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Mfield - uploaded by Mfield - nominated by Mfield -- Mfield (talk) 01:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mfield (talk) 01:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Amazing sharpness, good job! --Dori - Talk 03:33, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice, great detail. - Keta (talk) 10:19, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support well done. —αἰτίας discussion 16:33, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - TheWB (talk) 18:41, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - wow ! Peter17 (talk) 18:52, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Exceptional quality. –Dilaudid 19:07, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Amazing –Jontts (talk) 20:50, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support toll --Böhringer (talk) 21:01, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Quite Amazing! Full of wow! --IvanTortuga (talk) 06:11, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, wow! --Aqwis (talk) 12:09, 29 July 2008 (UTC
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fantastic!! If you geocode your picture it will be perfect ;) -Tobi 87 (talk) 13:07, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question If the original panorama was 50000X4000 px (200 Mpx), why not have a final result larger than 10 Mpx? A 40-50 Mpx panorama would give a still very sharp 4-to-1 downsampling from the original picture, and would incorporate way more details. As well, should be geocoded. --S23678 (talk) 14:04, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
If there was provision for a non commercial CC license variant in Wiki then I would gladly upload the full size original. I will add the geocoding though. Mfield (talk) 16:04, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Extraordinary! --Alex:D (talk) 16:44, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! --Romeo Bravo (T | C) 16:09, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportWow!Exceptional quality--libertad0 ॐ (talk) 20:00, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lestat (talk) 21:26, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fantastic resolution, good in details, excellent quality – makes me wow ;-) --odder 22:20, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fantastic panorama! Bidgee (talk) 13:13, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I have seen many panorama shots of cities on Commons but this one is quite well done. Cirt (talk) 06:20, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Downsampling. :-(. Lycaon (talk) 12:53, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very sharp picture all the way across the panorama, very awesome picture to add for encyclopaedic puroposes. ( Should also be a puzzle... :-) SriMesh | talk 04:49, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support a very nice pictire.--Pauk (talk) 10:23, 6 August 2008 (UTC) voting period was over -- Benh (talk) 22:20, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, too bright sky. Канопус Киля (talk) 17:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC) voting period was over -- Benh (talk) 22:20, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 20 supports, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Benh (talk) 22:15, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

image: TransAmerica Pyramid.jpg, featured[edit]

TransAmerica Pyramid, San Francisco, California

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by The WB - uploaded by The WB - nominated by The WB -- TheWB (talk) 17:54, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- TheWB (talk) 17:54, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very abstract. Great! --Simonizer (talk) 00:12, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. –Dilaudid 06:20, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it, too -Tobi 87 (talk) 13:05, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Great composition. I will support if geocoded. As well, is this a stitch or a single shot? --S23678 (talk) 13:52, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thanks for the comments. This is a single shot. How do I go about geocoding an image? - TheWB (talk) 14:04, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Here's how. --S23678 (talk) 14:08, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done. Thanks for the info. - TheWB (talk) 14:38, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S23678 (talk) 17:17, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 718smiley.svg --Kjetil_r 15:30, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--libertad0 ॐ (talk) 19:59, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Both "wow" and extra ordinary quality. Great editing, to. Leo Johannes (talk) 12:40, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great quality, sorta feels funny to stare at for too long but agree it has a wow factor to it. Cirt (talk) 06:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very abstract --Böhringer (talk) 13:09, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good picture, makes me crazy and i love it :-)--HouseGhostDiscussion 23:54, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 11 supports, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Benh (talk) 22:16, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Dendrocygna bicolor - Nantes 2.jpg, not featured[edit]

Dendrocygna bicolor in Nantes

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Peter17 - uploaded by Peter17 - nominated by Peter17 --Peter17 (talk) 18:49, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Peter17 (talk) 18:49, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Composition seems slightly unfortunate to me, and the dark triangle at the top right is distracting; did you consider cropping the image a little bit as to remove the triangle and de-center the subject? Rama (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I am not sure that the picture will become better if the subject is de-centred. It's leaning a little, enough for me. I like its look... I'm sure he follows me... Sémhur 14:58, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice duck and composition, but no wow. Crapload (talk) 16:58, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good composition and sharpness, but the loss of "wow" makes I rather would say this is a QI. Leo Johannes (talk) 14:13, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No WOW factor. Bidgee (talk) 13:10, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow, and that little plastic thing on the leg is not very nice. --S23678 (talk) 15:04, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose that plastic thing on the leg ruins it. Alvaro qc (talk) 08:51, 6 August 2008 (UTC) voting period was closed -- Benh (talk) 22:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info it is a bird ringing thing, I don't see why it is a problem. It has nothing to do with the good/bad quality of the picture. Peter17 (talk) 18:42, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Quality is one out of many aspects we judge for FP. Subjective arguments about the color, shape, composition, volume, and about the subject itself are entirely valid, and are actually what separates QI from FP. In this case, IMO, the bird ringing, by it's color, size and location, becomes the "highlight" of the picture, which is not good (IMO, again). --S23678 (talk) 19:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 supports, 4 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 22:18, 6 August 2008 (UTC) 

Image:Brinkhallin kartano.jpg, featured[edit]

Brinkhall Manor, built in the 1790s, in Kakskerta island, Turku, is the first Neoclassical building in Finland.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dilaudid • uploaded by Dilaudid • nominated by Dilaudid on 19:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Brinkhall Manor, built in the 1790s, in Kakskerta island, Turku, is the first neoclassical building in Finland. –Dilaudid 19:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportDilaudid 19:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Amazing colours, this photo makes me smile –Jontts (talk) 20:49, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Simonizer (talk) 21:34, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support quite nice, well done. —αἰτίας discussion 17:55, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - TheWB (talk) 19:29, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--libertad0 ॐ (talk) 19:58, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great photo of an Historic building! Bidgee (talk) 13:09, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Done well. --Aktron (talk) 13:50, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 19:08, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, Nice coloring, interesting symmetry, also has value. Cirt (talk) 06:18, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportLycaon (talk) 08:48, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good quality, but no wow. --S23678 (talk) 15:05, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 11 supports, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Benh (talk) 22:21, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Mlčechvosty, vlak na trati prvního koridoru.jpg, not featured[edit]

Train EC Jan Jesenius from Hamburg-Altona, Berlin-Hauptbahnhof, Dresden-Hauptbahnhof and Děčín Hlavní nádraží station near Mlčechvosty train stop. Electric locomotive class 371 (Czech), cars are German

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Aktron - uploaded by Aktron - nominated by Aktron -- Aktron (talk) 13:43, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Aktron (talk) 13:43, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, get closer! --Aqwis (talk) 11:21, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I tried to, but the train was so fast, that I was even unable to switch to continous shooting. But after all I think the train is here depicted quite well. --Aktron (talk) 18:31, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral This picture would have been perfect with a good motion blur. The train looks static, sadly. --S23678 (talk) 15:29, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 08:57, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Shanghai scycrapers.jpg, not featured[edit]

This is the pisture of Shanghai scyscrapers — Jin Mao Tower and Shanghai World Financial Center which disappears in the clouds.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This is the picture of Shanghai scyscrapers — Jin Mao Tower and Shanghai World Financial Center which disappears in the clouds. It was really impressive sight for me... created by Lošmi - uploaded by Lošmi - nominated by Lošmi -- Lošmi (talk) 02:25, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lošmi (talk) 02:25, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral, not wery bad but noisy. Канопус Киля (talk) 12:18, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like the placement of both skyscrapers here (too close) and colors of the edges of the image is also not very good. --Aktron (talk) 18:35, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeNoisy and composition. --Kolossos (talk) 20:41, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The Sun glares too much in this photo, making the skyscrapers unclear. --MacMad (talk) 05:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't view the disappearing building as an added value for this image. Composition at the bottom as well. --S23678 (talk) 15:39, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 14:09, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Old Colonial Building.svg, not featured[edit]

Estructuras Coloniales

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by User:The Photographer - uploaded by User:The Photographer - nominated by User:The Photographer -- libertad0 ॐ (talk) 22:32, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- libertad0 ॐ (talk) 22:32, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Does not say anything to me and quite simple work... (seems to me) --Aktron (talk) 23:39, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose If you had a more detailed schematic of a specific building--particularly an orginal architectural sketch--that might help. I think I recall seeing some old plantation plans from Antigua that date from the eighteenth century. Tug on my sleeve and I'll see about digging them up--they need restoration, so offsite via Skype would be a good way to transfer .tif files if you're interested. Best wishes, Durova (talk) 02:51, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Thax Durova. Maybe by email? :) --libertad0 ॐ (talk) 14:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Simple cut-'n-paste work. Lycaon (talk) 08:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
His comment was an insult and misplaced --libertad0 ॐ (talk) 14:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Not meant as an insult, sorry if you took it that way, but all the elements repeat several times, so in vector work that is called cut and paste. Lycaon (talk) 15:09, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
I understand that sometimes it is annoying to note mediocre work, perhaps this is not the case. But you must remember to be assertive, this is a job and the perpetrators must be respected. I do not speak for this, but in general --libertad0 ॐ (talk) 16:02, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Background overexposition As per Aktron. --S23678 (talk) 15:44, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 14:11, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Pittsburgh dawn city pano.jpg[edit]

A dawn panorama of the city of Pittsburgh, PA

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Mfield - uploaded by Mfield - nominated by Mfield -- Mfield (talk) 04:53, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mfield (talk) 04:53, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Bit windy up there? Parts of the image are blurred... Diliff (talk) 06:39, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, parts of the picture are very blurred. --Aqwis (talk) 11:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, I was about to support, until I opened it at full res... View, composition, lighting are beautiful. But right part of the picture is very blurry... Wind ? forgot to turn off any stabiliser ? -- Benh (talk) 11:46, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination woah, hold on, I must have inadvertently uploaded the wrong version as I surely didn't mean to nominate this one. I withdraw this nom while I figure it out. Mfield (talk) 14:19, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Fultondesign7.jpg, featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

May can be sharpened... --Beyond silence 00:05, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 8 supports, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Benh (talk) 09:23, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Li na 2007 sydney medibank international.jpg, not featured[edit]

A picture of Li Na playing tennis, under Creative Commons license.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Windsok - uploaded by Windsok - nominated by MacMad -- MacMad (talk) 05:15, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MacMad (talk) 05:15, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Econt (talk) 00:53, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice sports photo --AngMoKio (talk) 21:06, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Well done, but not outstanding capture. Crapload (talk) 02:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral This image doesn't really give me any WOW factor but is a nice photo. Bidgee (talk) 13:07, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, JukoFF (talk) 18:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor framing. Lycaon (talk) 08:36, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Natl1 (talk) 21:08, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice, but no wow. --S23678 (talk) 00:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, no wow. Канопус Киля (talk) 17:56, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 5 supports, 4 opposes, 1 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 09:23, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Anse Takamaka-Mahé-Seychelles.jpg, featured[edit]

Anse Takamaka, Mahe, Seychelles

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Tobi 87 -- Tobi 87 (talk) 13:19, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tobi 87 (talk) 13:19, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Due to weak technical quality: Very noisy at full resolution. —αἰτίας discussion 17:53, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition. Barabas (talk) 18:15, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - TheWB (talk) 19:41, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support At the first sight, the horizon seems to be tilted, but it is in fact not (or only very, very sligtly) tilted. Nice subject and composition, no major quality problems IMO. -- MJJR (talk) 20:09, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per αἰτίας. Noise and white haloes spoil the image. Lycaon (talk) 05:55, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support cool --norro 07:35, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, nice composition. --Kjetil_r 15:33, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Romeo Bravo (T | C) 16:08, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- It's the clear water with visible coral beneath that pushes this over the top for me. Durova (talk) 19:11, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--libertad0 ॐ (talk) 19:56, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, nothing special. Канопус Киля (talk) 09:57, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Quite noisy, but my opinion is that the great composition (a kind of "wow") outweigh that. Leo Johannes (talk) 12:36, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WOW Love it -- IvanTortuga (talk) 19:12, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Image has a WOW factor and also makes it feel Tropical location just looking at it. Bidgee (talk) 13:05, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like the shadowing and crispness of the tree. Cirt (talk) 06:16, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Vassil (talk) 09:48, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Original composition. --S23678 (talk) 15:07, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, Seychelles are forever. --Pauk (talk) 10:24, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, that's just what people fancy Seychelles are, but that's not what Mahé is, which is much more profusing. This picture is a poor reduction to an expected vision for holidays market. --B.navez (talk) 18:05, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 16 supports, 4 opposes, 0 neutral => featured. Benh (talk) 09:26, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Lake Near Søvassli Norway.JPG, not featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Created, uploaded and nominated by Julioromano (talk) 15:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Julioromano (talk) 15:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too common scenery IMO. The picture is good, but the subject has no wow to me. --S23678 (talk) 17:13, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It may be common to some (cultures, locations and nationalities) while others will travel thousands and thousands of miles to catch even a glimpse of something like this. –Dilaudid 08:07, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • A lake with small mountains covered by forest on the opposite shore may attract people comming from places where this is uncommon... but it's still a very, very common sight! Snow is uncommon for a great number of people, but a snow covered scenery is still a very common sight. --S23678 (talk) 14:26, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- This pic gives a feeling of inner peace. The exposure is well made, such all the areas result to have a natural tone. -- Ilfranzo (talk) 22:37, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, I agree with user:S23678. --Kjetil_r 15:27, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The quality is not very good. The surface of the water contains artififacts and has lost a lot of detail. /Daniel78 (talk) 21:35, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, I agree with Daniel78 and it also lacks a "point of interest" you can "focus" on. Right now it's just a horizon with mountains. --Aqwis (talk) 09:11, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition. --Specious (talk) 15:16, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. It's a nice northern Lake. --Pauk (talk) 10:25, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 4 supports, 4 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 09:27, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Iowa and Nebraska lands10.jpg, featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Burlington and Missouri River Railroad - uploaded by Durova - nominated by Durova. Restoration of Image:Iowa and Nebraska lands.jpg. -- Durova (talk) 19:08, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Durova (talk) 19:08, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - TheWB (talk) 19:47, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no wow. Lycaon (talk) 21:20, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes wow – the typography, printing technique and paper quality used really are something to look at. Beautifully restored to near original form from the initial scan. –Dilaudid 23:24, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow. -- Crapload (talk) 04:45, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Connection to historical event makes wow for me. Per my knowledge, Americans sold lands for low price to get Europeans to move in USA. --QWerk (talk) 12:21, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 09:11, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes wow. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 23:24, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Perhaps a valued image. /Daniel78 (talk) 09:14, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support From a historian's point of view, this is an exciting document. It's also a nice example of 19th century color printing. And the quality of the scan is very good. So for me it's FP worthy. -- MJJR (talk) 20:35, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 7 supports, 2 opposes, 0 neutral => featured. Benh (talk) 09:48, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Chincoteague Pony Swim 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Chincoteague Pony Swim July 30, 2008

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by FieldMarine - uploaded by FieldMarine - nominated by FieldMarine -- FieldMarine (talk) 20:09, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- FieldMarine (talk) 20:09, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, the composition is poor Lycaon (talk) 20:40, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - What I'm doing wrong during the upload of my images? I added this one & the one above recently & the images look like good quality on my desktop. Am I doing something wrong upon upload? I agree, the pic looks bad as shown here. FieldMarine (talk) 22:27, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
    • It's hard to tell without having access to the file on your desktop. Not to let you down, but these two suffer from at least the following: lack of clear subject, tilt, motion blur, unsharpness, lack of contrast, poor composition and unbalanced colours. If the colour space of the image on your desktop is not set right (for viewing on screen, eg. sRGB), the colours may seem different on a web browser as opposed to an imaging software, though fixing that alone unfortunately won't make these Featured Picture level. That said I believe to be speaking on behalf of the whole community when I say that these are nevertheless a valuable contribution to Commons, thank you for that, and I wish for your continued effort! –Dilaudid 23:15, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poor composition is a matter of taste and not a FPX reason. --norro 19:04, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
    Poor composition is a technical issue and as such a perfect FPX reason. Supporting just as an anti-oppose at the other hand may be less valid!! Lycaon (talk) 19:27, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
    "Poor composition" is certainly not a technical issue, it's an aesthetic issue. Technical issues are things like unsharpness, noise, and so on. --Aqwis (talk) 17:21, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
    Composition is not solely an aesthetic issue. It is governed by sets of rules, making it technical too. Lycaon (talk) 12:13, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
    The so-called composition "rules" are not rules, they are merely guidelines. Many, if not most, of the finest photographs the world has seen are not guided by your "composition rules". --Aqwis (talk) 18:26, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't know what this image is about. And I think the compostion could be better. --Aktron (talk) 13:48, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeDilaudid 21:40, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment please state reason for opposition as a courtesy to the author/uploader. Lycaon (talk) 22:18, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I believe I stated reason enough in my comment above. –Dilaudid 07:51, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Right, sure. I have a reflex posting this message when seeing an unsupported oppose. Sorry, wasn't necessary here of course. Lycaon (talk) 08:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • First of all Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. The picture is just really nothing special. Second of all, there are pictures here FPXed due to "lack of wow". "The wow" effect a matter of taste. Scroll down and you'll find what I am talking about. There's something just wrong with the possibility that everybody can FPX, just hours after the photo has been posted. Maybe this should be done at least 2 or three days after the nomination and some votes have been casted. I am not saying this because my photos got FPX, I am an amateur photographer, I was pretty much expecting it, I am still learning -- Silfiriel (talk) 17:34, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, poor composition. --Aqwis (talk) 17:21, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quite obvious composition problem, FPX should have been left there. --S23678 (talk) 15:09, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 supports, 6 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 09:49, 9 August 2008 (UTC) 

Image:Basilica of the Sacred Heart.jpg, featured[edit]

Basilica of the Sacred Heart, Brussels.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dilaudid • uploaded by Dilaudid • nominated by Dilaudid on 22:59, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Basilica of the Sacred Heart, Brussels. –Dilaudid 22:59, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportDilaudid 22:59, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Indeed good quality, but not that much wow... I can't descide whether it is enough wow... Leo Johannes (talk) 12:42, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sharp, good colors and subject is looking really good. --Aktron (talk) 13:47, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Definitely! Jon Harald Søby (talk) 23:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, great colors, lighting/shadow contrast, very nice. Cirt (talk) 06:15, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Luc Viatour (talk) 13:38, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support incredible photography. I also agree with the points made by Cirt Anonymous101 talk 17:59, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, JukoFF (talk) 18:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 21:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MJJR (talk) 21:29, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, too unsharp for a picture of an object as easy to photograph as this basilica. --Aqwis (talk) 17:19, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The perspective is really nice, but I don't like the semi washed-out advertising about "Expo Da Vinci" --S23678 (talk) 15:13, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good composition. I like the way up to the hill in the foreground --Simonizer (talk) 09:23, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 10 supports, 1 oppose, 2 neutral =>  featured. Benh (talk) 09:52, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Environmental sculpture by Yigal Tumarkin at the city of Arad.JPG, not featured[edit]

Haredi people on a visit to Arad, Israel

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Michael Jacobson - uploaded by Gridge - nominated by Aviad2001 -- Aviad2001 (talk) 09:49, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Aviad2001 (talk) 09:49, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think different angle would be much more suitable for statues or similar objects. This does not show the statue as primal object. Compostion like this would be much better and image I could support. --Aktron (talk) 17:55, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, I completely disagree with Aktron. The angle in the picture he links to is common and way too boring. The people in this picture give context, which adds to the picture. --Aqwis (talk) 17:18, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not sharp enough Ianare (talk) 05:30, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Boring sculpture (IMO) and featureless landscape. No wow. --S23678 (talk) 15:15, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 15:49, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Portrait of Jupiter from Cassini.jpg

Image:SF Fleet Week air show.jpg, not featured[edit]

2007 San Francisco Fleet Week Air Show

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by The WB - uploaded by The WB - nominated by The WB -- TheWB (talk) 14:51, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- TheWB (talk) 14:51, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, it is noisy and unfocussed Lycaon (talk) 14:57, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. Lots of wow and is technically very good. --MacMad (talk) 04:50, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Color noise, vignetting, chromatic aberration. /Daniel78 (talk) 07:50, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose And no wow. --Aktron (talk) 13:45, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition and technical problems mentionned above --S23678 (talk) 15:18, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 15:50, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Mount Everest as seen from Drukair.jpg, not featured[edit]

Mount Everest as seen from Drukair

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by shrimpo1967 - uploaded by Russavia - nominated by Russavia -- Russavia (talk) 18:06, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Russavia (talk) 18:06, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support My first reaction when I saw this image was "wow". Leo Johannes (talk) 18:23, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noisy, lack of contrast and above all tilted. Lycaon (talk) 19:34, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Tilted, boring composition (50% of the picture consists of unspectuclar blue sky), lack of contrast, vignetting --Simonizer (talk) 19:38, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I consider the contrast as the biggest problem here. --Aktron (talk) 14:36, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Same reaction as Johannes --Gonzalo Rivero ><> (talk) 16:28, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Contrast, vignetting and horizon tilt (at the cost of a slightly smaller crop) could be fixed, I presume. -- Klaus with K (talk) 11:34, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment I've tried my hand at editing the thing and provided our existing Everest FP as comparison. The shot was in here; the camera settings just weren't very skilled at handling a snow capped peak against a blue sky. Durova (talk) 22:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment An improvement certainly, but I feel the contrast is now on the harsh side. I know it is difficult through a plane window. -- Klaus with K (talk) 11:58, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Agreed about the contrast. I tried about ten different approaches with the histogram including different crops and automatic settings. This is where it wanted to go, but I wound up manually adjusting the foreground clouds and the background. Noticed the two existing FPs along the way. This has the advantage of a wider crop, but I'm uncertain whether the shortcomings make up for it. I'll abstain from the voting; mainly wanted to see the potential inside that original nom. Durova (talk) 16:35, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the composition, but has too much technical problems. Maybe a polarized filter would have helped for the contrast (I don't know). --S23678 (talk) 15:23, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The quality is actually quite remarkable for the conditions under which it was taken. I created version that falls between the original and Durova's, but in the end if the information is not in the photo you can't bring it out with Photoshop. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 09:05, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 2 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 15:51, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Poet's Daffodil.jpg[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

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 too shallow depth of field. 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.

Dilaudid 12:44, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:WishieSized.jpg, not featured[edit]

Western Salsify Wishie

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by SriMesh - uploaded by SriMesh - nominated by SriMesh -- SriMesh | talk 04:37, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A large puff-ball wishie of the Western Salsify Tragopogon dubius showing the achenes with their feathery pappus. ‎ Feel it is as sharp, and as wonderful a picture as this previously featured image of a small wishie at Image:Dandelion clock.jpg The flower head matures into a spherical "clock" (also known as a "wishie" or Blow-ball containing many single-seeded fruits (achenes). Each achene is attached to a pappus of fine hairs, which enable wind-aided dispersal over long distances.-- SriMesh | talk 04:37, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sharpness is not enough for such a delicate subject - filling the frame would have brought out more detail. Mfield (talk) 18:17, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 15:55, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Beaufort regiment de sambre et 1909 cd 1001.ogg[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Robert Planquette, and Paul Cézano, and Pierre d'Assy - uploaded by Rama- nominated by Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC) -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I hope this isn't disruptive, but we have so many high-quality sound files here that I thought that it might be worth testing the waters to see if there's any interest in creating some sort of Featured Media category beyond simple pictures. We have Media of the Day, but that's no real substitute for such a project. I chose this one as the test case as it's A. Very high-quality for 1909, well-documented, and, to avoid Anglocentric bias, not in English. Anyway, thanks for your time. - Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because this is featured pictures not sounds. Sorry. 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.

Lycaon (talk) 16:10, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Which is my point: We don't have any sort of featured sound program, so I went for the nearest possibility. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Which is my point: Nothing stops you (and maybe quite a few would help you) setting up a featured sound program. E.g., recently Valued Images was construed and is now running smoothly. And BTW, I didn't think of your nom as disruptive. It's good to bring it to the attention of more contributors anyway. ;-). Lycaon (talk) 18:10, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Fair enough. I just wanted to test the waters for such a project =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:07, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:A viev in the entry of Basil's Cathedral.JPG[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because of technical reasons mentioned above. 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.

Dilaudid 12:39, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Emblems of USA 1876.jpg, featured[edit]

Pictogram voting info.svg Info Moving this back to top of the stack to give more visibility to the edit. Benh (talk) 10:09, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Original, featured[edit]

Emblems of USA in 1876 Emblems of USA in 1876

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by A.J. Connell Litho. - uploaded by Alex:D (talk) - nominated by Alex:D (talk) -- Alex:D (talk) 21:09, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's a fine heraldic composition -- Alex:D (talk) 21:09, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lestat (talk) 21:23, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jon Harald Søby (talk) 23:22, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality and could prove to be pretty useful as well. Cirt (talk) 06:15, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Could be valuable on the original background. Lycaon (talk) 12:49, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Which is? --Alex:D (talk) 22:20, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the federal seals at top appear to float in the air. I'm not sure why the uploader chose to eliminate the background; removal left a few pixels behind. Retaining the orignal paper grain gives a more authentic feel. Might support a redo of the document. Durova (talk) 10:14, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
The pixels have gone now. --Alex:D (talk) 10:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Changing to Symbol support vote.svg Support. Durova (talk) 13:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 5 supports, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Waiting for other nomination to end. Benh (talk) 09:51, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Edit 1, not featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Same image, this time with the original background. Very impressive... --Alex:D (talk) 19:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 0 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 15:54, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Church of Bad Oberdorf.jpg[edit]

Church of Bad Oberdorf

Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because of unoptimal lighting, distortion and overexposed clouds. 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.

Dilaudid 12:36, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Pszczew kosciol wisnia6522.jpg, not featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Wisnia6522 -- Wisnia6522 (talk) 09:18, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wisnia6522 (talk) 09:18, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Aktron (talk) 13:44, 1 August 2008 (UTC) Good pic, man.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MJJR (talk) 21:25, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support clear, sharp and crisp. Cirt (talk) 22:41, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good composition, but technically insufficient. Needs a bit of noise reduction in the sky, is not sharp and has a lot of CA fringing. Lycaon (talk) 08:31, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Should be goecoded --S23678 (talk) 15:26, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Not bad, but missing that little something... Quite subjective, I agree. --S23678 (talk) 19:53, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Shadows, and general image quality. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:16, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice work, but not enough wow for a featured picture. Barabas (talk) 19:30, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 09:14, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:2008-07-23 VW Golf crossing railroad in Durham.jpg, not featured[edit]

VW Golf GTi crossing the railroad in Durham

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment please state reason for opposition as a courtesy to the author/uploader. Lycaon (talk) 19:28, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A skilled example of panning, but put to a confusing use. Not enough motion blur to diminish the unpleasant background. Durova (talk) 10:00, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Concur with Durova - the background is blurred enough to be disorienting and not enough to seem smooth. Nice work, though - were you actually standing on the tracks? Shimgray (talk) 18:40, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I was standing on the tracks. Is there an easier way to do this? I actually meant the background to be recognisable, as it is historic downtown Durham (North Carolina). I suppose the setting may not mean much if you're not local. Here's a shot from when I finally figured out how to hold the camera still. By the way, thanks for all the wonderful feedback, guys! --Specious (talk) 03:59, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Alvaro qc (talk) 05:26, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good technically (motion blur, sharpness), but no wow from the subject. --S23678 (talk) 15:30, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As above. --Karelj (talk) 16:34, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. –Dilaudid 12:50, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 09:14, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:The East Moscow in Night.JPG, not featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

This is a view on The East Part Of Moscow - at the night. The beatiful view on streets and districts of large city in Europe. Канопус Киля (talk) 18:42, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. ISO 1600 ruins the image, as well as the 1,3 s shutter speed. ISO 100 and 2-6 s shutter would make this image much better (like this example). --Aktron (talk) 18:58, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, JukoFF (talk) 18:07, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient technical qualities and basically, just a picture of a car park at night... Lycaon (talk) 08:28, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree with Lycaon. Alvaro qc (talk) 05:25, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The parking lot is the main subject here... Not FP --S23678 (talk) 15:37, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose just a night snapshot --Simonizer (talk) 09:25, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as per others. –Dilaudid 12:49, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 09:15, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:MC Drei-Finger-Faultier.jpg[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION The edited version another edit

Original, featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, and nominated by Chmehl -- Chmehl (talk) 15:45, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A Three-toed-sloth in the rather dark jungle of Costa Rica. -- Chmehl (talk) 15:45, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I feel lighting could have helped you a little bit more (background is a bit bright compared to main subject), but it still looks good. -- Benh (talk) 21:25, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Econt (talk) 19:23, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice sharpness on the hand. Cirt (talk) 19:36, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ack Benh - Keta (talk) 10:03, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 14:41, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--libertad0 ॐ (talk) 20:02, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, out of focus. Канопус Киля (talk) 09:56, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lycaon (talk) 10:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose dont like the background --Simonizer (talk) 18:15, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 08:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

edited version, not featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I have now ligthed the image a little. Leo Johannes (talk) 13:45, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question are you withdrawing the original version or what? -- carol (talk) 22:21, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
I think the edited version has a bit better details in the shadows but less contrast, so I am not withdrawing the original version. I still prefer the original. Thanks for your effort Leo. -- Chmehl (talk) 05:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
No problem :-). I am not used to Commons, I didn't really know how to present the edited version (what I should do). Leo Johannes (talk) 08:40, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 0 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 13:37, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

edit 2, not featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info by Lycaon (talk) 10:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lycaon (talk) 10:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think this edit is superior to my original. Let's see if it gets more support votes than the original. Thanks for the editing by the way! Chmehl (talk) 20:43, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Agree with Chmehl --S23678 (talk) 00:11, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose same as above --Simonizer (talk) 08:50, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It is better. Barabas (talk) 00:37, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I took the liberty to move this candidate to the top to get more opinions on the edit. Crapload (talk) 16:25, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support prefer this edit -- Klaus with K (talk) 19:08, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 11:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Surprisingly better ! some strange artifacts on dark areas, but minor issues -- Benh (talk) 19:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (other version has more support votes) Simonizer (talk) 09:17, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Eastern Tiger Swallowtail Papilio glaucus Female 2838px.jpg, featured[edit]

Eastern Tiger Swallowtail

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Created, uploaded, and nominated by Ram-Man. 01:54, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's more artistic than my typical butterfly photos. Of course it is naturally valuable for our projects. -- Ram-Man 01:54, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful. /Daniel78 (talk) 09:05, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gorgeous. Vassil (talk) 09:43, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice --mardetanha (talk) 11:24, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, nothitg WOW. Канопус Киля (talk) 12:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! --Luc Viatour (talk) 13:35, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks great. No problems with noise and the butterfly is sharp. --Aktron (talk) 18:36, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice --Böhringer (talk) 21:17, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great framing and colors. Cirt (talk) 22:40, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, wow! --Aqwis (talk) 17:16, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. Not bad, but doesn't wow me: Better resolutuion. --Dschwen (talk) 03:30, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Alvaro qc (talk) 05:13, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That's a wow from me. --S23678 (talk) 00:16, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Truly wonderful. SriMesh | talk 04:46, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:15, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral great picture but the head of the butterfly should be in focus too! IMO --Simonizer (talk) 09:27, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Yes, Original ButterFly. --Pauk (talk) 10:27, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Incredible details on the wings ! It's a pity head isn't in focus. Why f/5.6 ? -- Benh (talk) 21:35, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
    • It just happened that way. The lighting was variable and the butterfly didn't stay still for long. I took some with smaller apertures, but this had the best lighting and sharpness. The lens I use maximizes sharpness at ~f/5.6. For me this is about the wings, not the head. -- Ram-Man 00:13, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Wow, man. Jonathunder (talk) 04:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really wow picture of butterfly --Sfu (talk) 20:56, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 17 supports, 1 oppose, 2 neutrals => featured. Benh (talk) 15:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Passo di Giau.jpg, featured[edit]

Giau Pass, Dolomites, Italy

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Frisia Orientalis - uploaded by Frisia Orientalis - nominated by Frisia Orientalis -- Frisia Orientalis (talk) 12:20, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Frisia Orientalis (talk) 12:20, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great composition, no noise, the rocks and clouds are great here. And the colours... I like them. --Aktron (talk) 18:34, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good --Böhringer (talk) 21:15, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Quite striking, great detail and shadows. Cirt (talk) 22:39, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good technical quality, impressive landscape. Lycaon (talk) 08:27, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A good picture displaying several elements of the displayed landscape. --- Anonymous DissidentTalk 09:00, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Simonizer (talk) 10:09, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral, the sky kind of ruins it. --Aqwis (talk) 17:16, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That's the typical sky in the Dolomites. Chmehl (talk) 20:42, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support stunning picture, well done. —αἰτίας discussion 01:19, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I said it in German, and i have to say it in english: nice work. --Pixelfehler (talk) 14:33, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive view. --S23678 (talk) 15:40, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not enough wow. Barabas (talk) 19:29, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support impressive and wow --Sfu (talk) 09:00, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love the way the road swirls around. --Laveol (talk) 14:28, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent job with them clouds – both mother nature and the photographer. –Dilaudid 02:12, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Anzee (talk) 18:16, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sweet. Daniel Case (talk) 06:42, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful -- Jontts (talk) 05:45, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 17 supports, 1 oppose, 1 neutral => featured. Benh (talk) 15:17, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Chelidonichthys lucernus 1 Luc viatour.jpg, not featured[edit]

Chelidonichthys lucernus

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Luc Viatour (talk) - uploaded by Luc Viatour (talk) - nominated by -- Luc Viatour (talk) 13:32, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Luc Viatour (talk) 13:32, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Delightful composition, subject and colours but sadly very noisy. Lycaon (talk) 13:42, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
    • It is very difficult to photograph in water or in an aquarium because the light is low or water creates defects! It is an image of 3600 x 2000 it is possible to reduce and still have a beautiful image --Luc Viatour (talk) 14:19, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- FieldMarine (talk) 16:43, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose That is great picture of a fish. I'd like to support it, but the noise ruins it totally. --Aktron (talk) 18:33, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Le bruit est minime si l'on considère la taille de l'image. Très impressionnant. --S23678 (talk) 15:42, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow is definitely there. Barabas (talk) 19:28, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral A great aquarium shot. Love the colors and detail on the fish. But the image is too noisy, as others have said. -- TheWB (talk) 01:30, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support this Fish! :) --Pauk (talk) 10:28, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Should not be hard to remove some of the noise, but until then I oppose. /Daniel78 (talk) 18:12, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 2200 ISO... and it shows ! I'm surprised you had to go this high (but don't really know how lit was the aquarium). Fortunately you had a D300. Still a super catch to me ! Benh (talk) 21:42, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Heavy noise, CA, motion blur. –Dilaudid 12:48, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 13:32, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Great picture, but it's a bit too blurry. --RoFra (talk) 17:17, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 7 supports, 4 opposes, 2 neutrals => not featured. Benh (talk) 15:18, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Napoleon's exile to Elba3.jpg, not featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by J. Phillips (publisher) - uploaded by Durova - nominated by Durova. Restored version of Image:Napoleon's exile to Elba.jpg. -- Durova (talk) 01:59, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Durova (talk) 01:59, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Just another old etch. Do you plan to nominate The World History in Pictures? Lycaon (talk) 08:11, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Ouch. Is there an objection to etching as a medium? Durova (talk) 08:58, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
    • I think that would be cool. The World History in One Picture. Could we open a contest? -- Silfiriel (talk) 17:19, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 17:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow. --S23678 (talk) 15:45, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - These sorts of things are very useful for showing the popular attitude of Country X to subject Y, in this case, the English view on Napoleon near the end of the Napoleonic wars. The art is pretty typical of that time, though not, perhaps, reaching the humour and insight of the acknowledged master of political cartooning from that period, James Gillray. However, Gillray was not that active by this point.
I realise that there's going to be more photographers here than historians, but do think through what would be lost by ignoring insight into popular views provided by this kind of work. Also consider this: The 18th and 19th centuries started with the flourishing of cartooning, then illustrated newspapers which provided engravings. If we accept that illustrating subjects relating to the 18th and 19th century is important - well, we aren't going to be able to do it with paintings alone, and we sure as hell aren't going to be able to do much more than the very end of the 19th century with photography. Political cartoons and engravings are all we have to choose from. Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:23, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As a historian, I can agree with Adam Cuerden. Moreover, the scan is pretty well done. On the other hand, there are several hundreds (!) of that kind of Napoleonic cartoons; should we promote all of them as FP?? -- MJJR (talk) 20:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, nothing wow. Канопус Киля (talk) 14:09, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As above. --Karelj (talk) 13:34, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 19:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Alongtheriver QingMing.jpg, not featured[edit]

Along the River During the Qingming Festival

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Zhang Zeduan, 12th century Song Dynasty artist - uploaded by Daniel Chiswick - nominated by Daniel Chiswick -- Daniel Chiswick (talk) 01:33, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Daniel Chiswick (talk) 01:33, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A much better image of this series is already FP here. Lycaon (talk) 08:17, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentThe Picture that is already featured is the 18th century Qing Dynasty remake, which is much different than the 12th century Song Dynaty original that I uploaded. Also keep in mind that this painting is nearly 1000 years old and pictures of it of this size are very rare. Daniel Chiswick (talk) 09:43, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose reluctantly, although I supported on en:wiki. Different featured standards here: encyclopedic merit put this over the top on that project, but the technical shortcomings are a stronger consideration over here. If you locate a better scan of this original, I would support it. It wouldn't be an issue to me that a later dynasty's imitation is already featured. Durova (talk) 10:08, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I personally think it's good and with the information given above it makes it that much better. --IvanTortuga (talk) 04:51, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support , WOW! Канопус Киля (talk) 21:51, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The current scan gives 62 ppi resolution. I think the value of this painting resides in the details. A better (higher resolution) scan is necessary IMO, even if it's necessary to split the image in 2 in order to achieve it. --S23678 (talk) 00:29, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Why is there a speedy deletion template on the nominated picture? --S23678 (talk) 00:30, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but I think only a scan with 30,000px width would do this justice. The photo already exists, so it only needs to be scanned at higher resolution. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 19:18, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This format of image cannot be seen well on screen. --Karelj (talk) 13:41, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Econt (talk) 00:51, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good work, but I don't like these stripes. --RoFra (talk) 17:15, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 19:58, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Displaying the Song chef-d'oeuvre in such poor quality seems to be discreditable for Wikipedia. Even unambiguously decorative black and white photos of this handscroll which one can find in the book by Bingjian Feng specifically entitled "A Genetic Epidemiological Study of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma", http://publishing.eur.nl/ir/repub/asset/10700/071129_Feng,%20Bingjian.pdf (in their turn borrowed from the Netherlands Optima Grafische Communicatie, Rotterdam, ISBN: 978-90-8559-329-4) produce much better impression due to more or less clearly visible details. It may seem worth asking for help from China with their numerous copies of Zhang ZeDuan being sold in each arts&crafts store. In fact, a resolution allowing you fo feel the original size would do only, so split into a dozen of 1-Mb parts, minimum is inevitable. Please start. Dr. Prof. D.Kivasipapu

Image:Ranunculus glacialis (habitus).jpg, not featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg InfoRanunculus glacialis L. (1753), Glacier crowfoot at the Swiss/Italian border at the Grand Saint Bernard Pass. Created, uploaded and nominated by Lycaon (talk) 14:39, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lycaon (talk) 14:39, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looking good. --Aktron (talk) 15:06, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition - not cropped close enough considering how far out of focus the background is. I mean if its a flower portrait then they should be cropped tighter, and if it's putting the flowers in habitat then more of the background should be sharp. Or crop about 1/5 from top and right. Mfield (talk) 15:11, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I like it, but there are too much distractions in the background, which isn't particularly interesting.Perhaps you can crop it and still keep it above 1600x1200. -- Silfiriel (talk) 17:11, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The background is actually part of the picture. This is a scientific illustration of an in situ specimen, that grows from 2400 m up to 4000 m altitude, often in the vicinity of glaciers (here a few meters from a melting snow field). 2600 m (where the picture was taken) is above the tree line, so a rocky background is very typical for this species. Cropping and/or resampling are non-issues for me: Commons policy is to always try to post the largest version available. This picture is very valuable uncropped (it is in situ), but as per the license, if someone wants to make a derivative for some specific purpose, he/she is very welcome. Lycaon (talk) 18:16, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment if that's the case, that it's intended an in situ shot, then more DOF would have been appropriate though. Mfield (talk) 23:26, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hi, perfect like this. --B.navez (talk) 19:20, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support background is fine (shows habitat w/o being distracting), flowers show lots of detail Ianare (talk) 05:24, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree with Mfield. Background is fine to show habitat but then it should be throughout sharp --Simonizer (talk) 11:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I can't help but discern a yellowish tint. –Dilaudid 15:45, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Common good quality image, no reason for nomination into FP IHMO. --Karelj (talk) 13:44, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow.--Sensl (talk) 20:36, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 19:59, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Californian Condor 50 MC.jpg, featured[edit]

California Condor in flight.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info California Condor in flight. Created & uploaded by Chmehl • nominated by Dilaudid on 19:26, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportDilaudid 19:26, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow, thanks for nominating :) --Chmehl (talk) 20:40, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Well I think this deserves to at least be nominated :) –Dilaudid 07:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great picture. --Aktron (talk) 22:29, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support didn't know there were condor races ;-) Ianare (talk) 05:21, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support sure, as per above. --Sfu (talk) 13:03, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wisnia6522 (talk) 17:42, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support in flight! very good --Böhringer (talk) 20:03, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, bad fone. Канопус Киля (talk) 21:32, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lošmi (talk) 00:18, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very beautiful picture, huge bird tagging on that poor bird. SriMesh | talk 04:45, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I think the background confuses the shot, but that;s my personal opinion. --- Anonymous DissidentTalk 09:10, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Background distracting. The head merges with the ground. Nichalp (talk) 17:35, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Is it a racing condor???? so bad the numbers on the wings... --Sanchezn (talk) 21:41, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info According to an ornithologist I met there, all the free living Californian Condors (I think about 150 at the moment) are numbered. --Chmehl (talk) 06:19, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don like the composition with the head near the border. Give them room to make them fly! ;-) --Simonizer (talk) 09:31, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not only an image of one of the rarest birds on the planet, but also an excellent quality image of one in flight. --Calibas (talk) 21:59, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 13:45, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support High quality, educational, fine composition. What more do you need? -- Ram-Man 00:35, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Anonymous Dissident and Simonizer. -- Lycaon (talk) 07:54, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support for wow alone. Gotta be there, flying higher than eagles. NVO (talk) 12:23, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Thermos (talk) 16:04, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Do not like the composition--Sensl (talk) 21:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 15 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 20:01, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:The Anatomy Lesson.jpg, not featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Rembrandt van Rijn - uploaded by Durova - nominated by Durova -- Durova (talk) 03:25, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Durova (talk) 03:25, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question any way to remove the little white spots ? Ianare (talk) 05:36, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Yes. With historic paintings, though, I tend to leave that in because it accurately represents the way the paint has behaved over time. Durova (talk) 18:28, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Reflections. Lycaon (talk) 10:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This picture is copyrighted (see the copyright page on the site Geheugen van Nederland [1]) and protected by the Dutch laws: Auteurswet 1912 and Databankwet 1999. -- MJJR (talk) 20:08, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Could you link to the laws themselves? I checked with three Dutch Wikimedians in advance of uploading to see whether Dutch law had any exception to the standard practice on derivative works of two dimensional artwork. This is a digitization of a two dimensional painting over three centuries old. It isn't uncommon for museums to assert spurious copyright claims that have no basis in law. If you say Dutch law supports this, we ought to know where and update our summary of Dutch copyrights. Durova (talk) 06:27, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Whatever Dutch law says on the matter will quite soon be irrelevant, since consensus seems to be to follow the 'position' taken by the WMF and to allow such images on Commons even if local law forbids it. See Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag/Straw Poll. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 17:58, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
        • I'd certainly delete the image if local law places it under copyright. The relevant law in this instance has been researched extensively in advance. If you know of a law this violates, please provide specifics. Durova (talk) 18:30, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! Barabas (talk) 19:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Alvaro qc (talk) 08:38, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Reflections. Канопус Киля (talk) 17:54, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I can't see any reflections. /Daniel78 (talk) 18:11, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ditto to Daniel. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:31, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Reflections and problematic copyright. --Karelj (talk) 13:27, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Thermos (talk) 16:22, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lifeless colors, reflections. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 23:33, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 6 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 17:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Emdenratsdelft.jpg, not featured[edit]

This is a featured Image in German Wikipedia It shows a historical part of the Emden harbour

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Pixelfehler - uploaded by Pixelfehler - nominated by Pixelfehler -- Pixelfehler (talk) 14:10, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pixelfehler
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not a bad view, but tilt and not very sharp (given the downsampling) --S23678 (talk) 19:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, a nice viewing. --Pauk (talk) 10:32, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Everything is out of focus except for the "Feuerschiff". For a deep scenery like this, maybe try F8 instead of F3.5? --JDrewes (talk) 10:50, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose While the colours are very nice, it seems too fuzzy for an FP for me. Also some parts such as the right hand side are heavily blurred, and it could use perspective correction. –Dilaudid 12:42, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose a day shot would have given less noise and better DOF, and i see no advantage to a night shot Ianare (talk) 05:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 17:54, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Lilium martagon Kakskerta.jpg, not featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Lilium martagon • created and uploaded by Dilaudid • nominated by Dilaudid on 15:29, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportDilaudid 15:29, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, highlights are overexposed. Barabas (talk) 18:57, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Technically not bad, composition good and a not so common species in the wild. Lycaon (talk) 19:04, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the look, and the image is of high quality and resolution! Good job! jakemaheu (talk) 20:52, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose technically very weak. DOF is much too narrow. —αἰτίας discussion 00:58, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as per αἰτίας Ianare (talk) 05:07, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A bad image of a common flower.--Sensl (talk) 20:38, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 17:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Blässhuhn Family6.JPG, not featured[edit]

a Eurasian Coot Family

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- Böhringer (talk) 19:58, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Böhringer (talk) 19:58, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour (talk) 20:33, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but at full resolution, I find the image too blurry. jakemaheu (talk) 20:48, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but the part of image is out of focus. Канопус Киля (talk) 21:45, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I really like, and I have no issues with the sharpness since it's a 6mpx picture (better have an unsharp large picture than a downsampled sharp one). However, the big bird's head is too dark. I don't know if this can be corrected. --S23678 (talk) 01:01, 5 August 2008 (UTC) ________ Forget my last, I failed to notice the heavy CA at the black/white interface on the face of the bird. --S23678 (talk) 06:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
thank you, but I do not believe that it does brighten head denm --Böhringer (talk) 06:00, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 18:01, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Blueberry Macro 1.JPG, not featured[edit]

A high-resolution, macro mode photo of a blueberry.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jakemaheu - uploaded by Jakemaheu - nominated by Jakemaheu -- jakemaheu (talk) 20:40, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- jakemaheu (talk) 20:40, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Natl1 (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looks like a 10 pounds blueberry at thumb size! but I have to oppose because of too small DOF. --S23678 (talk) 00:38, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose DoF too small. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:12, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The background could be far better, especially colour-wise. –Dilaudid 07:31, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose due to technical weakness. —αἰτίας discussion 00:54, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark, bad background, no wow. Leo Johannes (talk) 20:27, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 18:02, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Constantinovka Factory.JPG, not featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

This is ruines the factory in Constantinovka, Donetsk Region. Look at this ruines! This is a Donbass, very-very poor region in Ukraine. Канопус Киля (talk) 21:36, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing Original. No wow.--Natl1 (talk) 21:46, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, very interesting, but too unsharp and poor composition for me to support. --Aqwis (talk) 23:42, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As per above. No geolocation as well. --S23678 (talk) 01:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (formerly {{FPX}}) Lack of wow. –Dilaudid 07:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Ridiculous. --Aqwis (talk) 09:16, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support perhaps not wow but oow for sure ! --B.navez (talk) 14:46, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The type of topic that needs technical excellence to make it to FP, and that is unfortunately lacking (too soft, CA fringes). Lycaon (talk) 19:50, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Could be cropped closer. Try shooting closer with a wider angle lens. -- TheWB (talk) 01:25, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose low details, grass and trees are washed out --Simonizer (talk) 09:24, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. It's interesting. It's a truth of Life. --Pauk (talk) 10:33, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love the composition, though the sharpness could be better, I think. There is definitely a wow for me, but I like this kind of stuff! --Specious (talk) 07:06, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Random industrial blight. I can't even tell that they're ruins, much less do I get the impression of economic collapse I'm expecting from the explanation. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 19:38, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's a too normal factory... --RoFra (talk) 17:14, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 5 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 18:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Impulse Turbine.jpg, not featured[edit]

Impulse turbine

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Wuzur - uploaded by Wuzur - nominated by Wuzur -- Wuzur (talk) 09:48, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark. ---donald- (talk) 10:46, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too tight crop. –Dilaudid 12:37, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose good for QI, but not enough wow for FP Ianare (talk) 05:43, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 0 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 18:24, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Sciurus vulgaris Turku cemetery.jpg, featured[edit]

Red squirrel (Sciurus vulgaris) on a tombstone in Turku cemetery

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Red squirrel (Sciurus vulgaris) • created & uploaded by Dilaudid • nominated by Dilaudid on 15:41, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportDilaudid 15:41, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral very good, but not as good as the similar Image:Eichhörnchen Düsseldorf Hofgarten edit.jpg. Neither full profile nor full front view. --Romwriter (talk) 18:31, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 21:03, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice. Alvaro qc (talk) 08:41, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support! A nice Squirell. --Pauk (talk) 10:36, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Very cute! — Kalan ? 20:19, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Cute, sure, but not as good as the other FP. Barabas (talk) 00:33, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very unique photograph! --Specious (talk) 06:58, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 13:49, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose good, but not great; very common and easily approached subject Ianare (talk) 05:12, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good picture --Böhringer (talk) 22:10, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose cute but not excellent. Not very sharp, unfortunate light and distracting background --Simonizer (talk) 20:24, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Oonagh (talk) 06:58, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special.--Sensl (talk) 20:13, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 9 supports, 4 opposes, 1 neutral => featured. Benh (talk) 09:48, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Water fountain 6178.jpg, featured[edit]

water fountain

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dori - uploaded by Dori - nominated by Brianga -- Brianga (talk) 16:42, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Brianga (talk) 16:42, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support-Nice -- Silfiriel (talk) 20:22, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Simonizer (talk) 20:45, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Atamari (talk) 20:48, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Sanchezn (talk) 21:33, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thank you for the nomination Brianga. --Dori - Talk 22:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support stunning, great. —αἰτίας discussion 00:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great capture! -- TheWB (talk) 01:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Vassil (talk) 06:05, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, very well! Канопус Киля (talk) 14:53, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Refreshing. Lycaon (talk) 05:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Laitche (talk) 20:46, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral could use a bit of de-noising, otherwise great Ianare (talk) 05:14, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Thermos (talk) 16:21, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 22:09, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 14 supports, 0 oppose, 1 neutral => featured. Benh (talk) 09:49, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:CathedraleEtVieuxPontBeziers.jpg, not featured[edit]

View of the cathedral of Béziers and of the old bridge over the Orb

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Nicolas Sanchez -- Sanchezn (talk) 21:06, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Sanchezn (talk) 21:06, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Image is hopelessly oversharped -- a pain for my eyes :-) Otherwise a nice image --Richard Bartz (talk) 21:37, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Okay... I'll correct this!!! Sanchezn (talk) 21:43, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • That's done... I also followed aqwis advices. Sanchezn (talk) 18:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Alvaro qc (talk) 21:39, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment, the colours in the first version you uploaded are better. I also think you shouldn't have cropped away part of the bridge to the right. --Aqwis (talk) 22:29, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nothing special, no wow. —αἰτίας discussion 00:50, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good lighting and composition, sharp, beautiful place. Spots in the sky on the right (birds?).Vassil (talk) 06:01, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. For this the panorama. --Pauk (talk) 10:37, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition is not sufficiently interesting. Barabas (talk) 00:32, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WOW! Beautiful! Peter17 (talk) 21:45, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wow is defintely there, quality is good Ianare (talk) 05:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose technical very good, but it would be better wihout the harsh light and with another sky --Simonizer (talk) 19:34, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A very, very bad photo shop--Sensl (talk) 20:03, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Low quality and no wow factor for me --Karelj (talk) 20:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 6 supports, 6 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 09:50, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Fira at Santorini (from north).jpg, not featured[edit]

Fira at Santorini Island, Greece

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by YooChung - uploaded by YooChung - nominated by YooChung -- YooChung (talk) 21:43, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- YooChung (talk) 21:43, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm afraid we have a far better picture of the subject by User:Chmehl Fira and the Old Port MC.jpg. Its only error I have spotted being the apparent tilt to the left of the horizon. -- Benh (talk) 22:01, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, looks dosen`t beatiful. Канопус Киля (talk) 15:57, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support Great! Crapload (talk) 02:06, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unsharp Ianare (talk) 05:19, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 supports, 3 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 09:51, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:2008-08-01 Solar eclipse progression.jpg, featured[edit]

The course of 2008-08-01 solar eclipse in Novosibirsk, Russia (should be viewed in full-size)

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by myself, User:Kalan. — Kalan ? 16:40, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. — Kalan ? 16:40, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Very cool! --Panther (talk) 16:44, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, proof! Канопус Киля ( ) 17:06, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. A very interesting composition. I like it. --Obersachse ( ) 17:31, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support under/over exposure, unsharp, noise, poor white balance, tilt, ... but it doesn't really mather here. Excellent picture. --S23678 (talk) 18:06, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, holy crap! --Aqwis (talk) 19:54, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, per all ;) lvova (talk) 20:28, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support +1. --Alex Rave (talk) 21:55, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice series, looks like a lot of work to me :) --Chmehl (talk) 06:33, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. I like it, fresh view. MaxiMaxiMax (talk) 07:53, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Clever. Naerii (talk) 03:58, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good. --Ficell (talk) 14:50, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very unique and clever method. It's quite nice and you apparently didn't have to burn your camera to bits pointing it at the sun either! -- Ram-Man 00:32, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow Leo Johannes (talk) 20:26, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Purdy cool. --ShakataGaNai ^_^ 07:08, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, great. Yarl 12:17, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Thermos (talk) 16:19, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Haros (talk) 16:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Low quality, nothing special, nothing is shown well at the image.--Sensl (talk) 20:55, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 22:08, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - great shot--Caspian blue (talk) 23:22, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 20 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 11:08, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Dry Falls.jpg, featured[edit]

Panoramic view of Dry Falls, WA, USA

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ikiwaner - uploaded by Ikiwaner - nominated by Ikiwaner -- Ikiwaner (talk) 20:45, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikiwaner (talk) 20:45, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sehr schönes Landschaftspanorama! Beautiful, well done --Simonizer (talk) 22:04, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hermoso --libertad0 ॐ (talk) 22:25, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Benh (talk) 22:40, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- TheWB (talk) 00:04, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great landscape! --Chmehl (talk) 06:32, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MJJR (talk) 15:32, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good picture, well done. —αἰτίας discussion 21:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 01:16, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good job ! Ianare (talk) 05:21, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good picture --Böhringer (talk) 22:06, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lestat (talk) 11:21, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 11:09, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Colias croceus (Dordogne).jpg, not featured[edit]

Colias croceus

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Clouded Yellow on European Cornel in the Dordogne, France. Created by, uploaded and nominated by Lycaon (talk) 11:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lycaon (talk) 11:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sunset rule. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 17:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • There is no FP of Colias croceus yet. Did you at least check? Lycaon (talk) 22:48, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • You are accusing me of lack of diligent research? There is also no FP of a sunset over Aberdeen, Scotland yet. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 00:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Your opposition rationale is irrelevant, and I'm sure you know it. Lycaon (talk) 05:46, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Coming from you that's even more laughable. But to translate it into lingo you can understand: "No wow". ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 13:37, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow.--Sensl (talk) 20:42, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of th 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 11:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:General Baden-Powell, Bain news service photo portrait.jpg, not featured[edit]

Robert Baden-Powell founder of the Scout Movement.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by George Grantham Bain collection - uploaded by Tom - nominated by Econt (talk) 13:13, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Econt (talk) 13:13, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Will support a cleaned-up version. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 13:20, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As important as this subject is, the lack of sharpness won't be resolved by a restoration. That can sometimes be forgiveable in early photojournalism of unique historic events, but this is a formal portrait under controlled conditions. With respect toward the uploader, I don't think I could bring myself to support this as a featured candidate. Durova (talk) 18:45, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment: I was wondering why he was wearing two Boy Scout emblems in a "service photo" until I noticed the image was from "Bain News Service". Misleading capitalization in title. Rmhermen (talk) 20:33, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of th 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 11:14, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Firemen in night action img 1235.jpg, not featured[edit]

Firemen during a night fire in Lausanne

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Rama (talk) - uploaded by Rama (talk) - nominated by Rama (talk) -- Rama (talk) 06:34, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Cool picture, but everything is blurry. --ShakataGaNai ^_^ 07:06, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special about it at all, no "wow". R-T-C Tim (talk) 09:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per SGN. Blurry but nice pic. Anonymous101 talk 14:10, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per coming back to my senses. That image may be funny, but it's more blurry than genius. Count that as a withdrawal so that people don't lose their time voting on this. Rama (talk) 14:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Lestat (talk) 11:18, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 0 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 11:15, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Image: Elephant eye.jpg, not featured[edit]

Elephant eye, San Diego Zoo

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by TheWB - uploaded by TheWB - nominated by TheWB -- TheWB (talk) 14:45, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- TheWB (talk) 14:45, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too blurry in full resolution. --RoFra (talk) 17:10, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 11:16, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Canyon De Chelly.jpg, not featured[edit]

The Canyon De Chelly with a tree in foregronud

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by RoFra - uploaded by RoFra - nominated by RoFra -- RoFra (talk) 17:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- RoFra (talk) 17:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too small. Also, I don't like the crop at the top of the photo. - TheWB (talk) 17:08, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bad crop on tree Ianare (talk) 05:57, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Colours are washed out and there is no sharpness anywhere. R-T-C Tim (talk) 12:21, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 11:17, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:TimesSquarenight.jpg, not featured[edit]

Times Square at Night, March 2006

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by TheWB - uploaded by TheWB - nominated by TheWB -- TheWB (talk) 18:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- TheWB (talk) 18:57, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not very good composition, distorted lines... --Karelj (talk) 20:15, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Casual shot. not very interesting. Benh (talk) 15:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ac Benh --Lestat (talk) 11:12, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Blurry and dark. Also composition is not that good. --Avala (talk) 20:17, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 11:17, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Jellies.jpg[edit]

Sea nettle jellyfish at Monterey Bay Aquarium, Monterey, California

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by TheWB - uploaded by TheWB - nominated by TheWB -- TheWB (talk) 19:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- TheWB (talk) 19:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose very bad image--Sensl (talk) 20:11, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because it is out of focus --Simonizer (talk) 20:33, 13 August 2008 (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.

Image:Golden Gate fog.jpg[edit]

Golden Gate Bridge in fog, San Francisco, California

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by TheWB - uploaded by TheWB - nominated by TheWB -- TheWB (talk) 19:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- TheWB (talk) 19:40, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bad image--Sensl (talk) 20:05, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
    • How is this a "bad image?"
      • One of the worst images of the bridge I've ever seen.--Sensl (talk) 20:11, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
        • Giving only your opinion is some form of contribution for sure, but you could at least be a little be more courteous than this, when talking about somebody else's work. -- Benh (talk) 11:03, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not bad, but size is too too small. --Karelj (talk) 20:32, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too many compression artifacts visible. 177kB for a 2.5MPixel image is way too much compression. --Chmehl (talk) 20:36, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because of overenthusiastic JPEG compression (= artifacts). MER-C 10:41, 14 August 2008 (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.

Image:Tawny frogmouth wholebody444.jpg, not featured[edit]

Tawny Frogmouth

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Benjamint 02:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Benjamint 02:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support well done. —αἰτίας discussion 21:02, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Issue has probably been raised before, but why are you taking them at night ? Is it relevant to have them at night rather than at some more brighter time ? I don't like the black background, the flash lighting and I have the feeling this may harm the subject. But if it's relevant to see them at night, I'd reconsider my vote. - Benh (talk) 21:26, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • OK for relevance. I maintain my oppose because of other issues I mentionned. Benh (talk) 15:34, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeThere is actually some relevance to take these at night, cause they are nocturnal birds. That said the harsh flash light, the over-processing and the insistence at posting images at the smallest possibles size (didn't we agree on the opposite here at commons?), disqualifies this picture for me for FP. Lycaon (talk) 05:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The size meets the criteria, I don't see why it should be a factor. Muhammad 20:52, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like the lighting either, the flash is too obvious. /Daniel78 (talk) 00:10, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very cool! --RoFra (talk) 17:13, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support could be a little larger given the camera, but great picture nonetheless Ianare (talk) 05:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality for a night shot, not too many such FPs. --Dori - Talk 00:03, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like the harsh light. I gives an unnatural 'silvery' effect. --Estrilda (talk) 20:23, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 6 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 10:22, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Fira and the Old Port MC.jpg, not featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Chmehl - nominated by Benh (talk) 21:21, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Following a similar nomination below, I propose this one instead. The view is amazing, it is huge and very detailed. -- Benh (talk) 21:21, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Romwriter (talk) 21:45, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, one of the best panoramas on Commons. --Aqwis (talk) 01:16, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition is not sufficiently interesting. Crapload (talk) 02:08, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, Muu-karhu (talk) 21:49, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good image, but not enouhg to FP IHMO. --Karelj (talk) 13:53, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A bit more sky and it would be great --Simonizer (talk) 16:10, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support amazing detail Ianare (talk) 05:27, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as Simonizer. --Estrilda (talk) 20:21, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 10:22, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:2008-08-11 University Tower across Durham-Chapel Hill Blvd.jpg[edit]

University Tower in Durham, North Carolina ("The Pickle")

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Specious - uploaded by Specious - nominated by Specious -- Specious (talk) 04:49, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Specious (talk) 04:49, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Not very sharp, the sign at the front is distracting, I don't like the way it's cut off by the trees, and I also think the image should be wider (to show more of the sky) for a better composition. Sorry. Naerii (talk) 09:51, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Naerii - the foreground sign is far too prominent and noticable. R-T-C Tim (talk) 12:16, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I meant the sign to be prominent. It was supposed to be part of the composition. Honestly, I just figured no one would be wowed by just a skyscraper these days, so I made sure to include something else. To get both the sign and the building sharp, I did indeed sacrifice some overall sharpness, but the image is 10 megapixels! Also, the building is surrounded by trees, so there isn't a clear view. So, how do you guys want to see this skyscraper? --Specious (talk) 19:13, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - it's not notable. inclusion of sign because it would be more interesting? We are not looking for interesting but educative and this sign can be used in which article exactly?--Avala (talk) 20:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I believe I understand why this shot (which looks great geometrically to me) won't interest most people. Thanks for the feedback! --Specious (talk) 19:16, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:2008-08-11 University Tower from Petty Rd.jpg, not featured[edit]

University Tower in Durham, North Carolina

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Specious - uploaded by Specious - nominated by Specious -- Specious (talk) 19:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For those who don't like the highway sign in the other picture. Please let me know if the wires are getting in the way here ;) -- Specious (talk) 19:05, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment For the previous picture as well, I just think the building itself is boring - just a big glass skyscraper. You would be very hard pushed to get a feature photograph out of it. R-T-C Tim (talk) 09:01, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment What about the fact that it's not next to other skyscrapers? Isn't that unusual? --Specious (talk) 20:51, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bad composition--Sensl (talk) 20:32, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, of bad composition and low prominence of main subject.
Yes, the wires are in the way; in fact, the composition is such that they seem to be the main topic instead of the building. –Dilaudid 20:57, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Composition is a matter of taste and no technical issue and therefore no FPX reason. --norro 18:02, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
Composition is partly (though not completely) a technical issue. Here it fails because of the visual hierarchy of the elements in the picture. See our guidelines. Please only remove {{FPX}} when you add a support vote. –Dilaudid 17:26, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
The guidelines say: "The arrangement of the elements within the image should support depiction of the subject, not distract from it." They do not say the subject has to be in front. --Specious (talk) 19:21, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
The guidelines also say: "Foreground and background objects should not be distracting." –Dilaudid 09:27, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bad composition JukoFF (talk) 18:47, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I find the composition not that good.--Avala (talk) 20:19, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - In addition to above, focus isn't that great either, IMO. Cirt (talk) 04:18, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 10:24, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:2008-08-12 White German Shepherd portrait 3.jpg[edit]

Portrait of a White German Shepherd Background removed

Original[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Specious - uploaded by Specious - nominated by Specious -- Specious (talk) 02:34, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Specious (talk) 02:34, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, The background is distracting --Romwriter (talk) 07:36, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
FPX reasoning reaches a new low. --Aqwis (talk) 21:34, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose--Avala (talk) 20:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 21:34, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distracting background. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 21:22, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg Thanks for all the comments. I'll get a better shot. By the way, should I not bother submitting this dog any more, or should I just do something more interesting with him? Specious (talk) 19:14, 16 August 2008 (UTC).

Edit 1[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Background removed. -- Specious (talk) 08:48, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Very good quality, bot unly a little wow... Leo Johannes (talk) 10:02, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose--Teme (talk) 13:06, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Avala (talk) 20:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, no thanks to unnecessary background removal. --Aqwis (talk) 21:34, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Don't like the cutout. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 21:22, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Any helpful suggestions? --Specious (talk) 08:28, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I see the black background as an improvement, but the masking isn't exactly masterful, the nose is lost in the background, and the shallow dof is more harmful here than in the one with the background. –Dilaudid 17:17, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg It's true, I'm a n00b when it comes to manipulation. Next time I'll shoot against a better background for cutting out the subject. Thanks for the comments, guys! Specious (talk) 19:14, 16 August 2008 (UTC).

Image:Wow! signal.ogg[edit]

The Wow! signal received in 1977. The signal bore expected hallmarks of potential non-terrestrial and non-solar system origin.

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 we are choosing featured PICTURES here not sounds or videos --Simonizer (talk) 10:51, 16 August 2008 (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.
  • Are we sure this is actually the Wow signal? Did they actually record them, or just use printouts? Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:47, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Festungsberg Salzburg, Sommer 2008.jpg[edit]

View from one of the Salzach pedestrian crossings towards "Festungsberg" in Salzburg/ Austria

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by User:Stephantom -- Stephantom (talk) 21:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Stephantom (talk) 21:20, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lighting is very harsh, and the almost black area on the right does not help the composition. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 21:20, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree with Michael --Simonizer (talk) 10:53, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - because of the extremely dark part in the bottom. Perhaps try at a different time of the day.--Avala (talk) 11:31, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because of its lighting and composition. 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.

Dilaudid 17:12, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Muscidae.jpg[edit]

Muscidae sp. Macro

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Glorfindel_rb - uploaded by Glorfindel_rb - nominated by Glorfindel_rb --Glorfindel rb (talk) 16:58, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Glorfindel rb (talk) 16:58, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose low quality.--Sensl (talk) 20:10, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose inconsistent focus - TheWB (talk) 20:12, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much is out of focus. Sorry. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 21:17, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The small DOF was voluntary but I understand you could dislike it. Sensl's comment have no relevance (like ever)- Glorfindel rb (talk) 23:01, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Agree with above that the inconsistent focus is a bit jarring. Cirt (talk) 04:16, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Heliopsis helianthoides 2008.jpg[edit]

Heliopsis helianthoides

Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because of shallow depth of field and unsharpness. 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.

Dilaudid 17:14, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Mountain roses on Raspberry Island-vertical.JPG[edit]

Roses and Spruce

Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because of unsharpness, composition and washed out colours. 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.

Dilaudid 17:21, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:A Chicken feathers fire.JPG[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment According to the image description, these are old soviet pillows stuffed with poultry feathers being burnt. --Specious (talk) 05:51, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I read the brief description above, but that does not make the picture special.--Caspian blue (talk) 06:20, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Durova (talk) 06:25, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Lestat (talk) 11:09, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In Soviet Russia, pillow explodes YOU! Seriously, there might be a deeper cultural meaning to this picture, but if there is, it certainly doesn't translate well. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 20:17, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose--Avala (talk) 20:55, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because the subject and its value are unclear. 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.

Dilaudid 21:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:J accuse.jpg, not featured[edit]

The text of the letter as published in L'Aurore A Featured Image on Wikipedia and the Turkish Wikipedia

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Emile Zola - uploaded by Schutz - nominated by Jordan Busson -- Jordan Busson (talk) 09:42, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jordan Busson (talk) 09:42, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is an old newspaper. I can imagine that this reaches FP on en: as encyclopaedic value is most important there. But an old newspaper on commons...? Lycaon (talk) 10:33, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I believe an FP on commons gains more visibility, and are then likely to be used on other wikipedias as well. So I think value should be important here too (??). -- Benh (talk) 11:49, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Silfiriel (talk) 15:16, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour (talk) 16:03, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Ist there an uncompressed original and could it be saved as a png? The whole small print is an artifacts fest and at 800kb for the jpg, the png shouldn't be prohibitively large. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 19:11, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree about the jpg quality mentioned above. /Daniel78 (talk) 00:04, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As Lycaon. --Karelj (talk) 10:23, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I like the image, but Lycaon has a point. - Anonymous DissidentTalk 14:31, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the text is more valuable and interesting than the image itself. Ianare (talk) 05:33, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For historical importance. --Thermos (talk) 16:15, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Sensl (talk) 21:03, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - This is one of the most famous newspapers in history: Emile Zola's defense of Dreyfuss. This newspaper would be discussed in most school textbooks. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:38, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Would support a png version or a better quality jpg than 800kB. Using low quality jpg for a picture that's all text is an obvious technical flaw that has a simple solution. Oh, and of course getting a high quality facsimile of one of the more important documents of western thought is of course a valuable contribution to many of our projects. This isn't just a repository for birds and butterflies. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 14:55, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with trialsanderrors: this is an extremely important document, which must be available at Commons; but the quality of this copy is not good enough for FP. -- MJJR (talk) 14:11, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 6 supports, 6 opposes, 1 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 18:24, 18 August 2008 (UTC) 

Image:BlackstoneReflection1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Autumn Reflection

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Common-Pics - uploaded by Common-Pics - nominated by Common-Pics -- Common-Pics 22:13, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Common-Pics 22:13, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, of a lack of needed quality.--- Anonymous DissidentTalk 01:06, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Although I will not support this picture, you should be more specific when you put up a FPX template (what is the quality problem? exposition, focus, depth of field, white balance?). Even here, I think composition rather than quality is the problem. --S23678 (talk) 04:05, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
    • It was a slip of the mind; the composition is, as you say, the main issue here. - Anonymous DissidentTalk 14:49, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Deleted FPX, IHMO this image is not so bad qaulity, same meaning as S23678. --Karelj (talk) 14:21, 9 August 2008 (UTC) Restored FPX (contested) --Romwriter (talk) 14:32, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose What does the photographer want to tell us with this picture? --Romwriter (talk) 14:32, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like it... --RoFra (talk) 17:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
    • although i agree, this type of comment is of no help to the submiter in improving Ianare (talk) 05:38, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unsharp, would be better without paved surface showing, IMO Ianare (talk) 05:38, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no Wow. not particularly good quality at high res. Anonymous101 talk 14:26, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 supports, 5 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 18:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Taming of the Shrew.jpg, featured[edit]

Act IV Scene 3

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by C.R.Leslie - uploaded and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:21, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info By far the best illustration of Taming of the Shrew on commons.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:21, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Is that blurred part on the centermost man's face from stitching? If there are no other options it could be restored by hand. –Dilaudid 07:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
    • I'm sorry, if I can find it, I'll fix it, but I can't see it =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:50, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Sorry for being vague. It's a horizontal blurred line on the man's nose level. –Dilaudid 14:29, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
        • Oh, that. Fixed, uploading now =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:24, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
          • I'd love to support this, but the blur is still there pestering me... –Dilaudid 17:34, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It blots thy beauty as frosts do bite the meads, Confounds thy fame as whirlwinds shake fair buds... - Just kiddin, really fine work though. Cirt (talk) 03:44, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Thermos (talk) 16:17, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Definite yes. Jordan Timothy James Busson (talk) 13:31, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose High quality work, for sure, but not enough wow. Barabas (talk) 00:27, 16 August 2008 (UTC)