Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/January 2014

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

Contents

File:Vespa cabro vs. Apis mellifera.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2014 at 20:51:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

European hornet (Vespa crabro) attacking a honeycomb of bees (Apis mellifera).
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by J.Ligero & I.Barrios - uploaded by Alurín - nominated by Alurín -- Alurín (talk) 20:51, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alurín (talk) 20:51, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting event, but the Vespa in unsharp, and the background very noisy.--Jebulon (talk) 21:26, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Jebulon. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 08:44, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose good idea but bad quality /St1995 10:17, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination. Thanks for your comments. --Alurín (talk) 12:33, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

File:The Chess Queen.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2014 at 21:53:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by John Fowler - uploaded & nominated by —Mono 21:53, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- —Mono 21:53, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T (talk) 22:26, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I reduced noise from the sky. --Ivar (talk) 07:16, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 09:51, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:04, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A bit oversaturated though.--Jebulon (talk) 15:02, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 19:30, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't think a square crop is the best way to do this, but still very good. --King of ♠ 20:18, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice noiseless sky. Daniel Case (talk) 04:52, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:51, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support   • Richard • [®] • 20:30, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:52, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support /St1995 19:30, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 22:48, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:23, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 02:06, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural

File:Ceiling Civitas Dei, Entrance of the Cathedral, Aachen, Germany.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2014 at 01:17:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Civitas Dei mosaic, Aachen Cathedral
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 01:17, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support "Civitas Dei" (the City of God), neo byzantine mosaic of the ceiling at the entrance of the Cathedral of Aachen, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany. The "City" looks like the cathedral itself, surrounded by allegories of the four major rivers of the Antiquity -- Jebulon (talk) 01:17, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Araujojoan96 (talk) 03:14, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T (talk) 14:24, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
    • I support also after the edits. Tomer T (talk) 18:10, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Tilted ccw Poco2 22:07, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Not at all. Horizontal lines of the city are... horizontal.--Jebulon (talk) 22:14, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
      • Sorry, but I disagree, the horizontals I see are not horizontal, see note Poco2 17:05, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
        • You nitpicker ( but right. Please notice anyway that this design is not flat ) ! Clin--Jebulon (talk) 17:26, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
  • I like the mosaic but I don´t like the format. The ratio of length and wide of the image doesn't work here with the image itself. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:29, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
    • I'm not far of your opinion. My goal is to provide always the more informations possible, but sometimes it does not work very well, and I know I should "sacrify" parts of pictures, but it is not in my mind, and I'm wrong...Do you suggest a crop like this one ? (see annotation)--Jebulon (talk) 09:09, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
  • I also would go for a crop like the one suggested. But leave the original for encyclopaedica purposes! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:02, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Let's go for the new version, with a better crop (original is kept as first upload) ! Thanks to reviewers, their idea is actually an improvement.--Jebulon (talk) 17:26, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The new version works. --Godot13 (talk) 19:54, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 13:08, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 13:19, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:03, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the crop is an improvement for this image, but the not symmetric pattern of the arcs distract the image impression, nice documentary image, nice mosaic, but not an impressive picture, I´ve seen much more impressive pictures of intersections --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:27, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:46, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 02:40, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice detail, interesting subject, good crop, but still tilted Poco2 11:28, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
    • horizontals ? Verticals ? I don't see what I could change. Remember this is an arched vault...--Jebulon (talk) 18:23, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Jee 06:40, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors

File:Girl Posing at Glacier Point Yosemite 2013.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2014 at 14:33:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Posing girl at Glacier Point with Half Dome in the background
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Posing girl at Glacier Point with Half Dome in the background
    all by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 14:33, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 14:33, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice. Tomer T (talk) 16:34, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request Maybe you could add the "personality rights template" in the file description page ?--Jebulon (talk) 17:44, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done But imho she is not identifyable on the photo. --Tuxyso (talk) 18:00, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
      • Jebulon is right, she is. Tomer T (talk) 18:06, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I tried it several times but didn't come to the conclusion that this composition is really featurable. I don't observe any harmony between the girl and the background. Is she actually posing? it doesn't look like that to me. Maybe that pose makes somehow sense from a different angle, no clue. Btw, it is blueish, you should increse the temperature a bit. Regarding personality rights, please, go ahead, is it allowed to stay there? I know the place and don't remember such an spot. Poco2 21:51, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Thanks Poco for your careful review. First: I've uploaded a new version with slightly modified WB, but I think WB is OK (even a bit too warm when you take the sun side of Half Dome as basis).
      Some background information to the photo: The rock where the girl is sitting looks more dangerous than it is - it is far from being dangerous :) The "rock" is about 1 meter high and is easy to go there. It is located on the public accessible part of Glacier Point, it is like a podium. The clue is that behind the "rock" there is no deep hollow (as the choosen perspective pretends) but just the normal visiting point where other tourist walk around :) The idea for the photo was: A lot of tourist (also me) go there and pose in front of Half Dome and take a photo. I saw this girl there during her friends were photographing her and asked if I can also take a photo. To the composition: For me there is a lot of tension between her and Half Dome. The curvature of her body corresponds to the curvature of the Half Dome - I tried to capture this moment. Also the sun lightens her well - head and legs are bright, her shirt is in shadow. I hope you understand my motivation of the nomination and the context of the photo better now?! --Tuxyso (talk) 23:41, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
      Add: On this photo you can see the "dangerous" situation quite well. --Tuxyso (talk) 08:02, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
      • Thanks to you for the detailed explanation and motivation, still, I'll keep the opposing vote. Poco2 13:49, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
        • No problem. Just to be sure: Your only remaining reason for opposing is missing Wow of the composition, right? --Tuxyso (talk) 13:54, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
          • No wow at all due to the fact that this composition is IMHO artificial, looking at the picture I don't see the harmony you seem to observe, even after your explanation. She on that rock is rather a disturbing element to a nice background Poco2 17:24, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wowww. Impressively and dangerous. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 09:54, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Poco a Poco. Although the image is technically good, I don't find the theme or composition featurable. Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:53, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support because this is the closest I've ever seen (and for that matter may ever see) anyone come to properly imitating a Maxfield Parrish "girl on a rock" illustration in a photograph. Really ... you should have had her dressed like one of his models, and just gone wild with the color saturation and the light on the rocks. Daniel Case (talk) 05:09, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Thanks Daniel for your informative comment. Up to now I have not known these illustrations, but you are right there are some similarities :) --Tuxyso (talk) 11:32, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:47, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lošmi (talk) 02:38, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Daniel Case's explanation of the similarity in composition to Maxfield Parrish illustrations. JesseW (talk) 06:35, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. --Yikrazuul (talk) 17:31, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Right now, I'm the master of the future of this picture... If I oppose... Mmmmh delicious ! Happy new year !--Jebulon (talk) 14:05, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Three more minutes for that cute girl. Clin Jee 14:30, 1 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 15:15, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: People

File:Red Bridge Embalse Burro Negro.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2014 at 20:07:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Red Bridge Embalse Burro Negro
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Red Bridge Embalse Burro Negro. All by -- Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 20:07, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Not the best sharpness due to the f/3.8 aperture. Nice colors but composition-wise I'd include more at the bottom (wider). --King of ♠ 20:12, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support St1995 12:14, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose DoF missing (f/3.8), sorry. --XRay talk 16:47, 29 December 2013 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Jee 03:00, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Vendor babies Balls.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2014 at 20:00:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

baby balls


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 02:59, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Glacier diagram.svg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Jan 2014 at 00:20:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A picture of an alpine glacier and surrounding landscape characteristics.


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 06:13, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic media/Computer-generated

File:Chamaeleo namaquensis (Walvis Bay).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Jan 2014 at 13:37:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Namaqua chameleon


Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 14:42, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Reptiles

File:Mercedes-Benz Museum 201312 08 blue hour.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Jan 2014 at 07:30:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mercedes-Benz Museum in Stuttgart, Germany, during blue hour.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by me. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 07:30, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain as author. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 07:30, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 12:30, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T (talk) 12:59, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:48, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 15:43, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 16:08, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ArildV (talk) 16:16, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MainFrame (talk) 16:44, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:07, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hard to find any shortcomings here. Probably the crop at the left looks a bit random / unmotivated to me despite its function of bringing the main motive out of the center. --Tuxyso (talk) 17:18, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ArionEstar (talk) 19:36, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'am not a friend of too tight crops ... let it breathe.   • Richard • [®] • 20:26, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the comment, neither am I, really. I didn't shoot it wider because there were some distractions on the right. I probably should have. I could include more on the top though, would that help? — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 10:46, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:58, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 23:38, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:44, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 11:44, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support St1995 12:12, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice work. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 19:37, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support indeed.--Jebulon (talk) 21:41, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 22:57, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 00:29, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In spite of centered composition Poco2 11:24, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 14:30, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture

File:Étang de Thau, Mèze 04.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2014 at 19:11:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Étang de Thau, Mèze, Hérault, France.

File:Pilea involucrata, Jardín Botánico, Múnich, Alemania, 2013-09-08, DD 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2014 at 18:15:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by Tomer T (talk) 18:15, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 18:15, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Blurred -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:18, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment yes, it's OOF. ISO 800 with noise kicks also in. --Ivar (talk) 18:52, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
    I fear, that's right. The picture is not sharp. That's why I didn't consider to nominate it to QI, either. Poco2 22:23, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor technical quality, and blur. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 03:49, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 17:42, 31 December 2013 (UTC) Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Tuc-tucs en la Calle Maha Rat, Bangkok, Tailandia, 2013-08-22, DD 01.jpg

File:Porto Covo July 2013-25.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2014 at 00:50:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Walking on the beach in Porto Covo, Portugal. Long live minimalism! All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:50, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:50, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Araujojoan96 (talk) 14:40, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (weak) I really like the interplay of different surfaces: brown beach, water+beach with a nice diagonal line and white parts, water with a gradient from green to blue. My opposing reason is due to the person walking there. Her white dress creates imho not enough contrast to the white water parts beneath her and thus the walking person does not work as central compositional element for me in that tiny size, sorry. Nonetheless quality and idea is very good. Probably a black dress and a white bag had been perfect :) --Tuxyso (talk) 17:50, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 20:16, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good quality and technically flawless but there is nothing featureable. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 22:44, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:54, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per other opposers. Kruusamägi (talk) 18:54, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nothing featureable /St1995 19:33, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't find the theme or composition featurable + no wow. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 19:40, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:09, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:45, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Trichomes of Arabidopsis thaliana[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2014 at 21:08:31 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Heiti Paves - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 21:08, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 21:08, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question I would like to understand, whether this is intended just as a modern art contribution or as a scientific contribution? The file descriptions are very short and for some of the images only a file description in Estonian is given. A size scale is neither provided in the images nor in the file description, though at least some of the images appear to represent different magnifications. I understand that all images are electron microscopy images, being artifically coloured, but I don't understand the colour coding. Why is a yellow colour chosen for some trichomes while the others are coloured in green/blue/red? -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 11:51, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes, thous are SEM images that have been artificially colored (technology uses beam of electrons, not light, and therefor allows no color), but the images have no specific color coding -- only goal seems to be to distinguish the trichomes from the leaf. I would view it as both modern art and as scientific contribution. Even the author is know for both of his scientific work and from photography (example). I asked from author to add the information about the size of the structures on the images. As additional information I might point out that this series (and there where some other images as well, that I didn't included to this nomination) won the Estonian Science Photo Competition 2013. Kruusamägi (talk) 12:33, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support enough wow for me. --Ivar (talk) 16:37, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't think it is justified to feature five similar images of the same subject at once. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 16:57, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment What are you exactly opposing? Are the images bad or you just don't like that there's a 5 of them? And how should I choose if they are "five similar images"? Btw there where more images uploaded by Heiti, but I already choose the most different ones to show how different the trichomes can be. Kruusamägi (talk) 17:53, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
    • I may support this nomination, if you compile the set into a single image and if appropriate scientific information is provided in the image description (scale information, instrument used, differences between the investigated samples, if any, etc.) -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 17:01, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow factor and high scientific and educational value. Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 19:39, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I support the step, I want more good scientific pictures for Wikimedia --Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:35, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:51, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose maybe "artsy", but not scientific IMO. Colorization troubles me, I don't know where is the truth, even with explanations. And colorization is not well done technically, especially on the last image. --Jebulon (talk) 10:39, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Should I withdraw this nomination and nominate thous images as one-by-one? Kruusamägi (talk) 13:05, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Kruusamägi (talk) 21:50, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

File:LighthouseKiipsaate.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Jan 2014 at 16:19:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunset at Kiipsaare Lighthouse
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Urmas83 - uploaded by Urmas83 - nominated by Urmas83 -- Urmas Haljaste (talk) 16:19, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Urmas Haljaste (talk) 16:19, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:10, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Lighthouse is really leaning. --Ivar (talk) 20:11, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 20:11, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 07:48, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 09:19, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support St1995 12:18, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:06, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Florian Fuchs (talk) 13:48, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 20:49, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice, OK, but "featurable" ?--Jebulon (talk) 10:12, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose hm, the main, the lighthouse, is simple to dark. The rest another random sunset image. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:03, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The lighthouse seems half inclined. ArionEstar (talk) 15:50, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It seems inclined because it is inclined.--Urmas Haljaste (talk) 16:24, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (weak) Inclined or not in real, it destroys imho the harmony of the composition. The slightly diagonal coastline is nice, but not the lighthouse. --Tuxyso (talk) 22:50, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Tuxyso. --King of ♠ 20:19, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Alchemist-hp. While it is a nice sunset image -- the focus is the lighthouse, and more detail on is needed for featured quality. JesseW (talk) 06:41, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Well I prefer the silhouette. I tried also HDR and different exposure settings but this one is definitely the best result. The lighthouse has not many details to be exposed. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 17:40, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Alchemist-hp + composition. I expect the lighthouse more on right than blocking the view as here. Expect more grass; now it is ending on the left bottom corner of the frame. Jee 02:53, 2 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 02:45, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Image:Geweihförmige Holzkeule - Staghorn fungus - Xylaria hypoxylon - 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2014 at 07:40:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Staghorn fungus Xylaria hypoxylon


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 02:47, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Fungi

File:Tallinna Niguliste kirik 22-03-2013.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2014 at 12:19:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. Nicholas' Church, Tallinn
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info St. Nicholas' Church, Tallinn, all by Ivar (talk) 12:19, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 12:19, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Light is excellent as usual with your shots but imho the composition is unbalanced. I guess that you would like to take the nice "onion dome" at the very left into the picture. But the problem is that the church, your main motive, is turned to the right image border and thus creates due to its right placement an unbalance. --Tuxyso (talk) 17:40, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 20:13, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:55, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (weak) There still is something in the composition that is annoying me but I am not exactly sure what it is ;) Kruusamägi (talk) 18:53, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support /St1995 19:27, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 22:55, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 02:51, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kasir (talk) 12:42, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 08:24, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Strong Symbol support vote.svg Support ArionEstar (talk) 23:03, 2 January 2014 (UTC) Use bot friendly templates; please. Jee 02:53, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Jee 06:19, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:A5 with Frankfurt airport on the horizon - Autobahn A5 mit Flughafen Frankfurt am Horizont - 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2014 at 11:37:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Light traces of traffic: Many cars and one airplane.


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 16:26, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects/Vehicles

File:Munich subway station Mangfallplatz.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2014 at 13:02:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Munich subway station Mangfallplatz
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Munich subway station Mangfallplatz with train arriving - all by -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:02, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:02, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice, although the signs and the clocks are a bit overexposed.--Florian Fuchs (talk) 14:02, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment that's true, Florian. Usually the lighting in underground stations is very demanding, often being too bright and too dark at the same time. The dynamic range in need is huge. So this image forms a compromise. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:35, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment That's why I supported it anyway. Although, you might have considered creating a DRI... --Florian Fuchs (talk) 16:55, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
        • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes, in fact I had considered that option, but there were too many non-static elements, i.e. the train and the passengers. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:53, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
          • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment With a DRI you could have chosen certain parts from each picture. In that case e.g. the signs from a picture with a shorter exposure time and the remaining parts from the photo displayed here. --Florian Fuchs (talk) 17:22, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
            • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Unfortunately I'm still not really familiar with exposure blending and HDR techniques - sounds like a good new year's resolution ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:47, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Funny, this is my subwaystation. I live 300m from there :-)   • Richard • [®] • 20:54, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ArildV (talk) 11:41, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jean-Éric Poclain (talk) 11:58, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Araujojoan96 (talk) 14:40, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Florian Fuchs, but per the author answers too...--Jebulon (talk) 15:22, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry. The picture is a bit soft to me, and the design of this station doesn't generate much of wow (this one is way more interesting), although the long exposure of the train is of course a very nice idea. --A.Savin 18:40, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 20:19, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Whatever one thinks of the station's design, I like the composition it offered. I wish the lit signs at the far end of the platform weren't so blown, but given how far they are from the camera it's a miracle we can read anything at all down there. Daniel Case (talk) 05:02, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (weak   • Richard • [®] • 20:34, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:48, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Prefered the another FPC, this station is too ordinary to me and the perspective distortion is not helping, either Poco2 11:22, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info there's no distortion, in fact the walls are slanting. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:43, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 16:19, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors

File:SMP May 2008-9a.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2014 at 13:05:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Running into the light. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 13:05, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 13:05, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very nice! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:08, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tuxyso (talk) 22:44, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ArildV (talk) 11:39, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Prefer b&w. -- Colin (talk) 15:53, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Preferred. --King of ♠ 05:36, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the world is colorful. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:53, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:49, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:32, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I support the colored one (if issues fixed) Poco2 11:22, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree with Alchemist-hp (the world is colorful), all see the world in color, so show something in black and white makes us see in a new way, and I think that our friend Alvesgaspar trying to convey .In my little experience think the color catches our attention visually, but it distracts the eye so they do not see certain things so easily. I like this photo. Greetings to all and Happy New Year 2014 --Rjcastillo (talk) 00:29, 1 January 2014 (UTC)


Alternative[edit]

SMP May 2008-9.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info -- Colored version -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 13:15, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 13:15, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support also very nice! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:27, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Remembers me an old man walking in this (?) tunnel...--Jebulon (talk) 10:16, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Yes, it is the same tunnel! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:29, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Artistic composition. Excellent --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 14:19, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Both are very good, but I prefer the b/w version. --Tuxyso (talk) 22:44, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
    • changed to neutral in favour for the b/w version. --Tuxyso (talk) 17:20, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I prefer the color version. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 00:33, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schnobby (talk) 17:16, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ruminant   • Richard • [®] • 20:32, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The colour is unappealing and distracting to the subject (silhouette of runners) -- Colin (talk) 21:00, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:49, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Colin --Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:32, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like b/w treats; but Here I enjoy the "real colored" textures on stonework. Jee 02:58, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Better this one than b&w but this one has blue CA in the silhouttes, the image is also ccw tilted. I'd support if corrected. Poco2 11:22, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Colour, please--Andrey Di Silvassex (talk) 08:59, 3 January 2014 (UTC) Not eligible to vote. 10 days and 50 edits required. --A.Savin 11:03, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 16:22, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: People
The chosen alternative is: File:SMP May 2008-9a.jpg

File:Theba geminata variability.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2014 at 06:09:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

These shells give an impression on the range of variability within one population.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 06:09, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 06:09, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As already said on QIC: Very good and high EV (if one is interested in shells). --Tuxyso (talk) 07:16, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:12, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Should be a wonderful poster ! --Jebulon (talk) 10:30, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good work. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 10:51, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support One frame is rather unsharp (note added), otherwise very good. --Ivar (talk) 10:54, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Correction done --Llez (talk) 12:10, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is good science considering the information provided with the image. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 11:29, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really a great (and hard) work! High scientific and educational value. Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 14:05, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very hard work, well done --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 14:52, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:34, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 18:46, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg strong support what for a work!!! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 19:36, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:47, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great work. Halavar (talk) 23:02, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:52, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:36, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support   • Richard • [®] • 14:33, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 23:44, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:24, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support How much will it take photographs, to make this picture? --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:30, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Strong Symbol support vote.svg Support ArionEstar (talk) 23:04, 2 January 2014 (UTC) Use bot friendly templates; please. Jee 02:55, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentA scale to compare sizes would be greatly appreciated. --Mario Modesto Mata (talk) 09:00, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 16:25, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Bones, shells and fossils

File:Vihren (Вихрен), Bulgaria (by Pudelek).JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2014 at 13:17:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vihren, Pirin, Bulgaria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 13:17, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 13:17, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, no "wow" effect. Personally, I find the motive boring. It is just a snapshot of someone hiking on a mountain to me.--Florian Fuchs (talk) 13:56, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Florian Fuchs St1995 20:18, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice. Valuable uploader.   • Richard • [®] • 20:31, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support No technical problems at high-res, and I like the composition: nice vanishing-point perspective on the trail, and the contrast between this solitary (yes, others are visible in the distance if you look at it at full size) hiker, so small, in front of this massive massif is just great. So great it adequately offsets the imbalance created by that annoying rise on the right (although I'm sure there's nothing that could have been done about that). Daniel Case (talk) 04:02, 29 December 2013 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 16:23, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Brasilia Supreme Federal Court of Brazil 2009.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2014 at 13:45:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Cayambe - uploaded by Cayambe - nominated by ArionEstar -- ArionEstar (talk) 13:45, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The height of the picture is 1196 pixels, below the required, but it reaches more than 2 megapixels.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArionEstar (talk) 13:45, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Isn't there a limit of 2 active nominations per nominator? --P e z i (talk) 14:35, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
The voting of the my last nomination ends today. ArionEstar (talk) 14:43, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Blurry. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 15:25, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
    • After rev. by Colin: Better, but still per Colin. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 16:39, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I've reverted the noise-reduction applied by ArionEstar as it removed all the fine detail from the image. Please don't do that to other people's pictures. User:Cayambe is active on Commons and if there is noise reduction necessary (there wasn't) then I'm sure he could do it from the RAW file. The building is impressive but this photo isn't up to FP. The resolution is relatively low these days and the cleaning equipment and man on the RHS are distracting. -- Colin (talk) 15:52, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @ Colin: Thanks for reverting the image. --Cayambe (talk) 20:41, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /ArionEstar (talk) 15:03, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Pont de l'Amour (Aqueduc), Villeneuvette, Hérault 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Jan 2014 at 06:01:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pont de l'Amour (Aqueduc), Villeneuvette, Hérault, France.
Thanks Norbert, the place is pretty and I am satisfied if I managed to make a very nice image. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:58, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Eileen Collins photographed by Annie Leibovitz as part of the NASA Art Program.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2014 at 01:28:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by - uploaded by Mrjohncummings - nominated by Mrjohncummings -- Mrjohncummings (talk) 01:28, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mrjohncummings (talk) 01:28, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose underexposed, distracting shadows. Far away to be featured for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 10:01, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Either dawn or dusk, so exposure is correct. Love the atmosphere. Kleuske (talk) 11:53, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Great image, and of historic significance. Andy Mabbett (talk) 13:21, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very good image of a culturally significant person taken by a culturally significant photographer. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 17:16, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support although the horizon isn't perfect... ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:31, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Andy Mabbett. ArionEstar (talk) 17:40, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Alchemist, + crop too tight above and below.--Jebulon (talk) 18:37, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Alchemist, shadows are too much of a distraction. Daniel Case (talk) 03:13, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sure, Annie Leibovitz can't handle exposure; should stick to "auto" :-). Come guys, you make fools of us. Nasa usually give us this sort of bland studio portrait and now we get real art and we can't spot it. Per Kleuske, the lighting is fantastic. She jumps out the screen in her red uniform and the eye is instantly drawn to her no-nonsense face. No wonder Nasa chose this image to publicise an exhibition of their Art program. -- Colin (talk) 10:13, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment That Annie Leibovitz took it does not give the image a pass here. Yes, she is famously talented. But even extremely talented artists make crap sometimes. Are "Do You Want to Know a Secret" and "You Know My Name (Look Up the Number)" towering achievements in popular music because the Beatles recorded them? Is Topaz a classic film because it was directed by Alfred Hitchcock? Daniel Case (talk) 17:33, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
      • You miss the point (though the photographer is famous enough for us to consider this work in the "Artwork" category to be honest). You agree with Alchemist that Leibovitz underexposed this picture? Are you now saying this is "crap"? -- Colin (talk) 18:11, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I hesitated, Colin convinced me -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:36, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Colin's arguments let my cold like a piece if ice. I don't care about who is Anne Leibovitz, with all due respect. "You make fool of us" is not acceptable. I have the right to dislike the work of a sacred cow, and I have the right to write my disagreement here. To me, this picture is full of flaws, regarding our usual criteria. Thank you and happy new year.--Jebulon (talk) 13:58, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
    • +1. Agree full to Jebulon. A happy new year for all. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 14:10, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
      • If the Internet makes you brave enough to ridicule a pro portrait photographer for not being able to expose or crop her pictures properly, then you should have thick enough skin to take what reaction you get. Yes you are more than entitled to your opinion and to stand by it. I agree there are no sacred cows and even pros take bad or mediocre pictures at times. Review, discuss, challenge, think. If you just want to vote and run away, then the unwatch button is up the top-right. And, yes, a happy new year to you to! :-) Colin (talk) 14:42, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
      • I did not ridicule anybody nor anything. Are you suggesting I am a coward ? I'm afraid you are going a bit too far, dude. If the Internet makes you brave enough to (try to, without any success) ridicule me as an amateur photographer, feel free. No offense: I am an amateur photographer. (Not exactly the same meaning in french, less pejorative). If you are soooo politicaly correct to think that any work, because of made by a well known photographer, is obviously good, feel free too. I agree: think. Your first comment, dear Colin, made me have a strong reaction because you say, in other words: 1) this picture is good, because of made by Anne Leibovitz, therefore, shut up. 2) who are you, poor insect, to contest the Nasa choice for its Art program. And you suggest me to "think" ? "Think" yourself too, by yourself. And many thanks for your wishes.--Jebulon (talk) 23:51, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
        • Jebulon, I haven't said anything about "amateur photographer" (that's Kleuske below), and your points 1 and 2 are not what I said at all. There is a difference between commenting on a work to say what you like and dislike, and commenting to say the photographer made a basic technical mistake like "underexposed". You might not like the lighting effect here, and you may hate it enough to oppose based on your own tastes, but you claim Anne Leibovitz, one of the worlds top portrait photographers has made a basic mistake. And also, when picking the which image to use from her shots, she picked the faulty one. And then NASA chose to exhibit this faulty photo and to lead with it in their publicity. This is all too much. I suggest you stop digging and consider the oppose was badly worded. By all means say it is too dark for you or that you don't like the lighting effect, but please, "underexposed"? -- Colin (talk) 13:35, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
        • As for me, I think that I've nothing more to say. I've given my opinion, arguments and vote, and have nothing to change. I think it is time for an EoD, sorry--Jebulon (talk) 23:15, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
          • It may be time for a DR, sadly, as the copyright status of the image has been questioned. -- Colin (talk) 07:32, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
            • I didn't see any DR? Jee 07:44, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
              • See Village Pump "NASA art program" -- Colin (talk) 09:58, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
                • Hmm; I noticed that discussion earlier, but didn't notice the "update" by Russavia. Something wrong as I doubted below. Jee 14:15, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
                  • I'd be sorry if this picture should be deleted, even if I voted "oppose" here. But I'm afraid...--Jebulon (talk) 20:02, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
      • Frankly, I just looked at the image, which struck me as brilliant, the fact that it's Leibowitz escaped me. Lemmesee... Internationally acclaimed photographer on the one hand, amateur photographer and Commons regular on the other... Now who am going to take seriously on this... Kleuske (talk) 17:20, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
"She jumps out the screen in her red uniform" - except its orange and you should be able to tell that from the photo. Rmhermen (talk) 06:14, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 14:16, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Sorry, I do agree with Colin on this one. This is far more interesting than the bland portraits they usually take. This is an artistic portrait and you can tell that it isn't accidental that the photo is 'underexposed' in parts. Targeted lighting is a completely legitimate method and I think it's been executed very well in this case - the only question is whether you like it or not. As with any art, we're all entitled to make our own mind up about that, but the photo does not contain major flaws in any objective sense. Diliff (talk) 15:58, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I checked the file history, visits the source pages several times. Personally I don't like full body portrait; so prefer a half body one similar (but a bit more generous crop on bottom) to one in Flickr. But showing the full costumes may have more EV.
Does PD NASA overrides non commercial restriction imposed at http://www.si.edu/termsofuse/ ? Jee 03:41, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
The "half body" is just a crop someone made. The actual portrait has the same vertical size but is actually a bit wider. See this photo of it. It is interesting the white balance appears different in that photo and the colours more saturated -- but it is hard to tell what is right. Another photo from that set has Collins with her helmet off and two examples here and here look different to this. I prefer a less sickly coloured sky. -- Colin (talk) 14:24, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Notable work by a noted artist with historic significance. Targeted lighting to feature the upper body and face works great as a deliberate style, even if it's not to everyone's taste. -- KTC (talk) 14:30, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ack KTC. --Sputniktilt (talk) 17:43, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Perfetto! --Andrey Di Silvassex (talk) 9:05, 3 January 2014 (UTC) Not eligible to vote. 10 days and 50 edits required. --A.Savin 10:59, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This image is now at DR here. russavia (talk) 14:20, 3 January 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 no image available - Alchemist-hp (talk) 13:59, 4 January 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:Kuwait Towers RB.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2014 at 14:28:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Kuwait Towers Kuwait City, Kuwait c/u/n by   • Richard • [®] • 14:28, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --   • Richard • [®] • 14:28, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • as written on QIC: remarkable sensor dust. Try the new LR 5 function "Bereiche anzeigen". The larger the sensor the more sensor dust :) --Tuxyso (talk) 14:37, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Fixed.   • Richard • [®] • 14:54, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I am personally not a big fan of that kind of neutral light, but composition, level of detail and motive are convincing enough for me. --Tuxyso (talk) 15:02, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Tuxyso. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 15:27, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Might have preferred a different arrangement of the three, and a more interesting foreground (could you clone out the can of 7-up?) but good detail and strange buildings. -- Colin (talk) 15:44, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good composition. Removing the can is a good idea. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 16:15, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Tuxyso. --King of ♠ 18:02, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 19:02, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Does anyone know if there is Freedom of Panorama in Kuwait? On COM:FOP there is no info on this country, but most Arabic countries have restrictive copyright law (compare: UAE, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc.). This here is modern architecture obviously passing any originality test. I really wish my worries were unsubstantial, as it's a fine image otherwise. --A.Savin 19:11, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
I haven't found any informations as well.   • Richard • [®] • 20:06, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
This was my concern in QIC too, and I did not find any answer neither.--Jebulon (talk) 20:31, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • We have to live with an gray area for now - but - I'll gather an location release for this image when i'am back in germany. I have to do this quite often when I work for clients.   • Richard • [®] • 06:48, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 23:42, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Although I fear it will unfortunately ended up deleted due to non-FOP Poco2 11:24, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Would support pending a determination on FoP. Daniel Case (talk) 03:17, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kasir (talk) 12:40, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per Daniel Case.--Jebulon (talk) 23:58, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support No need to waste our time for FoP matters. It will be deleted form our FP galleries too; if deleted from Commons. A good work (by the architect and Richard). Jee 03:11, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ArionEstar (talk) 21:48, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 20:28, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /ArionEstar (talk) 17:31, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Towers

File:More London Office Development at Dusk, London, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2014 at 12:45:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

More London, a new office and public space development in London.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by User:Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 12:45, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 12:45, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tuxyso (talk) 13:36, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support   • Richard • [®] • 14:34, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 14:59, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good work. The people on the right look weirdly grey, but it's not distracting. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 15:23, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very good scene and detail, and the brickwork at ground level show no parallax problems, which is hard to achieve. However, there's a glitch in the sky at the top (above the Shard). Of the three blurry people on the RHS, the middle one looks like a solid grey smudge has been applied rather than the result of overlapping frames or motion blur. I'd be very tempted to see what content-aware-fill can do with that, or see if you can rescue something from an individual frame. -- Colin (talk) 16:13, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Yeah, I wasn't that happy with the grey smudge person but I was too far along the post-processing to go back to the originals as it was quite a lot of work (so many minor adjustments here and there as Photomatix doesn't provide consistent output for each frame - ie if one frame has a lot of sky, it tends to process it very differently to a frame with a lot of bright lights) so I spent quite a bit of work re-balancing it both before and after the stitching, which may have introduced the weird glitch next to the shard... Content-aware fill just makes a hash of fixing the person on the right side though. I don't think the image would suffer too much to just crop that section out completely. The smudge in the sky next to the Shard is easily fixed. Just need to decide whether to leave to start from scratch again or crop. ;-) Diliff (talk) 16:53, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
      • You do the HDR on each frame before stitching? I can see how a tone-mapping program might produce wildly different output for each frame. Is the alignment not good enough to process HDR after stitching? -- Colin (talk) 16:59, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
        • I typically do process each frame individually prior to stitching. I can see how it might be useful to stitch first and then tone-map afterwards, but you lose the ability to remove ghosts using Photomatix if you let the pano stitcher (Hugin, PTGui etc) do the HDR-file creation. The ghost situation would probably be far worse if I hadn't eliminated them prior to stitching with Photomatix. Once the HDR file has been combined with PTGui, they'd be one big swirly smudge... Swings and roundabouts I suppose. I'll try the stitch-first-then-tone-map method on this scene and confirm. Diliff (talk) 17:13, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
          • Seems to have been a success. I've uploaded the new version over the top of the old. Hopefully it's not introduced some new glitches that I've somehow missed. Diliff (talk) 18:19, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great. -- Colin (talk) 17:00, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I support, when the above mentioned glitch in the sky is removed. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 16:27, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
    • The glitch has been fixed (as have a number of ghosts on the right hand side). Diliff (talk) 18:19, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 18:03, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support /St1995 18:18, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great shot! -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 20:30, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is tilted ccw, would support if fixed Poco2 11:24, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Sorry, this should have been fixed yesterday but I just realised I had uploaded the old version straight over the top of it, rather than the version with the corrected verticals. Should be corrected now. Diliff (talk) 12:00, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 17:53, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good --Rjcastillo (talk) 00:31, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Love that pissy-colored light in the buildings. Makes me feel sorry for the people stuck working there so late that we can see them in the windows at their desks. Daniel Case (talk) 03:20, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:52, 02 January 2014 (UTC).
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very sharp for me. ArionEstar (talk) 21:54, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good image! Halavar (talk) 23:31, 2 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 14:37, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes

File:Thorny oyster.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2014 at 12:51:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Nhobgood - nominated by Citron -- Citron (talk) 12:51, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Citron (talk) 12:51, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Araujojoan96 (talk) 20:55, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Probably a bit oversharpened but very good. --Tuxyso (talk) 22:43, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 00:57, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:55, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Never seen such an oyster before... Nature is wonderful.--Jebulon (talk) 20:12, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:52, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In spite of the tight crop Poco2 11:23, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 15:37, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals

File:Geranium nimbus.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2014 at 06:13:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Blooms from June until August.

File:Prague Firework 2014 7.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2014 at 20:37:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Prague firework at 1.1.2014
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded by and nominated by Karelj -- Karelj (talk) 20:37, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Karelj (talk) 20:37, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much noise, sorry. --King of ♠ 20:47, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice shot. Noise is fine at night (correct me if wrong, I'm inexperienced in this), but this is too much. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 08:53, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's just some firework. It's not outstanding (hardly any colour) and there is no other subject in the photo to make it interesting. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 12:21, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Julian H. -- Colin (talk) 13:40, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Karelj (talk) 15:33, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Amanecer en Huitzila, México, 2013-10-10, DD 01.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2014 at 10:56:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunrise landscape near the village of Huitzila, Morelos, Mexico
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Sunrise landscape near the village of Huitzila, Morelos, Mexico. All by me, Poco2 10:56, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 10:56, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ArildV (talk) 11:36, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 12:11, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Araujojoan96 (talk) 14:40, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 20:14, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:49, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MainFrame (talk) 16:44, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support cheesy 90% ev 10% .-)   • Richard • [®] • 20:28, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:55, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 23:39, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good job photographically, but in the end it's too ordinary a sunset over too undistinguished a landscape. Just doesn't do it for me, sorry. Daniel Case (talk) 03:52, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose: In agreement with Daniel Case. Pretty, but not enough to meet the sunrise/sunset bar. Julia\talk 11:29, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support St1995 12:53, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose With Daniel Case and Julia Dubya.--Jebulon (talk) 21:30, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice, but only nice. Featured picture needs something more. Halavar (talk) 22:54, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per other opposes. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:07, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 22:07, 30 December 2013 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Leitoxx 15:50, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Natural phenomena

File:Avenue des Champs-Elysées from top of Arc de triomphe Paris.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2014 at 10:08:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • The opponents convinced me, I change to Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral --Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:03, 04 January 2014 (UTC)
    • C'est ton droit le plus strict, mais c'est un coup de poignard dans le dos d'une inélégance crasse.--Jebulon (talk) 18:49, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support And again I change, I'm not an inelegant murderer... --Christian Ferrer (talk) 21:30, 04 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thank you very much Paris 16 for surprising and unexpected nomination !--Jebulon (talk) 12:16, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice view, but it's oversatured and has obvious lacking sharpness, even QI is questionable in this case --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:38, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great photo. Tomer T (talk) 14:11, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice shot, but lacking some sharpness. I wouldn't request too much of this, since it's hard to get it so nicely sharp, but sharpening it a little more would be good. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 16:27, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Some sharpening added. One can read the name of the subway station, and count the number of cobblestones on the ground. Please see annotation. --Jebulon (talk) 16:58, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
      • Sorry, I don't see any difference (sorry if I'm blunt here). But I do find that viewing it on the file's description page is good. :) (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 10:43, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
        • Sorry I don't understand your comment. A cache purge problem ?--Jebulon (talk) 13:15, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
          • Sorry, unfortunately it does not seem so. I opened 2 tabs, with 1 tab containing the full size of the older version and the other the full size of the newer version. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 14:58, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (weak)Looks as if the farer part of Champs-Elysées is in shadow (see note). Is it due to a cloud? For me the photo has a lot of Wow in thumbnail size but is somehow distappointing in full size. Sharpness of the foreground is good, but the last third is in shadows / dust and looks imho unfavourable and lacks sharpness. --Tuxyso (talk) 17:10, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Yes, the shadow is due to a cloud. The avenue is almost 2 km long, and it is impossible to have an uniform light.--Jebulon (talk) 17:23, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
      • But I guess the weather in Paris is much better than in most parts of Germany :) Watching for a moment where parts of the Champs-Elysées are not under a cloud should be no big deal and makes for me the difference between FP and non-FP. --Tuxyso (talk) 17:28, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
        • Amen. (it is raining a lot because of a storm during the time I write this. No way for me to take another picture tonight, sorry. And october was very nice in Bavaria, far much better than in Paris (see following pictures, coming soon)...--Jebulon (talk) 17:42, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Having looked at it at 100%, unfortunately, I have to agree with Wladyslaw. --A.Savin 18:49, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 20:16, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:49, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:54, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose: I'm normally very pleased with Jebulon's work, but Wladyslaw is right, here the quality is not good, even with the resolution being fairly low for such a "large" view. A reproducible shot, no reason not to anticipate a better photograph. Julia\talk 11:37, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
    • "Reproducible shot" ? I'm a Parisian, and it was my first time at the top of the Aec de Triomphe ! And who will pay for the ticket ? Maybe I'll ask Wikimedia France for a support ! Clin--Jebulon (talk) 20:47, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
      • I can't speak for Wikimedia France, but it's the kind of thing that Wikimedia UK would give "microgrants" for. You should ask your chapter!  :) Julia\talk 20:36, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral +:view, -:lack of sharpness Poco2 11:25, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral +:view and color, -:lack of sharpness --Claus (talk) 07:20, 5 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 3 neutral → featured. /Leitoxx 15:50, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes

File:Crystal Mill, Colorado.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2014 at 00:28:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by John Fowler - uploaded by PDTillman - nominated by Mono -- —Mono 00:28, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- —Mono 00:28, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 07:30, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 09:17, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice composition, good light and interesting motif. Who dares to enter the hut? Seems to be a fragile construction :-). But too much is blurred due to long time exposure and inappropriate aperture (f/5.6 is not suitable for a landscape image with foreground). The blurr is OK for the water, but almost all leaves, parts of the hut and mountains are blurred too. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 09:57, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice photo. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 10:10, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jean-Éric Poclain (talk) 11:58, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much blurred --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:00, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T (talk) 14:13, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice place and composition, but oversaturated and not sharp enough. Some parts are too strongly denoised IMO.--Jebulon (talk) 14:57, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (weak) I fully agree with Norbert, f5.6 was not a good choice but the compsosition and light justifys my pro vote. To the sharpness: IMHO sharpness has to be assessed with regard to the resolution. In the case here we have full size D800 resoultion. If you zoom out 2-3 steps in Firefox the water part and the house are incredible sharp. For me it is a bad habit to scale down and make an image "sharper" rather to leave it at sensor resolution. Although a photo looks sharper after downscaling you loose nonetheless information. --Tuxyso (talk) 17:24, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like this picture very much. Especially, the light is amazing. However, as previously mentioned there are too many blurred parts due to the badly chosen aperture. --Florian Fuchs (talk) 17:32, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In my opinion Wow factor there is! Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 19:33, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! The quality is not too bad IMO. --King of ♠ 20:17, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:50, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (weak) It could be better technical wise   • Richard • [®] • 20:29, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:53, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support /St1995 19:31, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great image! Halavar (talk) 22:49, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In this case I find the perspetive distortions disturbing, composition is really nice, though Poco2 11:25, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 19:14, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Industry
Crystal Mill = compressor station = Places/Architecture/Industry? Jee 16:43, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Dead Cypress at 17-Mile Drive 2013.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2014 at 22:30:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dead Cypress at 17-Mile Drive
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 22:30, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 22:30, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:06, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no wow, just a dead cypress. Kruusamägi (talk) 12:16, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
    • hehe, not only a dead cypress :) You also have rocks, sea, sky and probably an intersting composition... --Tuxyso (talk) 12:43, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tomer T (talk) 14:13, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose Very nice compo, but imo the light isn't favorable. Cypress is almost entirely in the shadow. --Ivar (talk) 16:43, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support The tree could be slightly brighter, but great shot nevertheless. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 17:01, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:50, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, not only a dead cypress! Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 16:19, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:53, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support /St1995 19:30, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice dead cypress, indeed !--Jebulon (talk) 21:36, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 22:48, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 22:08, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:23, 31 December 2013 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Leitoxx 15:50, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural

File:Donauuferbahn-Oberleitung-DSC 5892w.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2014 at 00:47:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Power cable of the railway Donauuferbahn near hydro power plant Freudenau, Vienna
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- P e z i (talk) 00:47, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- P e z i (talk) 00:47, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Araujojoan96 (talk) 14:40, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:53, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice silhouette, nice sunset but ... I have no idea what I'm looking at and why it's important. So I look at the image and see it's supposed to have something to do with a rail line in Vienna. OK, what does it tell me about the rail line that serves to illustrate useful information that might be imparted in an encyclopedic article (something which this image is currently not used for at all)? Also, frankly, as an image itself it's just too cluttered, between the stuff on the tower and the wires running across it. Daniel Case (talk) 03:57, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This is the Overhead_line#Tensioning, a very essential part of a power cable. I think the structures and details are even better visible in this silhoutte than in an ordinary picture. It's not in use because I've uploaded it recently. (And generally I think there is a trade off between wow and encyclopedic value.) --P e z i (talk) 11:18, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support /St1995 19:32, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Daniel Case. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:08, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:25, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 21:03, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • The opponents convinced me, I change to Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:11, 04 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Daniel. and no wow. Kruusamägi (talk) 12:01, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose somewhat per Daniel Case. It doesn't look impressively beautiful to me. The composition is ok for an encyclopedic shot but nothing special artistically and I think that would be the only basis on which this could work as fp. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 13:45, 1 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Leitoxx 15:44, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Fernanda Lima in 2012.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2014 at 17:29:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The brazilian model, actress and television presenter Fernanda Lima in TV Globo International Emmy Awards Nominees 2012
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The brazilian model, actress and television presenter Fernanda Lima in TV Globo International Emmy Awards Nominees 2012. Created by Alex Carvalho - uploaded by Sealle - nominated by ArionEstar -- ArionEstar (talk) 17:29, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality -- ArionEstar (talk) 17:29, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 06:10, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kasir (talk) 12:39, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:55, 02 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tuxyso (talk) 10:42, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 23:15, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 23:22, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment portrait is really nice, but the background has many dust spots and signs of posterization. --Ivar (talk) 19:14, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
And these problems are fixable? ArionEstar (talk) 19:44, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sealle (talk) 20:25, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 20:32, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support-- Niklem (talk) 17:12, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 12:56, 5 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 18:18, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: People
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Dogad75 (talk) 16:31, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Ilfracombe (Devon, UK), Damien Hirst's Verity -- 2013 -- 5.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2014 at 07:27:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XRay - uploaded by XRay - nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 07:27, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 07:27, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't think the perspective works, a less distorted view from farther away would be desirable imo. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 09:20, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment You may be right, but farther away there is a lot of water.--XRay talk 09:52, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Unusual perspective but featurable for me. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 10:02, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For the perspective --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:08, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose a very unfavorable perspective. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 14:05, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment You may be right, but not are aware of the geo-location. A better from your (and maybe my) viewing position requires that one would have to stand in water. The theoretical ideals are not always available.--XRay talk 14:53, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
      • Eine Unmöglichkeit es nicht besser abbilden zu können rechtfertigt nicht zugleich eine Auszeichnung als ein FP-Bild. Ich würde dann eher sagen: Pech gehabt. Und wieso nicht aus einem Boot auch photographieren!? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:13, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
        • That's right. I respect your decision to oppose. (I like the image and the perspective too. The perspective emphasizes the size of the statue. That's why I've nominated it.)--XRay talk 16:31, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Araujojoan96 (talk) 22:58, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:54, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support /St1995 19:28, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very interesting! Halavar (talk) 22:51, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:25, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose perspective. --Yikrazuul (talk) 17:30, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Jee 02:51, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose perspective --Andrey Di Silvassex (talk) 08:59, 3 January 2014 (UTC) Not eligible to vote. 10 days and 50 edits required. --A.Savin 11:02, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A bit too close and/or seen from the wrong side IMO. --P e z i (talk) 20:38, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Yikrazuul.--Claus (talk) 07:18, 5 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Leitoxx 15:44, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

File:The violent youth of solar proxies.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2014 at 13:05:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The violent youth of solar proxies.jpg


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 16:48, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Astronomy

File:St Olaf's church, Tallinn, July 2008.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2014 at 21:06:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. Olaf's church, Tallinn
✓ Done ArionEstar (talk) 12:40, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing exceptional. Most of the church is not visible. -- Colin (talk) 13:39, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment "Most of the church is not visible" -- is that a joke? Most of it IS visible and as the church is completely surrounded with buildings, then there is no way to get the rest of the church to the image without some heavy demolition. Kruusamägi (talk) 14:33, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
07-06-21-tallinn-by-RalfR-210.jpg
See other image that is larger than that, and realizes that it is surrounded by buildings and, indeed, it is possible to see the entire top of it. ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 19:37, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Gustave Le Gray, Pavillon Mollien, 1859.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2014 at 10:00:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Leitoxx 23:08, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Historical

File:Chethi poo in Thiruvananthapuram, India.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2014 at 01:58:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:13-08-06-abu-dhabi-by-RalfR-098.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2014 at 11:04:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Abu Dhabi, center of town, View to Al Istiqlal Street near Airport Road
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by -- Ralf Roleček 11:04, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ralf Roleček 11:04, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not sure what the subject is. The red pole in the middle? Kleuske (talk) 11:53, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kleuske. And also, where's the wow? (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 14:29, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above. -- Colin (talk) 12:55, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per all the other aboves. I think I know what you were thinking, but it's hard to tell. Daniel Case (talk) 07:07, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination ok --Ralf Roleček 08:03, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Endla looduskaitseala õhtupoolikul.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2014 at 20:13:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Endla Nature Reserve
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Siim Kannistu - uploaded and nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 20:13, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 20:13, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Significant CA (red/green). Should be possible to remove. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 20:47, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request please add a geo-tag and correct the visible CA. The perspective distortion is borderline, but for a landscape image "ok". --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:34, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I added the coordinates. Kruusamägi (talk) 12:54, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Ivar helped with removing CA and noise. Kruusamägi (talk) 14:08, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but despite traces of over sharpening, not especially sharp and relatively low level of detail in large parts of the image. I am also not convinced by the light / composition, with darker foreground. Heavy colour noise in the water.--ArildV (talk) 21:35, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Kruusamägi (talk) 12:20, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

File:World Trade Center, New York City - aerial view (March 2001).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2014 at 12:34:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

World Trade Center, New York


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 14:14, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Amboy (California, USA), Hist. Route 66 -- 2012 -- 5.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2014 at 15:14:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Historic Route 66 near Amboy, California
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XRay - uploaded by XRay - nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 15:14, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 15:14, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I find it a nice shot, since I'm not a American (if not I will oppose!), but I find that there is slight insufficient of wow. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:33, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I like the idea but feel the "Route 66" logo is placed too high up the image. This would work better if the camera were placed closer to the logo and a wider lens were used. --King of ♠ 00:42, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Per KoH, but I think we could get closer to a support just by cropping all that dead space at the bottom. Daniel Case (talk) 07:02, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Thanks for review! IMO it's better to have look to the other images than this one. --XRay talk 13:09, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Western massasauga rattlesnake.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2014 at 15:36:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Western massasauga rattlesnake (Sistrurus catenatus tergeminus), photographed in northeast Oklahoma.

File:Needle Galaxy 4565.jpeg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Jan 2014 at 11:24:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Needle Galaxy NGC 4565


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 14:10, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Astronomy

File:VISTA's infrared view of the Lagoon Nebula (Messier 8).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2014 at 13:04:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

VISTA's infrared view of the Lagoon Nebula (Messier 8).jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by ESO/VVV, uploaded/nominated by me St1995 13:04, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support St1995 13:04, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 08:39, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Informative *and* aesthetically pleasing. Kleuske (talk) 13:04, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:21, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--MaHaN MSG 10:35, 6 January 2014 (UTC) Sorry; not eligible to vote. Jee 15:45, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ArionEstar (talk) from Google Translate. 17:03, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportTintoMeches, 22:58, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 15:45, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Pakri tuletorn1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Jan 2014 at 15:33:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pakri cliff
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Pakri cliff, all by Ivar (talk) 15:33, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 15:33, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:08, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support St1995 10:52, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 11:26, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 00:29, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice light but very empty composition and depressing-looking subject at that time of year. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 08:41, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 09:37, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 11:20, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 12:53, 5 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Jee 15:40, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Towers

File:Monument Valley 2.jpg (delist), not delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2014 at 19:09:55
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Does not meet quality standards for FP. (Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist -- —Mono 19:09, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist -- —Christian Ferrer 19:21, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist /St1995 19:24, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep the FP-tag is and was simply a time stamp in the past. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 19:34, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Can you clarify? I'm not quite sure what you mean from what you said. —Mono 20:35, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Take a look here. Do you like still and continuously renominate all our FP images? This image was excellent in 2005, not today. The 2005 award says all. Please think about it. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:11, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep I agree with Alchemist-hp. Imo we should stop delisting older FPs. These had been promoted for a reason, and we should honor and thus historicize that decision, especially if we can't agree with it anymore only due to technological developments. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:42, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --A.Savin 10:52, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep I follow Alchemist-hp's und Martin's arguments. I don't see any sense in delisting old FPs for the reason that sensor technology was not as advanced as today. Will 16 MPs be enough in three years? --Tuxyso (talk) 13:52, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep As Alchemist; but only in cases like this, where the resolution would be the problem nowadays. --P e z i (talk) 14:41, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Blur, and looks oversaturated to me. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:06, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist This is a tired debate and folk who don't believe in delist should seek to abolish it by consensus rather than disrupt the voting. Is this among the finest on Commons? No. Look at the Category:Monument Valley. When there are dozens of better pictures than this, then something is wrong if this remains featured. The only people who care whether a photo was featured in 2005 are the photographer, the nominator and perhaps a few voters. Nobody else gives a damn and would prefer if FP isn't cluttered by images kept out of vanity. Using the "sensor progress" argument is a fallacy, all that counts is what people take and upload to Commons. If the average photo that just anyone can take and upload is so much better than an FP like this, then who are we kidding? -- Colin (talk) 16:29, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hard words. I didn't want to 'tire' anybody or 'disrupt' anything... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:35, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
      • But it is tiring to keep these debates for every delist. While we have a delist mechanism, votes here should be done in the spirit of that: that FP is the best on Commons, rather than a record of what was best at some point in time. This image is now among the worst on Commons. Please everyone take these other arguments to the talk FP page and debate there otherwise just abstain from delist voting altogether. -- Colin (talk) 15:42, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Not convinced by the composition (overlap of foreground and background subject), slightly tilted, quality insufficient (independent of the year it was taken, since better resolution is possible with relatively inexpensive film equipment). — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 17:31, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Julian (and others), can a non-appealing composition be an argument for delisting an FP? OK, you have other quality arguments, but imho delisting an image only because one does not like the composition is not sufficient. During an FP process you will always find reviewers who do not like one or another aspect (like composition, crop, motive). But as stated on the FP page, delisting is done because [o]ver time, featured picture standards change. The compositional standards have not massively changed but mainly the quality standards (over-exposure, resolution, advances in image editing software). Thus compositional aspects cannot serve as only delist reason. Delisting cannot be understood as second regular review just with different reviewers compared to the original nomination. --Tuxyso (talk) 16:07, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
      • In this case, that doesn't matter because the other arguments are sufficient imo. In general, I don't know, but if (a significant amount of) people complain about a composition in a delisting-nom and didn't in the original nom, that tells me that the standards have changed, purely by observation. If that's not the case, it won't be delisted for that reason. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 16:23, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
      • I agree that delist is not just another FPC round and shouldn't be used as such (e.g., you think we made a mistake). But standards can change in all ways. We sometimes make allowances that are no longer justified. But let's kill this "sensor progress" argument dead. For a start, this image is actually a slide that has been scanned. Look at File:Monument Valley (4998504149).jpg, File:Evening in Monument Valley (4077440899).jpg, File:Cowboy (4013367806).jpg, and File:Monument Valley (3871718849).jpg -- all shot with a D80 (launched 2006) or File:Monument Valley, late afternoon Cropped.jpg short with a D70 (launched 2004) or File:Monument valley.jpg taken November 2005. Some of these would stand a chance at FP even today. The delist image has simply been outclassed by better pictures, not by just better technology. -- Colin (talk) 16:42, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist per Colin. --King of ♠ 17:43, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment We need not delist all old FPs due to the technical enhancement of today. But we have a lot of low quality FPs due to lack of enough contributors (work and reviewers) on that days. So IMHO, we can delist a few of them. Remember, "This formerly was a featured picture on Wikimedia Commons (Featured pictures) and was considered one of the finest images." will still remain on a delisted picture. Jee 03:27, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:27, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Kruusamägi (talk) 08:53, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Sorry Huebi--Claus (talk) 07:29, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep I follow Alchemist-hp --Ralf Roleček 11:18, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Colors are great, I think it is still good enough for FP. Michael Barera (talk) 21:23, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep -- -donald- (talk) 13:20, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
Result: 11 delist, 6 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. Jee 03:05, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Domesticated goose head, Chaguaramal, Venezuela.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2014 at 22:36:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Anser cygnoides head
  • Forwarded to MPF for opinion. Jee 04:21, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Jee 08:46, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Acknowledged, thank you. --Myrabella (talk) 14:19, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 02:35, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Birds

File:Mesquite Flat Sand Dunes Panorama Morning 2013.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2014 at 10:35:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mesquite Flat Sand Dunes in the morning, Death Valley
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Mesquite Flat Sand Dunes panoramic view in the morning, Death Valley
    all by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 10:35, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 10:35, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Sputniktilt (talk) 14:49, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Christian sent me an email with two ideas for improvement: I have now modified WB (slightly warmer) and reduced overall brightness and increased whites. IMHO the image has been improved due to this changes. I look forward to further comments. --Tuxyso (talk) 22:55, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support You made a compromise -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 23:11, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'd like it even more, if some of the left part would be cropped ;) But it's a FP nevertheless. Kruusamägi (talk) 23:14, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
    The complete pano was MUCH longer at the left side. I cropped it that way in order to start the composition with increasing mountains. --Tuxyso (talk) 23:26, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 04:42, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 10:29, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 21:30, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 07:27, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:20, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ...and 10 :) Poco2 12:59, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:29, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support /St1995 15:09, 7 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 12:39, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Panoramas

File:Apis melifera on Hypericum perforatum-DSC 5123w.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2014 at 13:57:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Western honey bee (Apis melifera) collecting nectar from St John's wort (Hypericum perforatum)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- P e z i (talk) 13:57, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- P e z i (talk) 13:57, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Background is distracting and the bee isn't fully sharp. Kruusamägi (talk) 15:36, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the composition, but unfortunately, the head, and the left eye in particular, is out of focus. --Sputniktilt (talk) 17:19, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Strong oppose Picture and subject is out of focus, distracting background. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:10, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 15:51, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Al Bithnah Fort, Fujairah, UAE.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2014 at 01:37:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Al Bithna Fort, Fujairah, UAE


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 03:20, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

File:The Ramblin Wreck leads the Georgia Tech football team in their Homecoming game..jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2014 at 01:37:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Ramblin Wreck leads the Georgia Tech football team in their Homecoming game..jpg


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 06:40, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Amboy (California, USA) -- 2012 -- 4.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2014 at 16:43:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Roy's Cafe & Motel, Amboy (California, USA)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by XRay - uploaded by XRay - nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 16:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 16:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. ArionEstar (talk) 16:54, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 17:42, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 18:45, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support /St1995 19:21, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice scene, but I feel the image is too dark. The whites should be actually white, i.e. at a level where they would blow out if pushed any further. --King of ♠ 00:25, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
    • May be that's a good point. Thanks for the advice. I improved the white color.--XRay talk 07:30, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and clearly improved now. --Julian Herzog 08:35, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support   • Richard • [®] • 14:33, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:22, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:24, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Overpolarized sky and composition just a bit too cluttered. Daniel Case (talk) 03:21, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sky is very good and of course image also:) Halavar (talk) 23:28, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Alurín (talk) 15:25, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Claus (talk) 07:28, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:21, 5 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:01, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes

File:Munich subway station Candidplatz.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2014 at 21:49:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Munich subway station Candidplatz
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Now I'd also like to nominate the second of my two recent (imo and hopefully also in your eyes) FP-worthy images of Munich subway stations, with this one being the way more friendly and colorful candidate. All by -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:49, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:49, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 00:17, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Florian Fuchs (talk) 05:40, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Please take a photo of the subway station Großhadern too (U 6); it shows painted stratums. --Schnobby (talk) 08:42, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support HDR technique for preserving the details of the hightlights had been a good choice here (e.g. at the clocks). Nonetheless a great shot. --Tuxyso (talk) 13:12, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support   • Richard • [®] • 14:34, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think, this one is too similar to the other subway station photo, which you nominated below and which is is likely to become a featured image based on the already given votes. One featured image of this kind/type is enough considering the FCP critera. Also the mirror image of the photographer on the glass plate in the front is a bit disturbing. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 14:44, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree with Diliff, Colin and their arguments in the discussion above. As this is an image of a different station constructed with a totally different design, I think both images could get a promotion to FP. As far as the reflection is concerned, see below. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:25, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Because of the reflection of the photographer and his tripod.--Jebulon (talk) 20:38, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Well, I've come to consider this as more a feature than a bug: A clandestine portrait of the artist as a young fool, going on a photo spree late on Christmas Eve, hoping everybody else would stay home... ;-) Honestly: Even a polarizer doesn't help here, and as for photoshopping the reflection: I simply don't feel competent enough to work on that, considering all the different lights and shadows besides my own. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 21:25, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:24, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sharp. Exposition. Photographer on his own photo. --Andrey Di Silvassex (talk) 08:59, 3 January 2014 (UTC) Not eligible to vote. 10 days and 50 edits required. --A.Savin 11:00, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 11:17, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:23, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Kraft (talk) 12:14, 7 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arcalino (talk) 17:16, 7 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:10, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors

File:Царський курган 007.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2014 at 17:50:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:17, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors

File:7 More London Riverside at dusk, London, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2014 at 12:53:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

7 More London Riverside
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by User:Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 12:53, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 12:53, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Superb! --Ivar (talk) 13:06, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too much glass, too much blue, the composition is so so.--Claus (talk) 13:24, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Please, tell me how I can take a photo of a glass building while reducing how much glass is shown. ;-) As for blue, well it was taken during the blue hour... Sorry for upsetting your compositional sensibilities. Diliff (talk) 16:14, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Don't see anything wrong with the photo. --(✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 14:55, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Strange building and weird reflections. The building looks aglow with yellow light. Good level of detail. -- Colin (talk) 16:03, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice shot, but the other photo of the same object below is better and the idea behind FP is to feature the best photo, not the best and the second best. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 16:05, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
    • The other photo below is not of the same object. In that image, which is a panoramic view of the complex, the building is mostly obscured and you certainly cannot see it in any detail. The two photos are sufficiently different. Diliff (talk) 16:11, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Well both photos are in same wiki category and show buildings of the same building complex. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 16:49, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
NorbertNagel, we often have several featured pictures of the same subject, sometimes even the same angle of view. This view and the other are different enough that many would not even suspect they were the same building. So please strike your invalid reason for oppose. -- Colin (talk) 16:54, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
I understand, that we have different opinions on this topic and that it may have happened earlier that several pictures of the same subject have been featured, but this does not mean that my position is invalid. I ask you to respect my opinion as I respect yours. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 17:38, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
You are suggesting this is how FP should operate, which is a question beyond this individual picture. The idea behind FP is to select the best pictures on Commons, not the one best picture. I can respect differing views on one picture but if you want a different FP from the rest, then you need to get consensus for that change. I can also respect your view of how FP should work, but fundamental shifts such as this may be considered disruptive change is suggested by voting at the image-level. You've chosen a rather bad example to make your point. We do often oppose or go neutral on images that are too similar to others (especially recent) but never because it is the same building, even from the other side. -- Colin (talk) 17:55, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
Norbert, so if there is already one FP of an entire category, by your logic there should not be a FP of any other photo in that category? In this case, the category is for an office complex, and in that complex there are many notable buildings, each deserving of a FP IMO. As the two images are both clearly a different subject and a different object, the category they are in is mostly irrelevant. All it does is suggest that perhaps we could create more specific categories for each subject. That is not the fault of the image(s). Diliff (talk) 18:28, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it. Enough wow for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:04, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it as it is. --Cayambe (talk) 17:53, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Florian Fuchs (talk) 17:57, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg weak oppose: First: I've seldom seen such brilliant combination of HDR and stitching technique - probably the highest quality shots of that type we have on Commons - you master the processing of those images in a nearly perfect way. The same with the image here: The quality is far beyond QI average - I've only discoverd a small artefacts from stitching / fusing (see note). The reason why I oppose anyway is mainly due to compositional aspects: the different widths of the framing building at the left and right, diagonal elements on the floor starting amid the image and not going through the complete picture, the building at the right background distracts the symmetry, an unclean border of the right framing building and finally the different types of surfaces at the left and right which also distract the symmetry. All in all: This centered shot can for me only work with perfect symmetry which is distracted by several elements. --Tuxyso (talk) 18:34, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
    • Thanks for your comments. I agree with you that it could possibly be improved by centring the image so that the widths of the two surrounding buildings are equal. I left it slightly off-centre because I thought the tree would seem cropped otherwise but I concede it might be better. I'm happy to upload a centred image over the top of this one. I assume this is not enough to convince you to support however. I did take a similar panorama of this building another evening but I wasn't as pleased with the lighting as it was too dark. It may solve some your compositional issues. The view is from much closer so the building is more distorted, but the distracting foreground elements are minimised. What are your thoughts? Not as a potential FP candidate, but in terms of the composition. Diliff (talk) 22:30, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
      • I prefer the closer view. I am personally a great fan of close shots of buildings because the lines and architecture are accentuated well there. See for example this shot I've photographed with a T&S optic. To your closer image: It is much better that the pyramid-shaped building at the right is hidden. But there are still distracting elements at the left and right. I would crop them out - see my proposal. But cropping is always a matter of personal taste. But you are right, light is better on the nomination. --Tuxyso (talk) 23:15, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
        • I will see if I can revisit (for a third time!) and improve on both images with good composition and good lighting. As you say, cropping is a matter of personal taste. I try to 'let them breathe' (as Richard Bartz mentioned on another nomination) but sometimes it's just not possible. In this case, the building is cropped either by the framing or by the buildings - you can take your pick about which. ;-) Diliff (talk) 23:45, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 11:32, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jebulon (talk) 18:35, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very sharp for me. ArionEstar (talk) 21:51, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 20:26, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:24, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice light. --Lionel Allorge (talk) 14:35, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arcalino (talk) 17:15, 7 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 15:58, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture

File:Capra pyrenaica victoriae baby.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2014 at 12:37:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Three month old iberian ibex ().
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by J.Ligero & I.Barrios - uploaded by Alurín - nominated by Alurín -- Alurín (talk) 12:37, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alurín (talk) 12:37, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose I would have loved this photo to be featured...but sorry, the background, I have to say, is quite distracting. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:03, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think it's mainly a little dark, which should be easy to fix. Not sure whether or not the background is still distracting if it's brightened. — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 15:20, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
    • I actually don't mind the darkness, even though it does affect the picture a little bit. As for the background, I've tried different brightness levels on my computer, but none works. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:27, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support /St1995 18:17, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There is no geo position.--XRay talk 08:21, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. The background isn't a problem for me. —Bruce1eetalk 05:46, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--XRay talk 06:00, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer 09:32, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 11:17, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:23, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition + the cuteness of the subject. -- Lionel Allorge (talk) 02:55, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 15:55, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Mammals

File:D9-40C.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2014 at 09:30:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

D9-40C.jpg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Will Folsom - uploaded by User:An678ko - nominated by User:An678ko -- User:An678ko (talk) -- (talk) 09:30, 3 January 2014 (UTC)09:30, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Andrey Di Silvassex (talk) 09:31, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose washed out colors. The strong perspective distortion is disturbing. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 09:40, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose same as Alchemist --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:24, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Also very strong CAs, the perspective in unfortunate, the locomotive is too close to the left border of the photo. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:24, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Concur with Alchemist. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 15:04, 3 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 16:00, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Isabelle Faust B 09-2012.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2014 at 14:44:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Isabelle Faust with her stradivarius
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Previous FPC: 3 x support, 0 x oppose --A.Savin 14:44, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 14:44, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Strong Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Terrible flash (shiny forehead, cheeks), terrible colour (jaundiced middle, flushed side), terrible clothes choice (for portrait clothes need to not grab the attention), poor pose (looking away), unfortunate facial expression, distracting background (tubes coming out of her back, into her neck), unflattering lighting direction (highlighting pores and facial hair), strange crop (you've only kept the LHS because she is looking there). The camera did its job but everything else is how not to make a good, never mind flattering, portrait of a lady. -- Colin (talk) 15:31, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
    Wow! Probably the most flattering feedback on my work ever. Just don't forget to open an RfD, as terrible photos are out of Commons scope, as you might know. --A.Savin 15:42, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
    Perhaps a courtesy deletion would be best :-). -- Colin (talk) 18:41, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I am sorry. Although Colin put his decline rather harshly, I totally agree with his findings. --Florian Fuchs (talk) 18:04, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak Support After the well-balanced feedback at the beginning, now my extreme opinion: I'm not so much in the portrait business and the slightly different skin colours in the face are a bit surprising (make-up?), but I would consider this as an clearly above average portrait of a concentrated looking musician with instrument. Light and pose are good considering that this is not a studio shot. The background and the clothes are not disturbing to me. -- Norbert Nagel (talk) 18:28, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good in every respect -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:38, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Colin. Yellow nose is disturbing :( --Kikos (talk) 08:51, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg weak oppose Cannot follow Colin's severe assessment. I like the expression of face and body - it looks rather concentrated. Two aspects are disturbing: the steel banister at the left side in the background and the strong highlights on the face resulting from sweat + flashlight. IMHO some basic standard retouching work (skin) should be done before uploading female portrayals to Commons. --Tuxyso (talk) 11:20, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Needless offensive, assessment of Colin.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:03, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
We find it easy to pick fault in some remote professional's donation (e.g., although well done and looking fantastic on preview, one of the eyes isn't completely in focus at 36MP peeping or similar fussiness). Here, because Savin is one of us, we were too kind last nomination by saying nothing and he has misinterpreted that when renominating. Or perhaps we are looking to make allowances. Why? Nobody makes allowances for one of our holiday landscape/building snaps being the wrong light or bad weather? I have a whole gallery of Scandinavian professional portraits, some candid like this and some posed, and many of them could be FP perhaps and many far better than this. Do a Google Image search on the "Isabelle Faust" to see how a good portrait of her (posed or playing) might look. Then come back here and consider if "very good in every respect" is a reasonable conclusion and whether my comments are harsh but fair. FP is supposed to be our very best and make us go wow with appreciation. -- Colin (talk) 16:13, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Just all wrong for an FP—bad crop, shadow to side too distracting, composition is off, and why use landscape orientation when portrait was so obviously called for? Daniel Case (talk) 03:15, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment IMHO, I find that Colin's thorough (albeit harsh) assessment is fine. Through all this comments, photographers can learn more, understand their mistakes and thus improve their photography. If everyone is so "kind" and "considerate", how is a photographer going to improve, and how are we going to learn from one another? (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 04:17, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin --AmaryllisGardener (talk) 17:38, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This picture doesn't do justice to this person. --Lionel Allorge (talk) 14:43, 6 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 15:59, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Klodzko Ratusz wieczor.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2014 at 17:46:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Town Hall in Klodzko (Poland) at the evening
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jar.ciurus - uploaded by Jar.ciurus - nominated by Jar.ciurus -- Jar.ciurus (talk) 17:46, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jar.ciurus (talk) 17:46, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Some issues with the sky (notes added). --Ivar (talk) 19:26, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Spot and light banding corrected. -- Jar.ciurus 20:38, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per {{u|Iifar|Ivar}. Symbol support vote.svg Support I think I was too picky earlier on. Now I find it OK. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 04:13, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Wrong WB (it is blueish), perspective correction on the left improvable. I'd support if corrected Poco2 11:31, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
    Better now: Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 18:35, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Those background buildings and the town hall were just a little tilted. I've corrected it. The picture has been warmed a little. -- Jar.ciurus 20:39, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Andrey Di Silvassex (talk) 08:59, 3 January 2014 (UTC) Not eligible to vote. 10 days and 50 edits required. --A.Savin 11:00, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WB is ok now but was also ok before. Don't understand the criticism towards it. The issues are fixed and I support.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I reverted the image back to older version. Please read my reason for the revert. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 04:11, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:25, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Halavar (talk) 23:48, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /LEITOXX 20:23, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Matsalu metsas.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2014 at 12:44:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Old hay barn in Matsalu National Park, Estonia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Urmas83 - uploaded by Urmas83 - nominated by Urmas83 -- Urmas Haljaste (talk) 12:44, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Urmas Haljaste (talk) 12:44, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There in no perspective issue. The hut is actually crooked. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 12:52, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support Awesome shot. Sharp, great colours and composition. (✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎) 14:57, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I like the atmosphere and image composition, on the other hand there are substantial blurred areas around the house (mainly in the tree regions).-- Norbert Nagel (talk) 16:53, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent picture. Impressed with reed roof and forged parts. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 17:18, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition is ok but there are too much blurred areas in the trees -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:41, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This blur is actually intentional and it the guidelines it is called "motion blur". the branches are moving in wind. If all the branches in the background were sharp there would not be enough contrast between the hut and the trees. I actually would prefer even more blurred background but it was quite windy and with longer exposure time I would have had some overall blurriness due to camera shake. I nominated this picture because I was encouraged by the success of another picture of mine also with large blurred areas that was unanimously elected to featured picture. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 19:22, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The blur is also to make the hut stand out, or it would just blend in with the background if everything is equally sharp.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (weak) I consider it an interesting approach to leave background blurred like that, but at the same time I am not so much convinced about the overall wow effect of this image. You have some really nice shoots from Matsalu, ones that I consider even better than this. Kruusamägi (talk) 23:28, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 06:22, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 11:17, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:24, 5 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 15:57, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture

File:Namikawa Sosuke - Bowl with Chrysanthemum Blossoms - Walters 44546 - Profile.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2014 at 18:44:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Namikawa Sosuke - Bowl with Chrysanthemum Blossoms
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Walters Art Museum - uploaded by User:File Upload Bot (Kaldari) - nominated by Spinster -- Spinster (talk) 18:44, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spinster (talk) 18:44, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice and delicate, but disappointgly small.--Jebulon (talk) 19:36, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A very nice object indeed. But the overexposed part is too large for me. Also per Jebulon. --Cayambe (talk) 20:44, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Cayambe + die DOF + sharpness can be also better. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:29, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Like many Walters Art Museum donated images, this is professionally taken but miserly in size. The subject poses a lighting problem with reflective silver and translucent colour. I think the degree of "blown" silver highlights is acceptable but would prefer perhaps a little more silver rather than the quick change to dark shadow for the metal. If it was larger, I'd support, but the subject itself is rather small. -- Colin (talk) 13:52, 4 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /A.Savin 23:21, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

File:Sinemorec - rocks.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2014 at 22:01:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sinemorec, Bulgaria - beach in the morning


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /A.Savin 23:22, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural

File:Crëusc de Secëda d inviern.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2014 at 15:34:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Woodcarved summit cross on the mount Seceda 2519 m. in Gröden
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Moroder - uploaded by Moroder - nominated by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 15:34, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Imo the sun (even if overexposed) makes a dramatic counterpoit to the nude body of Christ in the ice -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 15:34, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer 16:58, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Also OK. --King of ♠ 17:17, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support prefer this one; the sun is already big enough --P e z i (talk) 21:01, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I prefer this one.--Alurín (talk) 14:51, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral With such a bright sun, I would have expected the snow to be much more white, not blueish-gray. Especially in the foreground and along the ridge top. Lupo 16:28, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Snow is never white, specially in a backlit photo. Thanks for the note --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 18:51, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
    • I didn't say it should be white, but whiter. I think the foreground was underexposed because of the bright sun. Lupo 19:40, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
      • It is not underexposed, as you can see it still fits in the histogram, but it is a lot darker compared to the sun - I don't like HDR btw or at least I'm not comfortable with it ;-) --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 14:17, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Alternative (crop and WB)[edit]

Woodcarved summit cross on the mount Seceda 2519 m.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Christian Ferrer 16:58, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Prefer this tighter crop and hence more simplistic composition. --King of ♠ 17:17, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Strange artifacts to the left of the cross (halo & shade, both even visible in the thumbnail), halos to the left and at the top of the foreground fence poles. These artifacts do not exist in the original nomination. Lupo 21:29, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done New version, thanks, you're right, oversharpening is certainly (one of) my biggest default. --Christian Ferrer 08:55, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
    • Well, to my eyes, nothing much has changed. The fence poles still have the halos left & right, and the cross a slightly less noticeable halo on the left. However, I've given this image some more thoughts, and I must say I'd even oppose this crop being featured if these halos were completely fixed. First, I do think there's something wrong with the snow; see my comment on the original nomination. But more importantly, I feel that by cutting off the cliff at the bottom right you lose the vertical dimension. It's nearly as if the cross stood on some unremarkable hill. Lupo 16:28, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Too bad the snow is trampled. A nice fluffy snow cover would make it perfect. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 12:18, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
why, lots of people go up to the crucifix, that's why there is a fence --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 22:10, 4 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Jee 15:10, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects
The chosen alternative is: File:Crëusc de Secëda d inviern.jpg

File:Bois des Aresquiers, Vic-la-Gardiole, Hérault 06.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2014 at 20:24:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bois des Aresquiers, Vic-la-Gardiole, Hérault, France.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Christian Ferrer - uploaded by Christian Ferrer - nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:23, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:23, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice! ArionEstar (talk) 20:30, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition with the dirt path leading our eyes to the trees, which are well-balanced with the water and sky on the right. --King of ♠ 06:09, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice but no wow for me. -- Colin (talk) 15:13, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It would be a great background for something but this something is missing here. It would be a great landscape photo if the trees were fully in frame--Urmas Haljaste (talk) 15:35, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the calmness coming from this photo. Well composed, nice colors with high technical quality. --Tuxyso (talk) 10:59, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no wow: a random landscape view + the sky is a bit overexposed. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:39, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment no wow, ok if you want, it's your point of view but overexposed certainly not. -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:15, 05 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Barera (talk) 21:26, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support /St1995 11:55, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
  • (weak) Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 20:10, 9 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 02:44, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Natural

File:Guildhall, City of London - Diliff.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2014 at 23:16:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The interior of Guildhall, London
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Diliff -- Diliff (talk) 23:16, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Diliff (talk) 23:16, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sharp and detailed, nice lighting. --Urmas Haljaste (talk) 08:37, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:09, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 11:22, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kasir (talk) 11:39, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good! Technically challenging, interesting motive, outstanding quality / sharpness.
    Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question What pano hardware do you use? --Tuxyso (talk) 11:54, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
    I'd rather find out the pano SW... Poco2 13:12, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
    It's PtGui as you can see in the image description. Also Hugin is very good for multi-raw panos (leaving the stability issues aside) - I've compared the results of both programmes with different multi row shots. The key questions with Diliff's panos is which hardware (surely not computer hardware but camera hardware) is used. Pano head? Nodal point adapter? Special shooting technique? Would be interesting to hear something about that. --Tuxyso (talk) 13:17, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Indeed it is PTGui (and Photomatix) on the software side. I use a Nodal Ninja 3 panoramic head to avoid parallax issues. Diliff (talk) 16:56, 5 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:06, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors

File:PM08-13 img03 Kloster Lehnin.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2014 at 11:40:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kloster Lehnin courtyard, Brandenburg, Germany

Alternative (wide-angle)[edit]

Kloster Lehnin courtyard, Brandenburg, Germany
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 11:33, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it in spite of the barrier on the right --Christian Ferrer 11:46, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ack Christian. --Sputniktilt (talk) 13:48, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support My first choice: I prefer this alternative. Michael Barera (talk) 21:30, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support — Julian H.✈ (talk/files) 15:54, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 18:13, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support LEITOXX 21:58, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 10:23, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --TCCE (talk) 14:05, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kikos (talk) 17:26, 9 January 2014 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 02:50, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
The chosen alternative is: File:PM08-13 img02 Kloster Lehnin.jpg

File:Penguin in Antarctica jumping out of the water.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2014 at 16:39:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

An Emperor penguin (Aptenodytes forsteri) in Antarctica jumping out of the water