Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/August 2014

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

Contents

File:Barn Owl flying.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2014 at 05:48:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Barn Owl flying
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Kristina Servant - uploaded by User:dman41689 - nominated by Dman41689 -- Dman41689 (talk) 05:48, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dman41689 (talk) 05:48, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Soft and noisy, but a great capture otherwise. Diliff (talk) 13:43, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Soft and noisy, perhaps. But an absolutely breathtaking photo, and just the kind of image that will make people say, "Look at what's on Commons!" I love it! KDS444 (talk) 16:19, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
    • They'll say "Look at what's on Commons!" and then they'll view it full screen and feel cheated by Commons. It's clearly out of focus. It's an unfortunate almost-caught-it moment. Diliff (talk) 21:31, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
    • KDS444, this is a captive bird, so not nearly as "breathtaking" as if it were wild. -- Colin (talk) 11:30, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very tempted to support per KD above, but in the end technical considerations prevail. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 18:14, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose truely breathtaking as a thumbnail, can't argue with that. It breaks my heart to reject this, but it's really very soft and noisy at higher resolutions. --El Grafo (talk) 21:25, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 23:02, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others, plus overexposure on the white parts of the face. Pity, it’s a nice shot. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 19:16, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. –Makele-90 (talk) 18:24, 25 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 09:33, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Borgund Stave Chuch in Lærdalen, 2013 June.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2014 at 14:22:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SBorgund Stave Church in Lærdalen in Lærdal municipality, Sogn og Fjordane, Norway in 2013 June.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Ximonic - nominated by Nikhil
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Nikhil (talk) 14:22, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 16:40, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 18:08, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 21:17, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 07:05, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kleuske (talk) 11:16, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 23:13, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Clear and crisp all around. Daniel Case (talk) 23:52, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:41, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I would prefer to see more to the left of the church and less to the right of it - it seems more interesting and can add nice perspective. Gidip (talk) 18:46, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose a boring simply composition. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:13, 27 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 09:31, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:Heppenheim BW 2014-05-13 14-32-16.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2014 at 19:22:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by -- Berthold Werner (talk) 19:22, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Berthold Werner (talk) 19:22, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Coat of Many Colours (talk) 02:06, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 10:58, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looks like a photo from a tourist's photo album. If this photo was professionally made, the photo would have been taken on a sunshiny day and the photographer would have waited until the people at left were gone. Good photo but not featured I think. I need a wauw effect. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 23:12, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm not bothered by the people so much as the white balance, which seems off. Daniel Case (talk) 23:54, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The statue right in front of the house is a poor choice. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:29, 24 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 09:32, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Kongress und Theaterhaus Bad Ischl DSC 3295w.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2014 at 21:11:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Congress and theater building at Bad Ischl, Upper Austria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Congress and theater building at Bad Ischl, Upper Austria / created, uploaded and nominated by -- P e z i (talk) 21:11, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- P e z i (talk) 21:11, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support maybe it need a very little sharpening and a little brightening of the shadows (especially at right), however well done and wow -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:04, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done thanks for voting (also to all other voters) und for the hint. I've tried to slightly brighten the shadows. For sharpening I don't dare; I'm afraid it could ruin more than help ... --P e z i (talk) 19:35, 26 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 09:32, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture

File:San paolo ,basilica.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Aug 2014 at 21:09:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Livioandronico2013 - uploaded by Livioandronico2013 - nominated by Livioandronico2013 -- Livioandronico2013 (talk) 21:09, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Livioandronico2013 (talk) 21:09, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment At least someone writes me a comment? positive or not, maybe I learn something. Thanks :)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's a nice photo, but I don't think it has a wow factor. Perhaps the image is a bit soft, but that's not a big issue. Overall, I don't think it is outstanding, for example the background is not chosen very well, imo (the statues are cut). Also the lamp in the background at the right bottom is a bit distracting --DXR (talk) 19:00, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for your suggestions --LivioAndronico talk 19:25, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think the columns and the statue are fighting for attention. And by the way, maybe you would write a better description of the photo on File:San paolo ,basilica.jpg instead of just "San paolo ,basilica". --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:04, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Strongly framed by the lintel at the top, but at the bottom the columns are simply truncated. Don't know that you can fix this composition. Kbh3rd (talk) 03:43, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 09:34, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

File:2014 Reeth Swing Bridge.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2014 at 12:25:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Reeth Swing Bridge in late evening light
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Reeth Swing Bridge is a suspension footbridge, erected 2002, allowing several rights of way to cross the Swale river. Yes, the image has been edited to please the eye and to render the real impression of that moment. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 12:25, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info c/u/n by Kreuzschnabel -- Kreuzschnabel (talk) 12:25, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kreuzschnabel (talk) 12:25, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, but too dark over all (underexposed) --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:16, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I’ve had this issue rising on QIC as well. I like this image exactly for the contrast of deep shadow versus the sunlit pasture beyond. Brightening the shadows would spoil the atmosphere. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 08:11, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dman41689 (talk) 07:10, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Perhaps as an abstract composition of light and shadow and color it works, but when I see a picture like this I want to see more detail than the lighting in this image affords. The foliage in the upper right appears to have a halo -- did you manually darken the sky and avoid the trees? It's a great subject, but I just don't feel the atmosphere that you do. I like the structure of your composition. I'd take lots of pictures of it in lots of different lighting and with lots of different skies if that was in my back yard. Kbh3rd (talk) 04:45, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for your review. Yes, the image has been slightly tone-mapped, as I said in my initial info. Unfortunately, it’s a two days journey from the place I usually live :-( but I’ll do my very best next time I’m there. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 10:39, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 18:05, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Dülmen, Naturschutzgebiet -Am Enteborn- -- 2014 -- 0202.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Aug 2014 at 07:35:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nature reserve "Am Enteborn" in Dülmen, Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XRay - uploaded by XRay - nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 07:35, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 07:35, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Pretty, but low value. --Slaunger (talk) 19:58, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 23:02, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I have been trying to take this picture myself for quite some time. And for once it's a country other than Estonia that is showing off its natural beauty this way Face-smile.svg. Daniel Case (talk) 23:49, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 06:05, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice, but not outstanding. --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:24, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gidip (talk) 18:49, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 07:34, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dman41689 (talk) 07:04, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 10:10, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 20:36, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I would be happy if this came out of my camera, but oppose per Uoaei1 and Slaunger. Kbh3rd (talk) 03:33, 1 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 18:04, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural

File:De fem søstre i århus perspetiv korrekt.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Aug 2014 at 18:59:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Villy Fink Isaksen - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 18:59, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 18:59, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I had noticed this photo as well and thought it was very good. --Slaunger (talk) 19:49, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 20:21, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:58, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Nice sunset but unfortunately the main subject is in shadow. --King of ♠ 06:04, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This is not a sunset the time is 21. nov 2008, 14:43 and the sun is behind the photografer behind a cloud, so the main subject is not in shade but in diffused light. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 08:24, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The top part of the sky looks massively oversharpened. I would suggest to apply masked sharpening (exclude the sky) and apply some selective noise reduction on the sky. There are also dust spots (see note). Composition is good. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:13, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thx for the reviews. I have removed the two dustspots and done a noise reduction on the sky. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 11:08, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
      • It's remarkably better, but for my personal taste still too much sharpening artefacts / noise on the sky (also on the lower parts). --Tuxyso (talk) 07:29, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 12:11, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great detail and atmosphere. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 05:59, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 08:50, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good composition, and the sky cinches it. Kbh3rd (talk) 05:51, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 16:24, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

De fem søstre Alternative.jpg


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 22:26, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Industry
The chosen alternative is: File:De fem søstre i århus perspetiv korrekt.jpg

File:Raspberry Pi B+ illustration.svg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2014 at 09:52:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vector illustration of a Raspberry Pi B+, a portable Linux computer used in education and private electronics projects.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Lucasbosch - uploaded by Lucasbosch - nominated by Lucasbosch -- Lucasbosch (talk) 09:52, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lucasbosch (talk) 09:52, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No "wow". --Yikrazuul (talk) 11:39, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I appreciate the Raspberry Pi topic as such, but the illustration gives me a zero readings on my wow-o-meter. Sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 20:44, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dman41689 (talk) 07:13, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the subject – I have two – but this doesn't look FP-ish. Looks too flat and too dull. A bit more saturated colors might be an improvement. I don't know how to add metallic sheen in Inkscape, but that might also help where appropriate, though perhaps still not enough to get to FP level. Kbh3rd (talk) 06:10, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 19:07, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Raspberry Pi B+ illustration.svg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2014 at 09:52:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vector illustration of a Raspberry Pi B+, a portable Linux computer used in education and private electronics projects.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Lucasbosch - uploaded by Lucasbosch - nominated by Lucasbosch -- Lucasbosch (talk) 09:52, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lucasbosch (talk) 09:52, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No "wow". --Yikrazuul (talk) 11:39, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I appreciate the Raspberry Pi topic as such, but the illustration gives me a zero readings on my wow-o-meter. Sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 20:44, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dman41689 (talk) 07:13, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the subject – I have two – but this doesn't look FP-ish. Looks too flat and too dull. A bit more saturated colors might be an improvement. I don't know how to add metallic sheen in Inkscape, but that might also help where appropriate, though perhaps still not enough to get to FP level. Kbh3rd (talk) 06:10, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 19:07, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Raspberry Pi B+ illustration.svg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2014 at 09:52:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vector illustration of a Raspberry Pi B+, a portable Linux computer used in education and private electronics projects.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Lucasbosch - uploaded by Lucasbosch - nominated by Lucasbosch -- Lucasbosch (talk) 09:52, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lucasbosch (talk) 09:52, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No "wow". --Yikrazuul (talk) 11:39, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I appreciate the Raspberry Pi topic as such, but the illustration gives me a zero readings on my wow-o-meter. Sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 20:44, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dman41689 (talk) 07:13, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the subject – I have two – but this doesn't look FP-ish. Looks too flat and too dull. A bit more saturated colors might be an improvement. I don't know how to add metallic sheen in Inkscape, but that might also help where appropriate, though perhaps still not enough to get to FP level. Kbh3rd (talk) 06:10, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 19:07, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Allium rothii 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Aug 2014 at 16:44:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Allium rothii 1.jpg


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer Talk 14:05, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Plants/Flowers

File:Raspberry Pi B+ illustration.svg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2014 at 09:52:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vector illustration of a Raspberry Pi B+, a portable Linux computer used in education and private electronics projects.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Lucasbosch - uploaded by Lucasbosch - nominated by Lucasbosch -- Lucasbosch (talk) 09:52, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lucasbosch (talk) 09:52, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No "wow". --Yikrazuul (talk) 11:39, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I appreciate the Raspberry Pi topic as such, but the illustration gives me a zero readings on my wow-o-meter. Sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 20:44, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dman41689 (talk) 07:13, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the subject – I have two – but this doesn't look FP-ish. Looks too flat and too dull. A bit more saturated colors might be an improvement. I don't know how to add metallic sheen in Inkscape, but that might also help where appropriate, though perhaps still not enough to get to FP level. Kbh3rd (talk) 06:10, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 19:07, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Tulipa agenensis sharonensis 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Aug 2014 at 18:01:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Gidip - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 18:01, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 18:01, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:54, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 14:52, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 17:59, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't fully get the intended pattern behind the composition here. Missing wow as well. - Benh (talk) 09:45, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 07:33, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gidip (talk) 11:04, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good quality, but low wow. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:58, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 18:11, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The seascape takes up a majority of the frame, but it's all annoyingly out of focus. I think this is a case of too much bokeh that doesn't work with the composition. Needs to be framed or cropped differently. Kbh3rd (talk) 05:44, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Benh/Yann -- Colin (talk) 09:11, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others, Poco2 16:30, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others -- Christian Ferrer Talk 04:50, 2 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /-- Christian Ferrer Talk 14:07, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Zuzana Smatanova-2014.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Aug 2014 at 19:21:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Slovak singer Zuzana Smatanová
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Bojars - uploaded by Bojars - nominated by Bojars -- Bojars (talk) 19:21, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Bojars (talk) 19:21, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think it is pretty decent concert photo, but the artist appears for me lack the kind of concentration/charisma/expression, which I expect for it to reach FP level, like these two recent concert FPs, for example. --Slaunger (talk) 20:38, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dman41689 (talk) 06:55, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Slaunger -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:03, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
    For me: too many people are opose. Many of them are categorical oppose: "without the words..." if I can compare other pictures submissions for music perfomance, I thought that from the last time this is best one... I have done many written Slovak articles about music for Wikipedia, but here are no many amateurish pictures about them with better qouality: "better" in general no better that this one... thank you for new experience: voting here is not about voting for articles submissions' quality, this is almost for artistic photographers' support only... vaste time for me... candidate of amateur reporting photo here is mistake. Bye. --Bojars (talk) 06:00, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
    Bojars I am sorry if nominating a photo here has been a bad experience for you. It is less than 0.1 % of all photos on Commons, which end up being featured. So getting the opposes is not a shame. It has happened to most frequent nominators here. There is another image recognition project on Commons, Commons:Valued images, which recognise getting that good illustration for a specific topic or article (which this photo is, it is clearly better than average photos on Commons). You may want to have a look at that - and hopefully come back, when you get that fantastic concert shot with a great wow and expression. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:55, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
I absolutly agree with you, Slaunger. You are one of those, who gave answer/ comment for "oppose". This is clear and uderstable... (and for my poor English knowledge too). For my acceptation of working/ uploadind to Wikimedia Commons is: "how many from my uploads are used in Wiki projects?". And there are over 90% of them... and that is another motivation. --Bojars (talk) 07:44, 3 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:42, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Drnholec (Dürnholz) - wayside cross.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2014 at 17:21:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Drnholec (Dürnholz), Moravia - old wayside cross
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 17:21, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 17:21, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow for me sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 20:21, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The place and the object have potential but crop id too tight and too much centered, maybe an horizontal shot with more landscape...-- Christian Ferrer Talk 10:59, 1 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:41, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

File:A Aranha-de-prata (Argiope argentata) se alimenta, antero-dorsal recorte.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2014 at 16:03:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
@Lauro Sirgado: It's fixable? User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 21:50, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment@ArionEstar:I like that. I respect the Kreuzschnabel opinion (Hi Kreuzschnabel), but I have my own. The choice of point of view was just to give the impression that the spider touched the riparian forest to an observer far from the picture in the original format. This species is well distributed (even in cities) and the photo was taken to show it in its wild habitat, remove the motif of picture and replace the background ruin the motivation of the photographer to choose the composition. Anyway add a background leave the unnatural picture, due to details of the spider would be an insane work, to stay so I took it as a good job. -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 22:59, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentTo achieve that effect, the spider and forest should be nearly equally sharp. The unsharpness of the forest gives too much depth into the image to generate the intended deception. That idea just didn’t come to my mind. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 06:02, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment@Kreuzschnabel: Please take this (and the previous) for information only, I do not want to defend a position, just explained, the image would be in a frame a few steps away from the observer, the lure disappear on approach, revealing the motif. The background should be blurred in this case. Each composition(and person) requires a different way of looking, and yes(so even), I understand and respect your point of view. Ty -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 19:40, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not "FP enough" for me as I said earlier. (This is another Argiope taken by me which is also below the FP bar.) Jee 03:28, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel. I appreciate the explanation by Lauro Sirgado, but I did not get the compositional idea when seeing the image, and it does not work for me. --Slaunger (talk) 20:27, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support I don't have problems with background, backwards, not a studio picture; but background with a bit of noise--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 11:29, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Kreuzschnabel. Fredlyfish4 (talk) 21:24, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 22:31, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Kranj - Grad Kieselstein 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2014 at 14:30:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panorama of Kieselstein Castle in Kranj, Slovenia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Mihael Grmek - uploaded by Mihael Grmek - nominated by Meho29 -- Mihael Grmek (talk) 14:30, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice composition! However, central building looks tilted CCW, entire image looks oversharpened to me (bright fringe along edges), bright areas slightly overexposed. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 19:34, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too harsh light and too high contrast to shadows on right hand side. Propose trying earlier in the morning or an hour or two before sunset (depending on how the shadows fall) to get more soft light. --Slaunger (talk) 20:32, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice detail in the shadows at the cost of washed-out highlights. Not sure about the composition, either. All sorts of things are chopped off at the edges, and that boring grass takes up too much of the frame. Shadows of unseen features detract. Definitely should try at other times of the day. Maybe get tighter in on the center building. How would it look if taken while standing even with the first lamp post, or even the second? Kbh3rd (talk) 06:04, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment For me your sharpening is overdone. Take a careful look on the sky and on the leafs of the tree at the left. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:17, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 0 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:41, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Raspberry Pi B+ illustration.svg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2014 at 09:52:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vector illustration of a Raspberry Pi B+, a portable Linux computer used in education and private electronics projects.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Lucasbosch - uploaded by Lucasbosch - nominated by Lucasbosch -- Lucasbosch (talk) 09:52, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lucasbosch (talk) 09:52, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No "wow". --Yikrazuul (talk) 11:39, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I appreciate the Raspberry Pi topic as such, but the illustration gives me a zero readings on my wow-o-meter. Sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 20:44, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dman41689 (talk) 07:13, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the subject – I have two – but this doesn't look FP-ish. Looks too flat and too dull. A bit more saturated colors might be an improvement. I don't know how to add metallic sheen in Inkscape, but that might also help where appropriate, though perhaps still not enough to get to FP level. Kbh3rd (talk) 06:10, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 19:07, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Bananaquits.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2014 at 19:55:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Two bananaquits on a branch
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Leon-bojarczuk - uploaded by Tom-b - nominated by Arion -- User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 19:55, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support FP in English Wikipedia -- User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 19:55, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment With its 2.25 Mpixels, just barely scrapes over the 2 Mpixel minimal resolution requirement. The file page could benefit from a proper {{Information}} template and a geolocation. I think the photo as such is very good, with a good timing. Focus is soft on one of the birds, but I think excuseable. Some concerns were raised about the authenticity of this photo in its EN:WP nomination back in 2009. It appears they were not completely resolved. I am in doubt if this gets over the bar for FPs of birds nowadays. --Slaunger (talk) 20:33, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Partial✓ Done@Slaunger.Added description and location -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 14:57, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Partial✓ Done@Slaunger.Indicated the probable author page(is not a Commons page) of the photography, see note on talk page -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 17:12, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info@Slaunger.I loaded a new image with larger size, based on the original as the quality of the original photo is good was possible to recover details and not just make a large copy devoid of value, please rate, if you disagree I revert the image. Please understand this issue as good faith, not dominate commons rules, do not know if I break something. -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 19:36, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment@Lauro Sirgado:See Commons:Overwriting existing files. It is very good that you have uploaded a photo of higher resolution, and it is certainly uncontroversial for this nomination as no-one has actually voted yet. It is a bit more controversial because the same file is promoted to featured status on both the English and Turkish wikipedias. However, as I see it it is clearly an improvement in this case and thus should not cause any problems with regard to the previous promotions. Overwriting an image with one of larger resolution is also mentioned explicitly as allowed, although one is cautioned when it comes to images with assessments that not other alterations are done at the same time. --Slaunger (talk) 20:05, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Since the creator is available for questioning: In the nomination at the English Wikipedia, an editor raised a concern/question if this was actually a staged shot? He also mentioned that the background appeared artificial. Could a little more details be revealed about the conditions of the shot on the file page (if this is still recallable, it has been some years :-) ) to shed some light on this? --Slaunger (talk) 20:12, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment@Slaunger:Do not know the author, and do not feel comfortable doing any inquiry, although we are geographically close. In the original I noticed a discontinuous and undefined boundary between the background and the motif, but does not progress on areas of detail of the barb of feathers, can be the result of image compression, but that's just a guess. -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 21:13, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral OK, thanks for all your hard work. I like the photo, but I am not fully convinced regarding the technical quality. --Slaunger (talk) 21:17, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The colour of the fake green background is too big a contrast to the birds I think. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:29, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The technical quality is not good and that branch on the foreground.. –Makele-90 (talk) 15:47, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 17:39, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Image:WikiGif.gif[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2014 at 20:01:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wiki Puzzle

Gustavo Girardelli (talk) 20:01, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support . Girardelli G. . . Escucho . 20:01, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Creative gif. User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 20:15, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose What shall be featurable here? Where is the encyclopedic usefulness, or at least the wow effect? Btw, you forgot (or didn't know) that the WP logo is protected; I've corrected the licensing now. --A.Savin 20:17, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice idea. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:06, 27 July 2014 (UTC) P.S.: we are here on Commons, not in a Wiki.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice but not FP - like A.Savin --XRay talk 07:24, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 10:46, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Far below the minimum size of 2 MPix. Nice idea, but by no means an FP. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 11:13, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment this is not a free image.--Monfie (talk) 14:36, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not freely licensed. --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 19:41, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 08:48, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The size 600x600 (=360,000) is far below the required minimum of 2,000,000! And I don't see the idea of a logo "building" up and down, up and down, up and down... And by the way, animations can be very educational (e.g. File:CtVRvascRed.gif), but this one just looks stupid I think. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 21:50, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dman41689 (talk) 06:58, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Moedling1997 (talk) 14:36, 1 August 2014 (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 Violates requirement that an FPC be freely licensed. King of ♠ 02:18, 3 August 2014 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Botijo y pucheros de Extremadura.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2014 at 11:12:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pottery in Spain
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by doalex - uploaded by doalex - nominated by [[User:{{subst:doalex}}|]] -- Doalex (talk) 11:12, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Doalex (talk) 11:12, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice idea. But an important part of the pitcher at right is in dark shadow. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cayambe (talk • contribs) 12:49, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
    • It's the problem when the natural light comes from left.--Doalex (talk) 17:37, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Which can be solved by placing something large and white right outside the frame, lightening the shadows a bit. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 11:51, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the idea is good, bud the technical quality is low: sharpness, DOF, color noise. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:09, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per user Cayambe's comment above. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:05, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dman41689 (talk) 07:08, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per the above objections, plus I don't see the value. Still lifes must meet a pretty high threshold in my opinion. Kbh3rd (talk) 05:04, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Doalex (talk) 09:08, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

File:Vranov nad Dyjí (Frain) - panorama.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Aug 2014 at 13:54:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vranov nad Dyjí (Frain), Moravia

Alternative[edit]

Vranov nad Dyjí (Frain) - panorama crop.JPG

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Cropped version from User:Kikos --Pudelek (talk) 12:54, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I prefer this crop to the first. The subject is a castle on a hill overlooking a town. The large foreground houses of the town at the bottom of the first crop distract from and compete with the castle. I might crop a bit off of the left side so that the castle and the buildings on the right are more in balance, but don't lose the bridge over the river. I don't like how the house on the far right is chopped off by the edge of the frame. Kbh3rd (talk) 05:34, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • But looking at it again, I'm beginning to think that maybe the first image with a bit of a crop off the left would be better. Kbh3rd (talk) 02:35, 1 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 22:40, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Toronto - ON - Humber Bay Arch Bridge2.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Aug 2014 at 20:22:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Toronto: Humber Bay Arch Bridge
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 20:22, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 20:22, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the perspective and the overall framing of the topic. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:13, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think the white arc is overexposed because the parapet wires are invisible before it. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 05:20, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
maybe you're right, i'll proof it soon. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:44, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The graffiti ruins it. Gidip (talk) 18:50, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It needs perspective correction on the left and is too bright and too unsharp in the middle. Sorry. --XRay talk 07:22, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Subject overexposed. The arch and sky are nice but other components not so great. -- Colin (talk) 11:37, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Gidip and Colin. Too much stark concrete in the foreground; try framing or cropping more tightly? Too bad about that graffiti. Kbh3rd (talk) 05:40, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Kreuzschnabel, Gidip, Colin, Kbh3rd, XRay. new version uploaded. Too much concrete? Not possible. I love concrete! :-)) --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:22, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is really a lovely composition, but the off-centered non-vertical line in the bottom of the file is really distracting for me. It is clear that perfect symmetry has been sought for in the bridge (and I like that a lot), but it is only half done. --Slaunger (talk) 20:35, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, but this image IS centered, adjusted on the arch bridge and not on the non symmetric road surface. Very creative argumentation but sadly not truth. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:39, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
I am sorry you do not like my annotations. But I have added another to illustrate the symmetry is not quite there. --Slaunger (talk) 20:47, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:51, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

File:David - The Death of Socrates.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2014 at 12:24:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Death of Socrates
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jacques-Louis David - uploaded by Harpsichord246 - nominated by Nikhil (talk) 12:24, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Nikhil (talk) 12:24, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 12:41, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice painting, but I cannot really see the individual contribution of the photographer. Another problem: There is a lot of dust on the painting, most visibly on the darker areas. --Tuxyso (talk) 16:48, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tuxyso: Huh? There doesn't need to be spectacular photography for a painting to be featured. It is sufficient for the photography to be an accurate, detailed rendering of what the painting actually looks like, with all its quirks and blemishes. --King of ♠ 17:56, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 19:50, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl (talk) 20:03, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Would prefer illumination for photography that didn't bring out the cracks in the paint, if that's even possible, but that's a minor issue and only at full resolution. It's a fine photograph of a very good painting that passes the value test. Kbh3rd (talk) 03:49, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Moedling1997 (talk) 14:35, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 18:22, 2 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer Talk 04:37, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic media

File:Gran Palacio, Bangkok, Tailandia, 2013-08-22, DD 20.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2014 at 09:42:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Yaksha (mysthical demon) "lifting" the southern of the Two Golden Phra Chedis (or pagodas) located on the Phaithee terrace in the Wat Phra Kaew (or Temple of the Emerald Buddha) in Bangkok, Thailand. The chedis were constructed by order of King Rama I in honor of his father (southern pagoda) and mother (northern pagoda) at the end of the 18th century. The structures are entirely covered with copper sheets, painted with lacquer and covered with gold leaf. The 20 demons and monkeys around the base were added later, at the end of the 19th century, by order of King Rama V.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Yaksha (mysthical demon) "lifting" the southern of the Two Golden Phra Chedis (or pagodas) located on the Phaithee terrace in the Wat Phra Kaew (or Temple of the Emerald Buddha) in Bangkok, Thailand. The chedis were constructed by order of King Rama I in honor of his father (southern pagoda) and mother (northern pagoda) at the end of the 18th century. The structures are entirely covered with copper sheets, painted with lacquer and covered with gold leaf. The 20 demons and monkeys around the base were added later, at the end of the 19th century, by order of King Rama V. All by me, Poco2 09:42, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 09:42, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Coat of Many Colours (talk) 12:36, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 14:28, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 19:54, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Saffron Blaze (talk) 20:17, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Minor cloning wouldn't hurt (notes added). --Ivar (talk) 20:18, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
    ✓ Done, thanks, Poco2 22:31, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kadellar (talk) 09:23, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 16:38, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Digitally removing items makes the picture fake I think. You can crop a photo but "cloning" out things to make the picture look more beautiful gives a picture that doesn't show how it looks in real life. I like the earlier version of the picture but not the currect one. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 21:54, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Dman41689 (talk) 07:00, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The highlights are too washed out in the upper part of the image, and overall the contrast and saturation are just a bit too low. I see you adjusted curves, etc., in successive uploads. I like the exposure more in the first version than this. (Perhaps it's my monitor... or yours.) Kbh3rd (talk) 05:20, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:01, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A very eyecatching composition IMO - Benh (talk) 19:44, 1 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 14:55, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects

File:Presqu'île du Rouens, Clermont-l'Hérault 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2014 at 08:04:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Presqu'île du Rouens, Lac du Salagou, Clermont-l'Hérault, France.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 08:04, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 08:04, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too much uninteresting foreground, too bluish, and no wow. A simply not featured shoot for me. Sorry Christian, but I'm missing the special. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 10:27, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info New version less bluish. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 10:47, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 07:25, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This looks like it's one of those scenes that was much better in person than the picture shows. I agree with Alchemist-hp; this looks too much like one of my snapshots. Kbh3rd (talk) 05:23, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /-- Christian Ferrer Talk 04:31, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Шаан-Кая в облаках.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2014 at 12:05:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mount Shaan-Kaya in Clouds
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Александр Черных - nominated by Ivar (talk) 12:05, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 12:05, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 12:36, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 18:19, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:07, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Amazing composition. SteveStrummer (talk) 06:48, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 08:47, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, very Impressive, a little less vignette would also work. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 17:51, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:41, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:18, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support While I'd normally say that this could be cropped a little more at top and bottom, in this case I think the extra space makes the contrast between the detailed rock and the fuzzy clouds that much stronger. Daniel Case (talk) 18:25, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Since support seems overwhelming I can voice my objections without ruining anyone's day. ;-) I was going to say that the lower clouds are too large and dense and serve more to obscure than to lend atmosphere, and that the extra space below the cloud in this crop is necessary in order to lend depth to the image. But I think that's actually what the problem with this image is. If the forest at the bottom was cropped out you'd have just this big rock floating in a sea of clouds, and that could be a stronger image. The current crop wants me to see more than the cloud allows -- more than I should want given that the subject is the rock and the atmosphere is the rock floating in the clouds. Kbh3rd (talk) 04:59, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Moedling1997 (talk) 14:37, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A crop of the bottom part would make it even more interesting to me Poco2 16:25, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 02:16, 3 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 15:00, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Natural phenomena

File:Mallorca - Palma de Mallorca - Castell de Bellver 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Aug 2014 at 20:52:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Palma de Mallorca: Castell de Bellver
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 20:52, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 20:52, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I would suggest you to review your nominations more carefully. The image here has several even QI issues (a lot of dust spots, I've marked only a few and a strange dark area at the top center). The sharpness varries remarkably from the image center to the image border - quite unusual for a stitching - what's happened there? The people at the edges are strongly compressed due to wide angle usage or due to projection type? Last issue: The noise level on the sky especially at the upper parts is imho to high and the composition is for my personal taste relatively boring. --Tuxyso (talk) 21:53, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Is it just me or does it look this is flipping the photographer offFace-smile.svg? Daniel Case (talk) 23:42, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Daniel I am no native speaker could you please clarify what you mean with flip s.o. off. Do you mean it just as technical term (the photographer does not answer to my comment) or do you mean it as malicious colloquial term which would be a direct personal attack against me. --Tuxyso (talk) 05:27, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
      • I haven't looked at the video link, but I think Daniel simply means the castle looks like a fist with the middle finger raised in a rude gesture. No offense to Tuxyso or Wladyslaw intended. -- Colin (talk) 12:03, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
        • Colin is correct. I apologize for overestimating the degree to which everyone would understand a common enough English colloquialism. Daniel Case (talk) 20:37, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
          • Thanks Colin and Daniel Case for clarification. I am not very familiar with colloquial English. I previously noticed Daniel as very friendly reviewer therefore I was irritated about his comment. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:06, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The minor impuritys of the sky are fixed now. Some are hardly to see and not every is a dustspot but simply the inhomogeneous sky. The nature isn't that pure that some whish to have. Tuxyso: if you don't like the picture vote with contra but please spare me with those ridiculous suggestions. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:58, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
    • My suggestion was not "ridiculous" (please no personal attack). As I've seen later there was already a comment on QIC adressing the same issues I've mentioned here. To avoid misunderstandings (in former times you've critized by bad English) also in German: Ich finde meinen Kommentar gar nicht so blöd wie von dir behauptet. Erst später habe ich gesehen, dass du das Foto auf QIC auch nominierst hast und dort wurden genau die gleichen Dinge kritisiert, die ich hier genannt habe. Bleibe bitte auf der Sachebene und vermeide beleidigende Kommentare wie "blödinnige Vorschläge". Auf die anderen offensichtlichen Mängel, die ich aufgezählt habe, gehst du ja gar nicht erst ein (Schärfe z.B.). Ob und wie ich abstimme überlasse bitte mir. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:12, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Scheinbar sollte man tatsächlich nur auf Deutsch mit dir schreiben, um Missverständnisse zu vermeiden. Ich sprach nicht von blödsinnigen Vorschlägen von dir sondern von lächerlichen. Und dazu stehe ich auch nach wie vor. Kleine Unreinheiten am Himmel, die ich nicht gesehen hatte, als KO-Kriteriem für eine Nominierung heranzuziehen ist nämlich nichts anderes. Und in der von dir zitierten QI-Nominierung wurde das Bild im Übrigen gelobt und nicht nur die marginalen Unreinheiten thematisiert. Soviel dazu. Außerdem: wenn ich einen Satz von dir kritisiere dann ist das keine persönliche Attake. Mir ist bewusst, dass das bei WP/COM nur allzu gerne als ultra-totschlag-Argument herangezogen wird, aber es trifft weder der Sache noch ist es in einer anderen Art dienlich.
Dass ich bei diesem "Tonfall", den du anschlägst nicht sonderlich motiviert bin, dir auf deine weiteren "Fragen zu antworten mag verständlich sein. Dennoch: ich vermag keine gravierenden Schärfeverluste im Bild zu erkennen. Dass sich am Rand unschäre ergibt liegt in der Natur der Optik (schon mal von Randunschärfe gehört?). Daran ändert auch nichts, dass man ein Bild stitched. Gerade weil man eben die Bildmitte (das Hauptobjekt im Allgemeinen) durchgängig scharf haben will, stitched man ja. Dass eine kleine Mauer am Rand nicht 100% die selbe Schärfe hat ist nach meinem Verständnis kein gravierender Qualitätsmangel. Natürlich kann man aber über jedes Pixel diskutieren. Dass die Passanten am Bildrand durch den Weitwinkelblick gestaucht wurden liegt ebenfalls in der Natur der Sache. Mich stört es nicht, sollte es die Massen hier stören, bin ich auch leidenschaftslos, diese komplett heraus zu retouchieren. Würde vielleicht in diesem Fall sogar noch atmosphärisch dem Bild zum Positiven gereichen. Dass du das Bild oder seine Komposition langweilig findest ist dir unbenommen. Will man eine Nahansicht des Bauwerks haben so bleiben aufgrund der örtlichen Gegebenheiten nicht so viele Alternativen. Aber gegen langweiligen Bildeindruck gibt es ja auch kein Argument, das ist gusto. Entweder es gefällt oder missfällt. Dann hoffe ich mal, dass du missverständnisfrei alle Infos erhalten hast, die du dir gewünscht hast. Gut Licht! --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:07, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Ja vielen Dank für die Erläuterung. Dass bei Stitchings per se am Rand Unschärfe sein muss sehe ich übrigens nicht so, vgl. dieses Foto - da ist kein bisschen Unschärfe. Es kommt auf die Aufnahmetechnik an - wenn nur nur 2,3 Fotos mit einer WW-Optik aufnimmst kann das in der Tat passieren. Du hast doch auch einen NP-Adapter, da ist qualitativ definitiv deutlich mehr drin. Nimmst du im Hochformat oder im Querformat auf? Bei Stitchings mit 28-35mm Brennweite, ggf. mehrzeilig habe ich derartige Probleme bisher nie gehabt. Außerdem kannst du ja auch etwas weiter nach links und rechts aufnehmen und dann croppen. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:26, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Einen NP-Adapter habe ich nicht und ist dementsprechend nicht zum Einsatz gekommen. Es handelt sich um drei Hochkant-Freihand-Aufnahmen, deren Stitching-Ergebnis nachträglich noch perspektivisch korrigiert wurde. Diesen Schritt hat man auch mit NP-Ausgleich. Vermeidbar wäre das m.E. nur dann gewesen, wenn ich noch deutlich weiter über die Ränder hinaus fotografiert hätte, um anschließend den nicht überlappenden Rand wegzuschneiden. Aber wie ich schon sagte: ich halte den Schärfteverlust (a) absolut für vertretbar und (b) da es sich nicht um einen Bereich handelt, der zum Gebäude selbst gehört und nicht das Hauptobjekt betrifft schon zwei mal. --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:59, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentFor me there’s distractiong amounts of space left and right of the subject. I’d crop off the left until the wall has gone, and a bit off the right too, to emphasize the subject. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 10:27, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Strong vertical perspective "correction" applied making the building distorted and proportions wrong. A Google Image search for "Castell de Bellver" shows that this is the dullest viewpoint possible for this castle, which could be a "wow" subject. -- Colin (talk) 12:03, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Each (!) perspective "correction" ist making the building distorted and proportions wrong. This is inevitable. The correction was definetly not strong, this is a wrong statement. And I don't see what should be distracting at this view. --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:01, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
No, a mild degree of perspective correction is acceptable. You simply can't make a rectilinear image of a tall building from this close a viewpoint without serious distortions. This has been known since renaisance painting. But in addition to this "correction", your proportions are just far out. This image has the building looking only about 20% wider than the tower is tall, yet other distant views show the ratio should be more than 2:1. That's due to the exaggerated wide-angle perspective, which here is very misleading. And your people look about 1m high. There's just too much wrong here. And I didn't say the view was distracting, I said it was dull. This castle has some amazing features that are visible from other viewpoints, but this seems almost chosen to exclude anything interesting. -- Colin (talk) 13:44, 1 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 03:31, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Neottia nidus-avis - Pruunikas pesajuur Keila.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2014 at 18:43:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Neottia nidus-avis
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Bird's-nest Orchid (Neottia nidus-avis). Created, uploaded and nominated by Ivar (talk) 18:43, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 18:43, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral High detail level. Plant sharp. Quite good bokeh and light. Composition and wow does not quite reach FP level IMO (not that I can tell what could be done better for the particular plant). For such a relatively common orchid species, I expect a little more for FP. Had it been a rare orchid, I would have supported. --Slaunger (talk) 18:53, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 19:57, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 07:24, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:41, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:22, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dman41689 (talk) 07:11, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bokeh should remove the distraction of the background, but the bright disks orbiting above the plant in this image distract my eye too much. That bright dash behind the stalk also detracts – it appears to be a part of the plant until one looks more closely. Kbh3rd (talk) 02:15, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For such an image you have to select the best looking plant with complete, undamaged flowers, not the way it is here. The flowers are very much worn out, the cobwebs are distracting, and the stem is too bright. The bokeh is actually pretty good IMO, except for the white dash. Gidip (talk) 07:47, 1 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Jee 03:21, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Reflection on the Salar de Uyuni, bolivia.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2014 at 18:35:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunrise over the Salar de Uyuni
  • Unfortunately I don't have any idea and I can't find any hint in the photos that I have, sorry. -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 20:36, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • I am confident that some other editor less ignorant about cars than you and me will pass by and help out with the model at least Face-smile.svg. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:40, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Uoaei1, could you be specific about the technical flaws, bearing in mind this is a 16MP image from a 16MP camera. -- Colin (talk) 11:49, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 11:49, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 20:41, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral -- Would like to see the auto on the right side of the image looking into/across the frame to compare with this, with the car on the left looking out of the frame to the left. Or even see how it works centered, not being a slave to the rule of thirds. Kbh3rd (talk) 04:27, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Normally I would agree that having the car facing into the empty space would be preferable to having it facing away from it. But in this case I think it works exceptionally well, partly due to the fact that it is not moving. It looks a bit like it is resting after a long trip and the framing kind of emphasizes where it came from. --El Grafo (talk) 09:45, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • I don't know much about composition rules (and don't really care about them to be honest as I prefer spontaneity). Before I bought this camera for my current travels, I used to shoot only with films, which means that I would take only one shot of each scene/portrait. To maximize the chances to get a nicer result, and because of my lack of knowledge about composition, I would simply move around the subjet, move around the camera, and shoot the one variation that visually seemed the more right to me. That's what I did here as well. Also I won't crop it to a square format because I like the idea of seeing more of the horizon line in the background. -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 13:19, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Changing to Support. Though curious about other composition possibilities, this is a striking image, and there's really nothing wrong with the framing. Kbh3rd (talk) 03:27, 1 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:20, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Natural phenomena

File:Taiwanese Monk at the Salar of Uyuni, Bolivia.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2014 at 18:58:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Taiwanese Monk at the Salar of Uyuni
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 03:09, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 06:07, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. Yann (talk) 08:46, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Magic lighting and setting. Hopefully this picture won't get deleted. And yes, taiwanese people take pictures every 5 minutes ;) (no offense intended, just a reference to people I know). - Benh (talk) 11:45, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support magic mood! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:51, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Only fault I can find is the horizon goes through his head rather than, say, further down. But the lighting, scene and subject are all great. -- Colin (talk) 19:24, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I am willing to accept that this photographer has sufficient consent for hosting this on Commons and having it featured. Re-use would be a different issue. I think the personality rights template addresses those consent and re-use issues well enough for our mandate. Particulalry given this is such a lovely picture. Saffron Blaze (talk) 13:41, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 22:23, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This is fake Symbol support vote.svg Support I tried to make a joke, however, I am learning the meaning of English humor. Pardon the misunderstanding. Very nice work Christopher, Now, talking seriously. I hope to see future work with the same quality and effort, congratulations --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 01:08, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure to understand in what this link to my blog is meant to support your statement, so... I guess this is a joke, right? :) -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 00:36, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Wilfredo, Christopher's blog is a little confusing but I think he is saying the gradient in the sky and the perfect reflections in his photographs look like a faked Photoshop image. But they aren't (I trust). -- Colin (talk) 07:49, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Aaaah, the reference to the Photoshopped joke... I thought it was an obvious one :) -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 12:04, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Never easy to grab the specific humour of each, especially with a big scary red “oppose” notation, but that's all good with me. Thanks for the kind comment (as well as everyone else's)! -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 02:13, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I am sorry, a hoax. I was hoping to see enough votes in favor to little influence over the ratings. If ever you are coming to take photos in Brazil, please do not hesitate to contact me. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 15:33, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Technical image quality not convincing --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:12, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Uoaei1, Like for the picture below, would you develop? Especially, how is this picture (which you supported) better technically? - Benh (talk) 20:06, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Do I have to defend my vote?! Well, looking at the face it looks quite soft. And the noise in the homogenous areas is also significant. --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:11, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • You don't have to... it's counted anyways. But it's more of a courtesy, and "technically wrong" could mean anything (and so means nothing). When I'm yelled at, I like to know why. And I'm just surprised a 16mpix picture which isn't that soft (IMO, and nothing sharpening can't fix) isn't as good as a 3mpix. - Benh (talk) 07:00, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Despite my "bitching" regarding consent above I kinda agree with Saffron Blaze. --Slaunger (talk) 18:51, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Subject, composition, and color all work for me, though could wish for sharper detail on the monk. Is ISO 800 a bit high for that camera? Perhaps shutter at 1/60 with ISO 400 would have been better. Kbh3rd (talk) 04:16, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Fuji's X-trans sensors are pretty good at handling noise, even though there are some drawback like lost of details during demosaicing (which can be considered noise somehow...). ISO 800 is not a problem in my experience, but this was processed with Lightroom and author used default values, which are known to render soft. - Benh (talk) 07:00, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • I don't have a tripod and therefore I have my camera hand-handled. When I used to shot with my Hasselblad 500 C/M, I didn't mind going as low a 1/30s since the body is quite heavy and hence more stable. But with this small and light Fuji X100S, I avoid as much as possible going slower than 1/125s or there would be too many chances for me to slightly move and get a blurry picture. -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 13:26, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:23, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: People

File:Urmia lake drought.webm, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2014 at 14:26:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Monfie - uploaded by Monfie - nominated by مانفی -- Monfie (talk) 14:26, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Monfie (talk) 14:26, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question and Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Is it correct that this movie has been created solely from the information in the three still images linked to from the file page? If so, I am impressed by how realistic the "interpolation" appears in the short video sequence. Anyway, I think it would be helpful and interesting to put quite some more details in the file page about how this video has been generated from the sources. --Slaunger (talk) 18:58, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Yes. It has been created using this 3 images only. They are mixed using cross dissolve transition in adobe-premiere.--Monfie (talk) 06:29, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 08:47, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support well done! --El Grafo (talk) 15:26, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question would it be possible to upload the 3 aligned base images as separate image files? That way, one could load them into an image viewer and step forth and back as one wishes. (It's always nice to have the raw data.) --El Grafo (talk) 15:26, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
✓ DoneYou can check "other versions". Now you can also see how much "color correction" has done, to equalize them.Monfie (talk) 13:12, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 11:45, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very instructive, and very convincing processing of the sparse material used for making the short sequence. Seems like you have extracted all the information that was there. --Slaunger (talk) 18:54, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Well done, and meets the criterion of value. Kbh3rd (talk) 04:32, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 10:11, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It seems to me as a very basic fading transition between the threes pictures ; and I'm not even sure the source material overlap nicely. To me it's more annoying than helpul to really judge and I'd rather have the three higher res pictures side by side. - Benh (talk) 14:56, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Changed my mind. Quite useful in the wiki article! - Benh (talk) 15:03, 31 July 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:16, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Satellite images

File:Vista de Benidorm, España, 2014-07-02, DD 51-53 HDR.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2014 at 20:41:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

High dynamic range night shot of Benidorm, turistic capital of the Costa Blanca (literally White Coast) in Land of Valencia, Spain. The shot was taken from the Cross of Benidorm, located on the summit of the Sierra Helada. Benidorm, is a town with 73,000 inhabitants throughout the year but with a peak of over half a million in the summer season. It's the third town with the most concentration of tall buildings in Europe, after London and Milan, whereas in Spain, Benidorm is positioned third, behind Barcelona and Madrid in the total number of skyscrapers. Nevertheless, Benidorm has the most high-rise buildings per capita in the world.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info High dynamic range night shot of Benidorm, turistic capital of the Costa Blanca (literally White Coast) in Land of Valencia, Spain. The shot was taken from the Cross of Benidorm, located on the summit of the Sierra Helada. Benidorm, is a town with 73,000 inhabitants throughout the year but with a peak of over half a million in the summer season. It's the third town with the most concentration of tall buildings in Europe, after London and Milan, whereas in Spain, Benidorm is positioned third, behind Barcelona and Madrid in the total number of skyscrapers. Nevertheless, Benidorm has the most high-rise buildings per capita in the world. All by me, Poco2 20:41, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 20:41, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too many parts of the image are absoutley dark (for me it's the wrong time to make such pictures, better is the blue hour), over all not so sharp and good like similar cityscape panoramas we already have as FP. it's good, but not a FP--Wladyslaw (talk) 07:19, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
    I don't believe that this kind of shots can only be taken in the blue hour (actually, I have some for this cityscape, but prefer this version). Poco2 08:20, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
    • depends on the scenery. A scenery with much water which becomes deeply dark and takes a dominant position in the composition is not beneficial IMO. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:14, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Caecilius Mauß (talk) 19:09, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Night is dark. The dark foliage on the lower left is balanced by the darker, shaper building on the lower right. This captures the ambience of the evening and makes me feel like I'm there. Kbh3rd (talk) 03:59, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg weak oppose Mmmh, I cannot really get enthusiastic about this photo. Level of details is quite good for a night shot. In direct comparison to the photo at blue hour one clearly gets the advantage of your careful HDR usages with this photo. From the technically side there are perspective issues at the very right (take a look in the verticals). But my main problem is the upper right part of the photo. There is a lot of fog and important details disappear in fog and darkness. The sharpening you've applied is also not beneficial there - sharpening areas with less details often result in sharpening artefacts. Probably an HDR at blue hour (a bit earlier as your nom beneath) with clearer air had been better. --Tuxyso (talk) 09:14, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment at least 4 dustspots (see notes) -- Christian Ferrer Talk 05:02, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
    ✓ Done, Poco2 07:56, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral nice image. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:11, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 13:38, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mountains are going to be dark at night. I believe we have an FP of Hong Kong from Victoria Peak with the same issue, but IMO it's not distracting. --King of ♠ 02:13, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

High dynamic range night shot of Benidorm, turistic capital of the Costa Blanca (literally White Coast) in Land of Valencia, Spain. The shot was taken from the Cross of Benidorm, located on the summit of the Sierra Helada. Benidorm, is a town with 73,000 inhabitants throughout the year but with a peak of over half a million in the summer season. It's the third town with the most concentration of tall buildings in Europe, after London and Milan, whereas in Spain, Benidorm is positioned third, behind Barcelona and Madrid in the total number of skyscrapers. Nevertheless, Benidorm has the most high-rise buildings per capita in the world.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This one during the blue hour Poco2 17:54, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • for me better than the first nomination but nevertheless far away from FP. Compared to this cityscape-FP Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes this one is technical not so sophisticated. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:00, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support fp worthy to me --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:21, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as already argued --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:02, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment again, this is NOT an alternative, but another picture.--Jebulon (talk) 21:58, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- In this case there is too much dark foreground lacking interesting detail and distracting from the main thrust of image. Kbh3rd (talk) 03:59, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The cropped one is much better. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 13:38, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturated. --King of ♠ 02:13, 3 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Jee 03:25, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Maramec Spring Park 20140330 151.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2014 at 03:10:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Waterfall under footbridge
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Kbh3rd - uploaded by Kbh3rd - nominated by Kbh3rd -- Kbh3rd (talk) 03:10, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice place, but Insufficient quality: lens flare, burnt sky and chromatic aberration (mainly in the branches at left). --Cayambe (talk) 06:46, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For all those reasons plus blown highlights on water and distracting dark area at rear. No matter how well-composed, this was never going to make up for shooting into the sun. Daniel Case (talk) 00:26, 2 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 0 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 05:57, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Aalto-Theater-Abends-02-2014.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2014 at 05:25:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aalto Theatre in evening light
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 05:25, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 05:25, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose lower part too dark, the container ruins the composition, it's a pity because this image is made good and the object is interessting --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:14, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
    • I understand your argument with the container (could not move it), for me it is not very distracting. What do you mean with "lower part"? The lower part of the building or the lower part of the complete photo? Take a look on Suncalc: The only way to photograph the building with nice light is in summer about 1h before sunset (north facade). The consequence is that only the building is well lid, other parts are in shadow. For me no shortage, in contrary: a special quality of this photo. Nonetheless there are still a lot of details in the shadows - no 100% black. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:05, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
      • The lower part of the image (=1/3 of the complete image) is rapt in strong shadow. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:18, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
        • Thanks for the info. I will take a further look on it in the evening. Some moderate brighening should be no big deal here because all shadow details are still visible. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:20, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
          • all shadow details are still visible Sorry, but this is definitely not the case. Behind the pillars the building structure is deeply dark. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:08, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
            • ✓ Done, new version uploaded, completely new development and stitching from RAW. Taxiarchos228, please take another look. IMHO the stitching is not that bad. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:35, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
              • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral much more better than the original, the container is still disturbing, therefore I don't support the image, but I see no reason for oppose any more --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:49, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
                • Thanks for re-considering your vote. I look forward to further comments. --Tuxyso (talk) 06:23, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:45, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For me, the container is not acceptable. The same picture, taken at a different time without the container, would be fine for me. --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:18, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Which container are you talking about? There are several --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 07:30, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent panorama! And I never seen such beautiful containers. :) --Alex Florstein (talk) 09:59, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The container/skip are distracting but overall still a good capture. -- Colin (talk) 11:53, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (but please kill the bird ... :)) --P e z i (talk) 20:52, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bitte noch einmal ohne Container. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:37, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment ✓ Done Bird killed :) To all the container comments: Yes the containers might be slightly disturbing BUT you never know when they are removed (btw: at the entry of the building of my home train station is still one there for over one year (!!) without clear reason). I think the nice golden hour light in this shot in combination with the beautiful sky formation over the building and the very high resolution (62 Mpx) is highlight enough to compensate the negative influence from the container . Additionaly what you see here is a north facade - you can only make reasonable photos of it with good light in a short period in the summer. --Tuxyso (talk) 22:01, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Agree -- Colin (talk) 07:23, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question I Don't understand. If this is the north facade, why do have the reflection of the sun in the window? And the shadows of the flagpoles would have a southern direction, also the shadows of the trees left on the facade. The sun in the north - impossible in Essen. --Llez (talk) 10:56, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
        • Llez, take a careful look on this GM view. The building is curved from west to north. The area where you see the reflection is rather the western part of the facade, take also a look on Suncalc. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:16, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
          • Thanks. This explains the reflection and the shadows. --Llez (talk) 11:48, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Slaunger (talk) 20:37, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry Tuxyso, but neither the lighting nor the subject are featurable to me. Poco2 16:27, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
    • No problem Poco (btw: the architecture of the building is imho outstanding) but what's wrong with the lighting? As I have argued above for me the best light one can reach with this object. Where do you see room for improvement? --Tuxyso (talk) 16:32, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
      • If I may suggest: sometimes the best one can do still isn't enough. Some subjects are just compromised by their location/aspect, and some subjects appeal more to some that others. -- Colin (talk) 16:52, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
        • I wanted to bring up the same argument like Colin. You cannot help it maybe but doing your best doesn't mean that it has to be one of the finest image here. Btw, technically there are no flaws. Regarding the lighting I find the tree shadow along with the sun reflexion really disturbing. The building itself (will not talk about the containers place near the entrance) is nice, but, at least from this perspective, nothing extraordinary IMHO. Poco2 16:56, 1 August 2014 (UTC) PD: Almost forgot, if I were Jebulon I'd also complain about the fact that we can see the photographer in the reflection of the door :) Poco2 16:57, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
          • ¿?¿?... But you are not Jebulon...Are you ? Fortunately, he is unique. :)) --Jebulon (talk) 21:00, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
            • Fortunately :) Poco2 09:14, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per other users comments above. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 13:39, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nikhil (talk) 07:44, 6 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Jee 16:07, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Apocynum venetum 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2014 at 12:54:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Apocynum venetum
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Gidip (talk) 12:54, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Gidip (talk) 12:54, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question I am puzzled why the DOF is so low, when the aperture is f/16? --Slaunger (talk) 16:17, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
    • It is not "so" low. Gidip (talk) 17:26, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Indeed, it is even good but the half left dark background kill the wow effect IMO -- Christian Ferrer Talk 17:26, 4 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Jee 16:08, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Goðafoss July 2014.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Aug 2014 at 09:04:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Goðafoss is a northern Icelandic waterfall with a height of 12m and a width of 30m. I took this exposure of 1s using a 64x ND filter. The two persons on the right side serve as scale.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Goðafoss is a northern Icelandic waterfall with a height of 12m and a width of 30m. I took this exposure of 1s using a 64x ND filter. The two persons on the right side serve as scale. All by myself -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:04, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:04, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great - I just wonder why the two persons are quite sharp with 1sec exposure time ?! --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:40, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment it seems the left guy is posing for a picture the right guy is taking --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:19, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 11:25, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Maybe a teeny bit oversharp, but not a deal breaker. Fantastic. Daniel Case (talk) 00:15, 1 August 2014 (UTC) (Oops, forgot a tilde thereFace-blush.svg)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks! But please do sign your review... ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 22:52, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:04, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Moedling1997 (talk) 14:39, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 16:51, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 13:40, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow --LivioAndronico talk 17:10, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 13:04, 6 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 04:48, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural

File:St Paul's Cathedral High Altar, London, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2014 at 20:58:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:St Paul's Cathedral High Altar, London, UK - Diliff.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 20:58, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 20:58, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support But, could you add some details about how these shots were made on the file page as well as state the projection and software used? (I guess it is basically the same recipe, which you recently explained in quite some detail to Benh). For instance, use the {{Panorama}} template. --Slaunger (talk) 21:12, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fredlyfish4 (talk) 21:20, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose "photoshopped" kitsch for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:21, 2 August 2014 (UTC) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:23, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
    • What makes it photoshopped/kitsch to you? All images receive processing (even if just to convert the sensor data into a JPG in camera) but calling something photoshopped usually implies that misrepresentation has occurred. This image is basically how the altar truly looks. The only real out of the ordinary processing is in recovering the stained glass detail. It's hard to show you equivalent photos though because as St Paul's Cathedral usually restricts photography, there really aren't any other decent quality photos of this high altar in existence on the web. Diliff (talk) 14:23, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
      • I think this image is an tonemapping/HDR image. The saturation looks to strong for me = "photoshopped". I think also you know its meaning. It will be also better for us all, to add more info's about your work: camera, lens, from how images it was made, the exposures etc.. At least that would be very interesting for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:50, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
        • Yes, it is tone mapped, as are most of my interior images. I can add this extra information but it won't prove or disprove that the subject is accurately represented. HDR images can be processed to look realistic (which is what I always aim for), and regular single exposures can be processed to look unrealistic. Diliff (talk) 08:28, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
          • An "accurately represented" image is a matter of opinion. I think the red canal and the saturation are a bit to strong. Best regards, --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:48, 3 August 2014 (UTC) P.S: this is only "one" oppose. I know, your image will be anyway featured :-) And that is also OK for me!
            • Yes, of course it's a matter of opinion, but I don't think there's anything particularly wrong with the saturation in the image, nothing looks unrealistic to me. I don't mind opposes when they are reasonable, I just disagree with yours this time. ;-) Diliff (talk) 10:25, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
              • OK, so I'd like to believe you. I strike my oppose. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:23, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great! --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:48, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:12, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:12, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 13:46, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support "photoshopped" kitsch for me too. -- Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:34, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
    • You've confused me. Are you saying that you're supporting this "photoshopped" kitsch, or you've accidentally supported it but meant to oppose, or you're disagreeing with Alchemist HP in some kind of obscure way? ;-) Diliff (talk) 19:24, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 17:51, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I want more kitsch like this. ;o) Yann (talk) 05:41, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Dman41689 (talk) 06:20, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 10:45, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support St Paul's has been described as "a lasting monument to the glory of God". If it requires Photoshop techniques to capture-on-camera and render-on-screen some of that glory, then I'm sure God approves of Photoshop. -- Colin (talk) 11:02, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Just superb. Nikhil (talk) 11:46, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The whole photo is pure pleasure, especially the beautiful ceiling. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:57, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:49, 6 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 04:45, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors

File:St Paul's Cathedral Nave, London, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2014 at 20:53:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:St Paul's Cathedral Nave, London, UK - Diliff.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 20:53, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • This image arguably scores extra points for rarity. Photography is normally not allowed to be taken inside the cathedral by any visitors under any circumstances, but I managed to get special permission to take this photo (and others). In addition, even if photography were normally allowed, St Paul's Cathedral is usually swarming with people and it would very difficult to get a photo like this without people everywhere. ;-)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 20:53, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Slaunger (talk) 21:07, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fredlyfish4 (talk) 21:20, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's is a beautiful (and rare) image, but if I may suggest... just saw an hour ago(!) a fascinating documentary on the cathedral, explaining how the building is very slowly "sinking", and how the pillar supporting the dome are cleverly hidden etc. I think you chose to squeeze too much horizontal FOV in the Frame, and the distorsions result in a nave which looks larger than reality. I couldn't tell at first glance that I was looking at the same interior. I think this picture gives a better idea of the volume. How about a worm's view without verticals corrected or a cylindrical-like projection? And just out of curiosity, what happened to the uncropped version of File:St Paul's Cathedral Interior Dome 2 crop, London, UK - Diliff.jpg (the link is dead)? If it looks like this, it would be the picture I nominate first :) - Benh (talk) 22:19, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the comments. It's always a criticism that wide angles of view make an interior look larger/more voluminous than it really is. Yes, I could have used a less wide FOV but then I would have missed the top of the arches and the monument on the left side. I wasn't able to get further back because I was pushed right up against the font near the entrance. And yes I would have really loved to have been given access to the balcony levels but that wasn't an option. I did ask. ;-) As for the uncropped version, it's there. I just forgot to add the File: at the start of the filename. Unfortunately I couldn't include the horizon in the image because there were too many people walking around by that stage. I wasn't given a completely empty cathedral unfortunately. I was able to enter at exactly the time that the cathedral opened in the morning (not earlier) and the nave shot was the first shot I shot as I knew the cathedral would fill up quickly. By the time I got to the dome in the middle of the cathedral, there were too many people walking around and time was limited so I chose to concentrate on the ceiling instead. If I had all day and the cathedral was empty, I would have tried a lot of other views. Diliff (talk) 14:38, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
      • Yes, that's why I proposed you to give a try to the worm's view, or cylindrical projection. I found cylindrical to render quite fine in these situations (but that's only my opinion of course, and my results don't necessarily speak for themselves like yours). The distortions are easy on the eyes and, in such cases where we have the references to help, we tend to read them as straight lines unconsciously. As for the dome, how sad because I see it as a trademark of the cathedral. - Benh (talk) 22:46, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 04:30, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support although there is some noise and some distortions on the sides --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:50, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 09:06, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:13, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 13:45, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 17:51, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 18:18, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 02:09, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 08:19, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --DXR (talk) 10:29, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 10:50, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 19:33, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 05:22, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 05:49, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 17:07, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 04:46, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors

File:Kansas 2008.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Aug 2014 at 06:44:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rock band Kansas in 2008
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info rock band Kansas in 2008. created by Glenn Smith - uploaded and nominated by Dman41689 (talk) 06:44, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dman41689 (talk) 06:44, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - to me the lower part looks too dark. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 07:00, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose To me the bg is a fake (if not the whole picture...), and the curtain in wrongly cut at the right border. Visible even on a tablet. Nothing against arranged bg in general, but 1) Manipulations should not be deceptive ( template 'retouched' added in the file description page, for instance ), and 2) it should be well done...--Jebulon (talk) 11:25, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Jebulon, also the right border looks strange... --DXR (talk) 12:12, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose You can see it's a combination of several photos. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 13:48, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - just a note this image is taken directly from Flickr no changes have been made to it. --Dman41689 (talk) 17:18, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per other opposes. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:49, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above -- Jiel (talk) 00:22, 6 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 17:11, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Chocolaterie Menier moulin Saulnier 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Aug 2014 at 15:03:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Myrabella - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 15:03, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 15:03, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info For those who do not know. Benh has created this FP (with some of the best light ever seen on Commons) of the same building at another vantage point. That does not exclude more FPs of this very nice building of course. --Slaunger (talk) 15:27, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
    • i feel a bit embarrassed (and honored) for this favorable comment :) and yes there's no reason that both can't be FP together. The current candidate offers a more thorough view (I was stuck behind a portal, and this probably was shot during heritage days when he monument is open to public) and a very clear weather. - Benh (talk) 22:29, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I have never been one of those that think like en:FP where only one image per subject should be featured. This project celebrates images not encyclopedias. More the merrier -- Saffron Blaze (talk) 17:31, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
    • Agreed. I just wanted to highlight another FP of the same building for reference. --Slaunger (talk) 18:04, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support – Conveys much detail in an appealing composition. SteveStrummer (talk) 22:03, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great Shot Nikhil (talk) 01:57, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 08:19, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 10:28, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 04:49, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kbh3rd (talk) 05:30, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support très joli ! very beautiful Jiel (talk) 00:23, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 21:26, 6 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 21:15, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Industry

File:Toads v Uni scrum.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Aug 2014 at 05:13:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A scrum during a regional rugby union match.
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 image is unsharp, tilted, crop is not convincing --DXR (talk) 07:28, 6 August 2014 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Cepaea vindobonensis - Banding variation.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Aug 2014 at 10:38:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The main banding types of the Viennese Banded Snail


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 05:35, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Bones, shells and fossils

File:Clevedon MMB A9 Pier.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Aug 2014 at 05:13:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Clevedon Pier at low tide.
@Dman41689: It's courtesy to leave a reason when making an oppose vote. Lewis Hulbert (talk) 01:26, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice idea but the dark rocks in the foreground are too dominating for me. However the pier itself looks interesting. A wide-angle shot from a point on the rocks could be fascinating. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 10:10, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Clear photo of pier but poor weather makes it lack wow. We have Saffron's sillhouette FP, though a daytime photo would be good to capture detail of the pier itself. However, Mattbuck, you should be aware that it is now illegal to photograph the British coast without a 10-stop ND filter. -- Colin (talk) 12:02, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK for me, the atmosphere suits this particular image well. --King of ♠ 02:11, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment While a good quality photo, the weather ruins the mood for me. The empty space to the left also irks me a little but it's not a major problem. --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 01:31, 6 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 05:38, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Cumulonimbus, Detail, Enschede, 2014-07-10.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Aug 2014 at 14:51:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Cumulonimbus calvus, detail. Cloudscape and lighting courtesy of You-Know-Who. Rest by yours truly. -- Kleuske (talk) 14:51, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kleuske (talk) 14:51, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- too dark -- Dman41689 (talk) 06:17, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Considerable chroma noise in dark clouds. Overall too dark, but stretching the histogram would raise the noise. Certainly most impressive in nature, but not easy to catch into bytes. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 17:27, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above. --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 21:26, 6 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 05:36, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Aerial View - Burg Rötteln3.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Aug 2014 at 12:41:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lörrach, Germany: aerial view of Rötteln Castle
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 12:41, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 12:41, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:18, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A topic very well suited for an aerial photograph. I do not like the crop though, where the surrounding walls and buildings are separated by the main ruin in an unfortunate way. Also, considering the medium resolution of the photo, I do not think the per pixel quality is quite as good as I would have preferred - or maybe it has to do with the somewhat harsh light, which gives a slightly bleached or washed out appearance. I think you have other shots from the same series of photos, which have more wow for me and better light. Foremost File:Aerial View - Burg Rötteln1.jpg - especially if a bit of the forest could be cropped off to the left and top. This photo is also a VI within the scope of aerial views of this ruin, with good reason I think. Maybe also File:Aerial View - Burg Rötteln7.jpg, albeit the crop is perhaps a bit too tight on that one. --Slaunger (talk) 18:19, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
This image shows the upper part of the Castle so this is factual a reasonable crop and I don't see a serious photographic reason against this art work. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:41, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
The way the image is cropped between upper and lower is IMO unfortunate with half cut through roofs (see annotations). Regarding my previous appraisal of File:Aerial View - Burg Rötteln1.jpg, that one looks really great in preview size, but not good enough in full resolution. --Slaunger (talk) 20:03, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, but that few cut off roofs are not really significant for the image impression. Let's hear some other opinions. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:25, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
I don't see that there is s.th. significant out of focus, especially for a aerial view image. If this should be a problem I wonder how this could File:Blasieholmen February 2013.jpg become a FP. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:27, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
But that looks sharp. What I meant to say is that this looks soft and fuzzy, like a plushy version of the image. Daniel Case (talk) 00:31, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Look at the upper part of Blasieholmen_February_2013.jpg. There is NOTHING sharp. If you find Blasieholmen_February_2013.jpg sharp than my image is twise as sharp. --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:20, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral An aerial view alone is already an achievement IMO. But the cut off part and cold WB kills it for me. File:Aerial View - Burg Rötteln1.jpg is better in these aspects. (How sad its resolution is low). - Benh (talk) 19:28, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jiel (talk) 00:09, 6 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /-- Christian Ferrer Talk 17:50, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Arcos das ruínas de Santa Mariña Dozo Cambados Galiza. Galicia 010.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Aug 2014 at 11:18:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Arcs of the roof. Ruins of the church of Santa Mariña de Dozo, Cambados, Galicia (Spain).
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, and nominated by Lmbuga -- Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 11:18, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The church is a monument indexed in the Spanish heritage register of Bienes de Interés Cultural under the reference RI-51-0001122.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 11:18, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:15, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Interesting composition, but it does not quite work for me. Background is a little too busy for my taste (albeit probably hard to avoid). --Slaunger (talk) 18:28, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • And so hard to avoid: I do not cut trees. Remove trees with photoshop is too distort reality IMO: Behind there is a forest! The church is on the outskirts of Cambados and heavily wooded area--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 22:07, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • And I certainly do not want you to try and remove them artificially:) I was more thinking if it was possible to find another vantage point where the background is less busy. Either almost entirely trees, or with less trees. I admit that may be easier said than done, but then again, this is FPC after all. --Slaunger (talk) 16:14, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Sorry, we'll have to wait to cutting trees to take a picture like this, from outside. Here you can see images of the church of the years 2007, 2011 and 2013 and there are trees (less in 2007). It is quite possible to avoid the trees from the inside, but it is a different photo.--Miguel Bugallo (Lmbuga) 08:22, 2 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /-- Christian Ferrer Talk 17:46, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

File:The Pine and the Sandsplit, Sète.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Aug 2014 at 10:15:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Pine and the Sandsplit, Sète, France.


Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 19:33, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural

File:Catedral de la Resurrección de Cristo, Podgorica, Montenegro, 2014-04-14, DD 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Aug 2014 at 18:56:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Let me look into it. Art works are problematic, not sure about buildings Poco2 08:02, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Well, I guess I will not even have a chance to do it (although I started with a general approach), since an impatient estonian IP (who seems to be obsessed with my FPCs) has already started a deletion request. So, apart from the fact that I am actually an amateur photographer and not a lawyer specialized in copyright, now I even feel to be put on pressure to clarify this. There are actually 3 FPs at stake, not only this one. Poco2 13:56, 8 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer Talk 04:40, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:Dactylorhiza fuchsii Mariazell 01.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Aug 2014 at 19:08:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Common spotted orchid (Dactylorhiza fuchsii), found near Mariazell, Styria (Austria)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Uoaei1 - uploaded by Uoaei1 - nominated by Uoaei1 -- Uoaei1 (talk) 19:08, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uoaei1 (talk) 19:08, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful. Sharp, good light and color, nice contrast with background that does not distract. Kbh3rd (talk) 03:14, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as Kbh3rd. Yann (talk) 07:15, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Please edit out the dust spots on the left side. Gidip (talk) 07:41, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done Thanks for the hint! --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:53, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:06, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There are color fringes on a large fraction of the edges visible at full resolution. That may not be objectionable in itself, but also in modest review resolution of 2 Mpixels, the fringes are immediately visible in certain areas. I have pinpointed two of them with annotations. It appears to be at least partially due to CA, which should be correctable if you have the raw file.. --Slaunger (talk) 16:30, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done CA correction done in new version 3 --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:59, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
Better now, thanks. --Slaunger (talk) 21:37, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support although there is one spot, that should be removed, see note, Poco2 16:50, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done I am not sure that it was a dust spot; anyway it is removed in new version 3 --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:59, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:43, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support Nice angle. I love this flower. User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 22:47, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:28, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 13:42, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Very nice picture but the tight crop on top ruins it for me. --P e z i (talk) 17:35, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above -- Jiel (talk) 00:13, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 13:10, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose My vote won't change anything, and there's nothing really wrong. It's sharp, but how difficult it is to achieve this these days? Since we're at FPC, I expect a little bit more like softer light and greener background. See [1]. - Benh (talk) 18:00, 8 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer Talk 04:38, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Plants/Flowers

File:Hong Kong Harbour 45.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Aug 2014 at 17:20:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hong Kong Harbour
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info -- Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:20, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think you should elaborate a bit on the categorization of the file page and make it more specific. I also propose adding geodata. --Slaunger (talk) 18:22, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 00:15, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry Wilfredo, but too dark. Yann (talk) 07:16, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I consider this type of photography should be dark, if your intention is to show the hours, the photograph must be dark. In this case, my intention was to show the contrast between light and darkness of the port of Hong Kong. To say that this picture is dark is very true because the technique of this style is. It is very difficult to know how to differentiate an error photograph and intentionally achieved, especially when some kind of art is the result of the error. In this case, I tried that this photograph was dark, by the light we recognize that there is darkness. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 21:46, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The darkness isn't the problem IMO. It's that there's too much of one color of light, and it's not a good one—that horrible "bastard amber" produced by sodium-vapor lighting. It makes the city look a lot more hellish than I remember it being last summer. If it weren't for the distinctive Tsing Ma bridge (which avoids that lighting), I wouldn't know we were looking at HK. Daniel Case (talk) 00:29, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree with Daniel. Couldn't that be corrected throuh white balance? It's also very dark, but I can't tell if that would still be a problem with more variation in colour. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 17:59, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Rebuild from RAW with White balance

Hong Kong Harbour

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 12:36, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thanks to the previous reviews, I have decided to reveal another version. Thank you very much for your feedback. --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 20:34, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Much better! Yann (talk) 12:53, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Definitely better. Leaving now and won't be able to change this, so I'll support although I'm still slightly unsure. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 13:17, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very nice! -- Christian Ferrer Talk 17:27, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree, this version is much better! --Halavar (talk) 21:54, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice image. :-) But: Some elements at the bottom are disturbing.--XRay talk 07:11, 9 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /-- Christian Ferrer Talk 04:35, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

File:A plastic clothespin in a rope.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2014 at 02:52:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

a plastic cloth spin in a rope


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 08:35, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Ordre de Mobilisation générale 2 août 1914.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2014 at 11:57:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

French mobilization poster, 1914,aug.1st
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by french government - uploaded, stitched, restored and by nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 11:57, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another centenial document. Exactly 100 years ago, August 1st, 1914, this poster was put everywhere on the walls in France, in order to call all the male citizens to the armies. This is a strange flyier for a terrible flashmob... This picture is visually very well known in France, and one can find many "fac simile" here or there on the web. This one is an original, from the collections of the French National Library (BnF). I don't think it needs translation, but it could be provided if necessary. High size, and high EV IMO. Restored by me.-- Jebulon (talk) 11:57, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support by all means! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:40, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good timing! Good quality, high resolution of a historic document. Yann (talk) 15:39, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose please tell me: what will be here featured??? A simply (restored) scan. This can be as a VI, but I can't see here featured parts. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:14, 2 August 2014 (UTC) I strike my oppose. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:10, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
    • You are welcome, I tell you:
      • -This is not a scan, but a photograph (see original file, one can find the link on the file page)
      • -Anyway, scans are eligible for FP candidacies, even "simple". (See the POTD of today 08/02, which is indeed a "simple (restored) scan" of a photograph.)
      • -This document has obvious lot of values, which is one of the criteria for FP (but you know this very well).
      • -The upload and restoration took me ages, and the human work on this kind of pictures is far much more difficult than any photography processing. IMO, the result is not so bad.
      • -Following your opinion, no historical documents can be featured here? Of course I can not agree.
      • -In France yesterday, at 4pm, all the tocsin bells were ringing in all cities and villages, and even all the bells of Notre-Dame de Paris (this is very rare), not because of the centenary of the beginning of WWI (08/03 for France), but because of the centenary of the put of this poster on the walls, which immediately changed the life of 4 millions of men. IMO, this is why this image is a FP, and not only a VI (VIC is for comparisons with other similar images in some scopes, not for valuable images by themselves, as frequently, but wrongly, thought).--Jebulon (talk) 09:55, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
        • Hi Jebulon, thanks for your clarification. I strike my oppose, but I still thinking such works are not featured for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:10, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
        • Hi Alchemist-hp, thanks for striking your opposition, but it was not necessary ! Im not sure I understand your opinion, but disagreements are normal here. You asked me about explanations, I was happy to provide you some arguments. I accept oppositions (yes, I do !) One more argument : we already had versions of this picture here, but the (original) quality and size of this one makes it maybe useful for many projects during the four 14-18 next years (students, historians etc...). This is featurable IMO, like banknote collections, or other 'only written' documents, when they have an historical or educational sense, and if technical quality is good enough for FP, of course. It was not the case of the original (CA along letters, tears, spots, pixellated bg etc...), but that's why restoration work is interesting to me. Thanks for your feedback anyway.--Jebulon (talk) 14:04, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well done and great encyclopedic value. --Cayambe (talk) 05:45, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Cayambe. --JLPC (talk) 16:34, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above -- Jiel (talk) 00:17, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support More like a WP FP. Jee 03:37, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 21:56, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Big but pretty blurry. As it is, it's as good to downsample to something like 2-5mpix. It will save bandwidth with zero downside. Do I miss something? - Benh (talk) 18:19, 8 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Christian Ferrer Talk 17:26, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic media

File:Vøringfossen.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2014 at 09:51:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vøringsfossen in Eidfjord, Hordaland, Norwa
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Kenny Louie (Flickr) - uploaded by Flickr upload bot - nominated by kasir -- Kasir (talk) 09:51, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kasir (talk) 09:51, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I really want to support, but the fringe between the right mountains and the sky is suspicious. Is the sky fake? Also some issue on the left part, with double lines (look the sky, we can see a duplicate faded out mountains). There's a lot of processing done here, but something is wrong. - Benh (talk) 10:25, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Just for information, the green fringe (if you are referring to this) IMO is just a chromatic aberration. Three pixels vertically upward direction and three in the horizontal direction to the left, on the winding road to the left you can see both green and red (as was expected) in the opposite direction. The magenta ghost may be another aberration related to the dark areas of the picture and extends across the central visual field, but in this case is just a guess because it is outside of the expected area. Very consistent I do not think that is a edition. -- Lauro Sirgadocontribs 14:48, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
      • This is not CA. It's just to big for a downsampled picture (and I'm pretty sure it is). CA can be this big, but on closer subjects. We're talking about far away edges here. - Benh (talk) 16:12, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Really nice image and composition, but per Benh – something went wrong in editing. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 10:31, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Benh. --Slaunger (talk) 16:22, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg strong oppose another Flickr kitsch/fake. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:16, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Dman41689 (talk) 06:22, 3 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /-- Christian Ferrer Talk 17:24, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Urban stream @ Odivelas, Portugal.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2014 at 07:56:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Urban stream recovered
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Reino Baptista - uploaded by Reino Baptista - nominated by Reinobaptista -- RB (talk) 07:56, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- RB (talk) 07:56, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unfortunately far below of what's expected here, especially technically. Thanks for your contribution, but please have a close look at successful FP nominations. Don't feel discouraged and do come back with another candidate! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:19, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Not a bad image though, regarding the composition and idea. There’s just the extremely posterized colours, the "ghost contours" (object movement between exposures?) and the huge loss of detail. Would make a fine watercolour painting (hope the nominator will excuse that joke) :-) --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 15:14, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination RB (talk) 10:52, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
    RB: I recommend you to send some candidates through COM:QIC to get a feeling what we mean with good quality. Poco2 11:52, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Kevelaer, Kerzenkapelle -- 2014 -- 00721.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2014 at 13:46:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Candle Chapel in Kevelaer, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XRay - uploaded by XRay - nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 13:46, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 13:46, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think the small DoF is your choice but it add nothing special to the image. And the composition is not outstanding IMO. -- Christian Ferrer Talk 11:30, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Thanks. I checked the images again and I think, you're right.--XRay talk 06:02, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

File:2014 Insulator electric fence yellow.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2014 at 12:55:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Yellow plastic insulator of an electric fence
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I think it’s a nice depiction of this object in its natural habit :-) c/u/n by -- Kreuzschnabel (talk) 12:55, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kreuzschnabel (talk) 12:55, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but the blurred background is too distracting. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:12, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The DoF (and the subject) don't disturb me. However if the composition is not bad, it is also not outstanding. Maybe a more close view... or maybe not, I don't know...-- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:14, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above Jiel (talk) 22:43, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 06:28, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Tõlinõmme raba01.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2014 at 15:43:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tõlinõmme bog, Vääna Landscape reserve.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Pinus sylvestris in Tõlinõmme bog. Created, uploaded and nominated by Ivar (talk) 15:43, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 15:43, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow for me. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 16:42, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jiel (talk) 22:23, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but no wow for me.--ArildV (talk) 21:34, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Ivar (talk) 05:13, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Deckenfresko im Marmorsaal vom Stift Geras von Paul Troger 1738.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Aug 2014 at 00:09:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The ceiling fresco in the Marble Hall of the Premonstratensian Chorherrenstift Geras in Lower Austria
This file shows that in the middle of the room a rope with a chandelier hangs. For this photo I have chosen the single location for the camera, in which the cable is not attached to a person. And I had to make the compromise that the rope does not depend entirely vertical. If you rotate the image, then the rope does not hang down. If one chooses a location for the camera, in which the central figure is down, then the rope runs through the center of the face of Jesus.--Michael Gäbler (talk) 14:19, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK fine. Yann (talk) 05:35, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose this looks heavily distorted --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:31, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
What do you mean with "heavily distorted"?
Some persons appear extremely stretched (e.g. the one with the red cape), while others are squeezed together. --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:47, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. My stitching program Kolor Autopano Giga gave the image the wrong proportions. I built the image again. The image now has the correct proportions. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:33, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment WLM2014 has not started yet, so please remove the category and whatelse refers to WLM! --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:36, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you, I removed the category WLM2014. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 13:36, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
We say in German: "Grau ist alle Theorie." Please have a look to this file. The only location for the recording of a symmetrical image is located in the middle of the floor under the flying angel. But at this point depends on the chandelier. The chandelier obscured the ceiling painting.--Michael Gäbler (talk) 13:36, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment No, you could stand so that the rope the chandelier hangs in, is in the midle of the picture and becomes the axis of symmetry to the picture. Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 13:59, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
The rope then hangs in front of the face of the woman. --Michael Gäbler (talk) 20:53, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
There are four sides and four corners to use. Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 10:52, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Amanita citrina - Gelber Knollenblätterpilz - false death cap - Citron Amanita - Amanita citrina - 02.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2014 at 22:39:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Amanita citrina - Gelber Knollenblätterpilz - false death cap - Citron Amanita


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Ivar (talk) 13:04, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Amanita citrina - Gelber Knollenblätterpilz - false death cap - Citron Amanita - Amanita citrina - 03.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2014 at 22:42:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Amanita citrina - Gelber Knollenblätterpilz - false death cap - Citron Amanita
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Norbert Nagel - nominated by Arion -- User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 22:42, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- User:ArionEstarArionEstar (talk) 22:42, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kbh3rd (talk) 04:28, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good picture of the species but no wow. QI justifiably but no FP to me. Too much space above the cap. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 05:07, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jiel (talk) 00:20, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor lighting, needs a flash. The center of attention is shaded. Gidip (talk) 19:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ivar (talk) 13:05, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Glassy-Carbon HP68-79.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Aug 2014 at 20:07:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

glassy carbon


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ivar (talk) 16:16, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects/Rocks and Minerals

File:Great White Pelican AdF.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2014 at 19:56:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Great White Pelican in Walvis Bay, Namibia


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ivar (talk) 16:21, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Iolaus glaucus 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2014 at 20:00:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Iolaus glaucus


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ivar (talk) 16:12, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Arthropods

File:Lednice (Eisgrub) - zámek.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2014 at 21:51:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Castle Lednice
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 21:51, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 21:51, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but please add English description and (if possible) geo-location data --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:31, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
    It's English description - Castle Lednice (Eisgrub), Moravia --Pudelek (talk) 09:07, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:14, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great shot! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:45, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not far from oversharpening but still great. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 16:56, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 21:18, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice --Rjcastillo (talk) 03:00, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 16:17, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Good quality and lightning but the trees (though maybe unavoidable, but here is a different compostion) are disturbing for the composition, the images also also lacks balance.--ArildV (talk) 21:29, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow. --LivioAndronico talk 23:24, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 17:57, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michael Gäbler (talk) 16:11, 11 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Ivar (talk) 17:59, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications

File:RWE Tower Essen 2014.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2014 at 14:02:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

RWE Tower
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info multi-row panorama of RWE Tower in Essen. Note that shooting conditions als quite challenging (Category, Google Search). The only way to photograph the tower together with its lower building is the use of panorama technique from an extreme angle
    all by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 14:02, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 14:02, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I appreciate there are a lot of compromises to take. Here you have stepped back such that the geometric distortion of the tower was correctable afterwards, and I do think that aspect of the photo has been achieved quite succesfully. But at a cost: The power lines in the foreground sign etc are distracting and the foreground as a whole is busy and distarcting, and by straightening up the tower the foreground is also severely curved, and that looks really weird. Looking in the same category, I think it is better to either choose a completely different vantage point such as in File:RWE-Turm Essen, abends.jpg, where the subject is simply the tower. Alternatively, move closer to get rid of the busy foreground as has been done in File:NRW, Essen, Sudviertel - RWE-Turm.jpg (but with an unfortunate crop) and simply let the perspective be seen as it is. --Slaunger (talk) 15:58, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose a good QI, not more and per Slaunger. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:19, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nothing is disturbing me in this picture ; I think this is a realistic seesight. Jiel (talk) 00:19, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 07:10, 9 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ivar (talk) 13:03, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Romain Rolland au balcon, Meurisse, 1914.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2014 at 14:20:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Romain Rolland on the balcony of his home
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info unknown photographer from the Meurisse Agency, restored, uploaded, and nominated by Yann (talk) 14:20, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info High resolution of a famous French writer, precisely described and geocoded, exactly 100 years old now. Romain Rolland was one of the few personalities to vocally oppose the First World War, for which he received death threats, and had to leave Paris to settle in Switzerland. He received the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1915, after the publication of his pacifist manifesto Above the Battle. This year is also the 70th anniversary of his death.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Yann (talk) 14:20, 5 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ivar (talk) 16:18, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Angkor Wat, Camboya, 2013-08-16, DD 084.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2014 at 14:49:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dawn view of the temple of Angkor Wat, with 2 Nāgas in the foreground, a gallery in the middle and the temple mountain in the back. The Angkor Wat was first a Hindu and later a Buddhist temple complex built by the Khmer King Suryavarman II in the early 12th century, and capital of the Khmer Empire, today Cambodia. This temple complex is the best preserved temple in the site and a symbol of Cambodia, appearing on its national flag.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Dawn view of the temple of Angkor Wat, with 2 Nāgas in the foreground, a gallery in the middle and the temple mountain in the back. The Angkor Wat was first a Hindu and later a Buddhist temple complex built by the Khmer King Suryavarman II in the early 12th century, and capital of the Khmer Empire, today Cambodia. This temple complex is the best preserved temple in the site and a symbol of Cambodia, appearing on its national flag. All by me, Poco2 14:49, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 14:49, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think the light is not good. Too much in dark shadow for me. There is also a magenta cast on the palm tree to the right and the overall noise level is too high. (I would have loved to be there though). --Slaunger (talk) 20:07, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The angle of the photo is so strange, it seems a little bit flattened Jiel (talk) 22:33, 10 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. I don't think the composition is really very nice. I know you don't have to always get the stereotypical view in all the postcards, but the point of view seems much too low and is dominated by the wall in the foreground. Diliff (talk) 16:04, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Ok, I got it, thanks for the feedback, Poco2 17:12, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Marasmius alliaceus-Knoblauchschwindling.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2014 at 11:14:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Marasmius alliaceus

File:Lijiang Yunnan China-View-of-Jade-Dragon-Mountain-01.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2014 at 10:38:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jade Dragon Snow Mountain (Yulong Xueshan) in Yunnan, China.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Cccefalon - -- CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 10:38, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 10:38, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment My eyes keep bumping against the side edges, I want to see more to the left and right here. Upright orientation does not seem to fit the scenery. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 11:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Scenery is nice, but composition is not convincing. The large area of blue sky is relatively boring. --Tuxyso (talk) 14:09, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 18:58, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Lahad-Datu Sabah Mount-Silam-Red-Crab-Geosesarma-aurantium-01.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Aug 2014 at 07:09:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Silam Crab (Geosesarma aurantium) on Mount Silam. Size ca. 15 mm
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I understand, that there are different opinions about the square crop and of course it would be possible to alter it. However, this photo got QI and VI on that shape and it would affect this, when applying that kind of changes. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 04:19, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jiel (talk) 22:21, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 18:58, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Cassis madagascariensis from Margarita Island.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2014 at 01:17:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cassis madagascariensis from Margarita Island


Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ivar (talk) 10:53, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Bones, shells and fossils

File:Food Market at Cajamarca, Peru.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Aug 2014 at 14:34:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Food market in Cajamarca, Peru.
  • Fair enough—in my point of view, I kinda like the relation between that woman and the family about to be served. The pole could be seen as a separating line between both?—well, I'm saying that but I've got to admin that I don't know anything about composition, hehe. I gave a go anyways at cropping it as you say, with a square ratio, but even though it indeed looks interesting, I feel like it's losing some of its soul... the relation with the family is lost. -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 20:41, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above -- Christian Ferrer Talk 18:00, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 21:13, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral -- a very interesting living picture, but wood pole Jiel (talk) 22:31, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but I have to agree about the composition.--ArildV (talk) 21:04, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for the comments so far! I'm keen to upload a cropped version of the image but what would be the best way for me to do it? Upload a new one, overwrite the existing one, or something else? -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 12:41, 8 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Ivar (talk) 10:55, 12 August 2014 (UTC))

File:Jielbeaumadier panda roux 1 mjp paris 2014.jpeg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Aug 2014 at 22:07:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

An adorable firefox eating with his hands.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jiel - uploaded by Jiel - nominated by Jiel -- Jiel (talk) 22:07, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jiel (talk) 22:07, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, bad quality --Rjcastillo (talk) 02:59, 7 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ivar (talk) 10:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC))

File:Jielbeaumadier renard roux assis 2 skansen 2013.jpeg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2014 at 23:49:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A red fox


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ivar (talk) 11:35, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

File:Melker Altar - Dornenkrönung.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Aug 2014 at 13:02:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Melk Altar by Jörg Breu the Elder: Crowning of Christ with thorns


Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ivar (talk) 10:51, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic media

File:Sun Setting over the Beach of Pimentel District, Chiclayo, Peru.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Aug 2014 at 14:39:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunset over Pimentel, Peru.
  • I've been wondering the same with many of the featured pictures, so you know, I thought why not this one? I guess landscapes and portraits always had a higher impact on me than buildings, flowers, photos of painting, and other photos of food. -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 20:27, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above -- Christian Ferrer Talk 17:59, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Nobelpeopleuploader (talk) 21:13, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose same here. No clear guideline comes out from the composition. - Benh (talk) 21:16, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- an ad for soda and quick foods ? Jiel (talk) 22:20, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I like the picture but the composition is not entirely convincing. The woman who sells drinks and snacks at the beach is an interesting subject, the evening light is beautiful. I would like to have more focus on her.--ArildV (talk) 21:03, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Agreed – the woman as such is not uninteresting in this lighting, but there’s too much in this pic to focus on any message that might be conveyed. Less would have been more. --Kreuzschnabel (talk) 07:57, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for the comments—I guess there's nothing I can do to improve it then because of the way I shot the original one? Please don't hesitate to add more comments if something hasn't been said yet, as I'm mainly posting here for feedbacks :) -- Christopher Crouzet (talk) 12:44, 8 August 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Ivar (talk) 10:55, 12 August 2014 (UTC))

File:St John's College Chapel, Cambridge, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Aug 2014 at 12:36:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St John's College Chapel, Cambridge


Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 14:21, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors

File:Uni caught stomping.webm, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Aug 2014 at 07:10:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 14:20, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

File:View from Skaftafell National Park July 2014 -2.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Aug 2014 at 06:00:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Skaftafellsheiði plateau provides a picturesque view on Skaftafellsjökull, a glacier terminus of the Vatnajökull, the adjacent glacier lake below, and River Skeiðará originating from it.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Skaftafellsheiði plateau provides a picturesque view on Skaftafellsjökull, a glacier terminus of the Vatnajökull, the adjacent glacier lake below, and River Skeiðará originating from it. All by myself, -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:00, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:00, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the composition have a great wow here, I like the people in the foreground.--ArildV (talk) 20:36, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jiel (talk) 22:07, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk)