Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/July 2008

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


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


Contents

Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/

Image:Heart numlabels.svg, not delisted[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Not very well executed. e.g., the perspective of the ends of the arteries is not correct. Compare to [1], which is the same style of drawing, but looks right. (Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist – flamurai 21:17, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Perspective can be argued. Lycaon (talk) 21:23, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
    • That doesn't make it an outstanding drawing... we should be as picky with illustrations as we are with photos. – flamurai 21:07, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 Delist, 1 Keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. --Simonizer (talk) 15:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Purine Nucleoside Phosphorylase.jpg, delisted[edit]

Short description

result: 5 Delist, 0 Keep, 0 neutral => delisted. --Simonizer (talk) 15:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Hubble ultra deep field.jpg, delisted[edit]

Short description

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Should be delisted in favour of Image:Hubble ultra deep field Higher Resolution.jpg which should then inherit the FP stamp. (Original nomination)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Replace in original namespace is advisable. Afterwards, new hires can be deleted as duplicate. Lycaon (talk) 11:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace -- Lycaon (talk) 11:23, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace Freedom to share (talk) 13:40, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Given that only the resolution differs, why put it through this process and not just upload the higher resolution version over the current one? G.A.S 18:15, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Because it was the other version that went through FPC. If we do it the proper way, nobody can afterwards object or complain. This should be a piece of cake anyway. Lycaon (talk) 19:14, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replaceG.A.S 16:05, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace -- Laitche (talk) 05:23, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace --Simonizer (talk) 11:41, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace -- Ram-Man 12:50, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace --MichaelMaggs (talk) 14:22, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist and replace – flamurai 23:27, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
result: 8 Delist, 0 Keep, 0 neutral => delisted. --Simonizer (talk) 15:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Replaced with high resolution version -- Lycaon (talk) 17:41, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Trakai-Troki.jpg, delisted[edit]

Trakai-Troki

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info low size, low resolution, low quality, blown out whites (Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Simonizer (talk) 11:53, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Without a doubt. -- Ram-Man 12:51, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Standards were pretty low back then. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 14:22, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Resolution --S23678 (talk) 15:49, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist the resolution issue is too big an obstacle here. --- Anonymous DissidentTalk 16:51, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist noise is unacceptable at this resolution. – flamurai 23:26, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
result: 6 Delist, 0 Keep, 0 neutral => delisted. --Simonizer (talk) 15:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Bébé Phoque de Weddell - Baby Weddell Seal.jpg, delisted[edit]

baby seal pic

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment sadly that's not a valid reason for keep -- as noted by others, there are technical standards to be met -- Korax1214 (talk) 12:06, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist much to small now --Simonizer (talk) 08:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Beyond silence 12:28, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Even if he seems to say "keep me!", sorry, you're too small... --S23678 (talk) 16:57, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist of course. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 21:54, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
result: 7 Delist, 1 Keep, 0 neutral => delisted. --Simonizer (talk) 15:29, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Tettigonia virdissima nymph on Phleum pratense.jpg, featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded & nominated by -- Richard Bartz (talk) 08:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Do you like green ? Female bush-cricket nymph in the 2nd last stage of genus Great Green Bush Cricket (Tettigonia viridissima) on Timothy-grass (Phleum pratense) showing camouflage very well.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Richard Bartz (talk) 08:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice atmosphere. -- Laitche (talk) 10:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, brilliant as always, Richard. --Aqwis (talk) 10:31, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support schön grün--Simonizer (talk) 11:09, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, 718smiley.svg great pic -- Korax1214 (talk) 11:48, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the composition. --S23678 (talk) 14:27, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • 718smiley.svg Support He has a sword growing out of his butt. --Calibas (talk) 17:52, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
She has an ovipositor --Richard Bartz (talk) 17:58, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 15:14, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Hebe Flower.jpg, not featured[edit]

Hebe Flower

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by haleq (talk) 16:53, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Haleq (talk) 16:53, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Korax1214 (talk) 17:35, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Is there a more specific name than "Hebe" (I know nothing about flowers)? Also, need more categorization ("flower" is not enough). Finally, geolocate if possible. --S23678 (talk) 18:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not properly categorized. –Dilaudid 18:59, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment What kind of categorisation would be better? I am new to this sort of thing. --Haleq (talk) 19:16, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • The exact flower name category, or the "flower family". For animals and plants pictures, the scientific name (in latin) is usually used. It's why I've asked for a more specific name than "hene". We can help you to categorize your picture, but you must do quick before opposing votes accumulate because of this. Give me all the info you have on the flower, and the location of the picture, and I'll do my best (as I told you, I have no knowledge about flowers...!) --S23678 (talk) 19:24, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • The thing is I am not 100% sure what particular species of hebe it is. Is there some database with images from which we could find this out? It was taken in south east England, UK. I will look for information here: Google Book and here Hebe society--Haleq (talk) 19:59, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Location must be as exact as possible (coordinates from google maps). Understand that I can help you to categorize your image and put the geolocation tag, but I won't do the research for you on what kind of hene this is...! --S23678 (talk) 12:23, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Depth of field is much too small, sorry. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:21, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Added detailed geolocation info --Haleq (talk) 18:24, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Pulsar.co.nr (talk) 23:46, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I've checked this in the RHS Gardener's Encyclopedia, and it could be Hebe "Alicia Amherst", Hebe andersonii variegata, or I seriously suspect it to be Hebe x franciscana.jpg Hebe x franciscana. If it is the plant will be about 60cm high. Pulsar.co.nr (talk) 23:49, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Considerably overexposed, DOF, sharpness, noise (I would not care about noise, if it was the only issue). Crapload (talk) 01:03, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
Pictogram voting info.svg Info But the flower is beautiful. Thumbs up. Crapload (talk) 01:03, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 15:15, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Soča River.JPG, not featured[edit]

Soča River Slovenija

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by MarcusObal - uploaded by MarcusObal - nominated by MarcusObal -- MarcusObal (talk) 04:09, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MarcusObal (talk) 04:09, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Can you please add geocoding? --norro 08:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Geocoding has been added --MarcusObal 12:37, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very nice composition. --AngMoKio (talk) 09:08, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, aber die technische Qualität ist zu dürftig (chromatische Aberration, vor allem im unteren Bildteil). Außerdem ist mir die Aussage des Bildes nicht klar (geht es um den Fluss oder um die Boote?) --Ukuthenga 09:24, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose River has been cut through in the middle. I'd prefer Image:Soča River Panorama.jpg --Romwriter (talk) 13:33, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Although impressive at first sight, I oppose because of the composition: the rocky beach takes too much place while the awsome blue/green water doesn't take enough. If you divide the picture in 3 horizontal stripes of equal length, the middle section is un-attractive (little water, lot of rocks and small bushes), and it takes the "wow" away. --S23678 (talk) 16:33, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree with S23678 --MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:44, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition (see above). --Karelj (talk) 19:19, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Boring, sorry --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:25, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg MarcusObal (talk) 00:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 15:16, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Northern rough-winged swallow 7226.jpg, not featured[edit]

A northern rough-winged swallow eating a bug

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, nominated by Dori --Dori - Talk 17:44, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A northern rough-winged swallow eating a bug
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dori - Talk 17:44, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely composition and the action!--Mbz1 (talk) 22:24, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ordinary capture of ordinary subject; low contrast. I do not think the wire contributes to the image. Also, resolution is low (I am not talking about pixel count). Crapload (talk) 01:10, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
    • It may be ordinary, but there is only one other northern rough-winged image in Commons besides those I took\, and it's not the full bird (pretty good detail as it's by Mdf, see Image:Stelgidopteryx-serripennis-001.jpg but still at 700mm is not much more detailed than my 300mm). Also note that I was pretty close to this small bird, you can't get much closer without capturing it. --Dori - Talk 01:23, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The major issue is the DOF on this. Assuming the lens used is the 70-300, it's been set wide-open (F/5.6) which has dropped the bird's face out of the plane of good focus. F/11 and 200th of a sec would have worked better to get the whole subject sharp. - Peripitus (talk) 10:45, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Maybe, but I think this bird is in focus. I've rarely gotten anything sharper than this with this lens on a subject this small. Of course an L lens would do better. --Dori - Talk 14:17, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Actually I was able to get even closer to some other birds today (minimal focussing distance on my lens). --Dori - Talk 16:18, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 15:18, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Boy begging in Agra.jpg[edit]

Street children, Beggars in India

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Gregor Younger - uploaded by Ranveig - nominated by Econt (talk) 21:42, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg InfoBoy begging in Agra--Econt (talk) 21:42, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Econt (talk) 21:42, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because too small. Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Lycaon (talk) 22:20, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:Huddle.jpg, not featured[edit]

Main station in Zurich

result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 15:21, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Black Eyed Susan.JPG[edit]

A photograph of a budding Black Eyed Susan

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 mostly out of focus - sorry. Why not try again using a tripod and a small aperture to generate a larger depth of field? Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

--MichaelMaggs (talk) 13:44, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Image:Llangrannog beach sunset 2.JPG[edit]

Sunset on Llangrannog beach in Ceredigion, Wales

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 overexposed, underexposed, distorted and of suboptimal composition. MER-C 02:10, 1 July 2008 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Image:Parqueecologico3.JPG[edit]

Parqueecologico3.JPG

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Infocreated, uploaded, nominated by Digary (talk) 02:17, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg InfoGreen Park in Pampas Tayacaja Perú.
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 much too small --Simonizer (talk) 20:58, 1 July 2008 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Image:HalAbelsonJI1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Hal Abelson

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Joi - nominated by Laitche -- Laitche (talk) 20:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Laitche (talk) 20:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose — No "wow" factor. I'm sorry, but this picture leaves me confused. G.A.S 05:32, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. I'm with G.A.S here: I'm confused as to why this was nominated in the first place. Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:13, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg Thanks. -- Laitche (talk) 15:32, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 15:19, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Wagner College From End of Parking Lot.jpg[edit]

Panorama of Wagner College

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 hiding important elements of the main subject (foreground objects are distracting) --S23678 (talk) 14:42, 2 July 2008 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Image:Gallinago-delicata-002.jpg, featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Mdf - uploaded by Mdf - nominated by MichaelMaggs -- MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:54, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:54, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Richard Bartz (talk) 07:22, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Can you please add geocoding? --norro 08:47, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wwcsig (talk) 09:07, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ukuthenga Starke Unschärfe des Hintergrundes hebt das Motiv hervor - klasse! 09:17, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support erstaunlich bei 700 --Böhringer (talk) 10:41, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The details on the feathers are not sharp. I would expect a better sharpness from a picture that was downsampled to 2 mpx. But I would also expect the original size picture. --S23678 (talk) 12:48, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose After some thought, the bird should really be bigger for FP. --S23678 (talk) 17:06, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Could use a little more sharpness but everything else is well done. --Calibas (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 22:49, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per S23678 and also very small, considering that more than half the picture is a single, featureless gradient (some may confuse it with bokeh). Lycaon (talk) 23:03, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As Lycaon. --Karelj (talk) 19:20, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 06:03, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Eagle01 (talk) 17:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:20, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Enough detail for me, beautiful composition, and until someone catches birds better than mdf, I see no reason why we should oppose as long as the criterias are met. Benh (talk) 18:54, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Details are perfectly visible, I like the composition. I find it funny that before Mdf was uploading pictures with a tight crop, now that he's uploading them with more breathing room that's not liked by some.--Dori - Talk 20:31, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice pic, but lighting is dull, and it does not wow me. I'd also like it to be sharper. Crapload (talk) 00:58, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:24, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
result: 11 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 14:45, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Banana flower.jpg, not featured[edit]

Banana Flowers

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Muhammad Mahdi Karim -- Muhammad 16:12, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Muhammad 16:12, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • FPX|not species-identified. I would recommend researching the species before nominating flower photographs for FP status

--MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:42, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Species info uploaded, FPX tag no longer relevant. Freedom to share (talk) 18:55, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Sorry, the specific id was in my email and I had problems opening it. Description page updated with specific name.Muhammad 17:53, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The FPX template should be reserved for the most obvious nominations only. This is a nice picture with good image quality, so it really doesn't deserve it and further discussion would be helpful for the author. —startaq (talk) 18:03, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
It can be removed by anyone who intends to support. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:00, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 22:48, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Umnik (talk) 08:32, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distracting background could be blurred out more. Freedom to share (talk) 20:15, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment If the background is blurred even more, then the fronds will not be visible. Currently, some parts of the fronds can be see hence increasing its encyclopedic value. Thanks for removing the FPX template BTW Muhammad 07:27, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • My suggestion would be to take it from another angle possibly, so that the background gradient is more consistent than it is now. For example, if you would take it from another angle and the whole of the background were green, that would be much better, have a look at most other flower FPs. I am not necessarily saying reducing depth of field will help, I am saying a different background would help. Good luck in your future endeavours, Freedom to share (talk) 10:36, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Is it acceptable in this kind of image to digitally remove the background using, for example, a blur filter? -- Korax1214 (talk) 06:25, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 06:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I've created a modified version of this image which can be viewed at Photobucket; the left half of the background has been replaced with a solid forest-green fill, whilst the right half has been reduced in brightness by 30% and in contrast by 20%. Would one of these techniques, applied to the original, result in an FP-quality image? (Note that this is a quick-and-dirty modification done solely as proof of concept.) -- Korax1214 (talk) 15:21, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
    • DO you think you could apply Gaussian blur to the background as you have now? Muhammad 10:25, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting subject. Flash flattened it, though. Background is distracting. Crapload (talk) 00:50, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Crapload --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:44, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Simba123 (talk) 11:50, 29 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:00, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as Startaq --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:26, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Crapload, needs dusting too. --AM (talk) 16:48, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Dusting? Muhammad 05:58, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The flash makes it look unnatural. –Dilaudid 08:41, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 14:47, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Jakarta slumlife65.JPG, not featured[edit]

Jakarta Child Poverty

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Thehero - uploaded by Thehero - nominated by Kuzain -- Kuzain (talk) 04:28, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The detail in the picture is very good and it captures a great deal of the subject matter. The garbage dump is contrasted with the excited faces of the children (and even the adult behind him) over a toy that many people in my country would not even pick up with their bare hands. All of this is excellently played upon the child's shirt: a shirt labeled California Beach and "Hope Club." -- Kuzain (talk) 04:28, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition is very muddled, with the cut-off adults behind the boy being very distracting. The hand and arm behind his ear don't help either I am afraid. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:32, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Relevance. This image doesn't mean the same thing to me as it does to the nominator. Of course I understand the location and the probable life of those childrens. But it seems to me the kid is picking up the doll only to impress the photographer, and that he finds it discusting as well: he holds it by the hand not the body, other childrens and the adult are smiling/laughing as if it was not a normal behaviour, and the main kid's smile is not the one of a kid happy to find a toy, but the smile of a kid waiting for the reaction of the photographer (or someone nearby). --S23678 (talk) 13:37, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 14:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:White Sea StarFish, Russia.jpg, not featured[edit]

Seastar rfom White Sea

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created/uploaded/nominated by Vermonter --Vermonter (talk) 07:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Vermonter --Vermonter (talk) 07:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)(talk)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Large parts of the image are in shadow. —startaq (talk) 08:09, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose like startaq --norro 21:58, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Shadow as well. Otherwise I would probably have supported. --S23678 (talk) 13:40, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 14:52, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Solar coronae created by the steam getting out hot springs 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Solar Coronae

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 20:38, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg InfoOn cool early morning the steam getting out of hot springs creates Solar Coronae.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 20:38, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Simba123 (talk) 10:11, 30 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:01, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Missing that wow. I understand it's probably another very rare phenomenon because it's caused by geyser steam, not a simple cloud, but other solar coronae like this (from you) have such a better composition (again, I know it's not the exact same phenomenon). --S23678 (talk) 14:02, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 14:53, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Scaniar500.JPG, not featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Sterkebak - uploaded by Sterkebak - nominated by Sterkebak -- Sterkebaktalk 17:30, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Sterkebaktalk 17:30, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Teveel ruis en overbelichte lucht. Lycaon (talk) 18:22, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Emmelie (talk) 19:53, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - blown sky. MER-C 02:07, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Common good quality image, no reason for nomination for FP. --Karelj (talk) 19:12, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

i withdraw - Sterkebaktalk 19:24, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 16:32, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Emerald pool in yellowstone.jpg, not featured[edit]

Emerald PoolEmerald Pool

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Mbz1 -- Mbz1 () 16:39, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mbz1 (talk) 19:56, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Beatifull place, but the image is not sharp at all. --Sfu (talk) 20:51, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Well, it is a deep (27 feet deep) pool filled with the hot water. How sharp you expect it to look?The most important part of the image is the colors of the pool. The image really illustrates how the pool got its name. Here are few nice samples from Flickr [2]; [3]. They are hardly any sharper than my image and they do not reaaly show the deep green color of the pool.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:51, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The colors are great, but I agree with Sfu, a 3.1 mpx picture of a still object should be a little sharper, especially since the pool takes only half of the picture. --S23678 (talk) 00:59, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose due to low technical quality: Blurred at full resolution. —αἰτίας discussion 15:02, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Not all images should be sharp; some should be simply beautiful.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg but do not agree with the opposers

result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 16:30, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Alternative 1, not featured[edit]

  • Not all images should be sharp; some should be simply beautiful.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg but do not agree with the opposers

result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 16:30, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Grand Prismatic Spring in Yellowstone.jpg, not featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- Mbz1 (talk) 01:49, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 01:49, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice work! It could be sharper at full resolution, but I don't think we'll find a better photograph of this scene. Superb composition and good vibrant colour! --Specious (talk) 07:41, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Low quality, no wow factor. --Karelj (talk) 08:41, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose due to low technical quality: Blurred at full resolution. —αἰτίας discussion 14:59, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose over-sharpened. --Base64 (talk) 15:09, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Not all images should be sharp; some should be simply beautiful.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg but do not agree with the opposers

result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 16:29, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Frankfurt Am Main-Peter Becker-Frankfurts Vorstadt Sachsenhausen zu Anfang des 17 Jahrhunderts-1889.jpg, not featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Sachsenhausen, suburbia of Frankfurt on the Main, around 1600 (opposite direction view of a already featured image)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Doenertier82 - uploaded by Doenertier82 - nominated by Doenertier82 --
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral --Doenertier82 (talk) 18:51, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, ...run with the dogs tonight... --Aqwis (talk) 20:57, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Eagle01 (talk) 16:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:59, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question I'm not sure to understand the description. Is it a 17th century drawing of Frankfurt or it's an artist impression made later on? --S23678 (talk) 17:10, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
It actually is an artist's impression from 1889 of Frankfurt (it's suburbia Sachsenhausen respectively) as it looked like around 1600. But he didn't add any imagination, every single object that can be seen (i.e. the bridge tower, the bridge, the fortification, most of the buildings) is taken from historical descriptions / depictions of that time. --Doenertier82 (talk) 17:41, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For the "as-exact-as-possible", I think this picture is valuable. --S23678 (talk) 17:48, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 11:24, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ben Aveling 06:07, 5 July 2008 (UTC)Sorry, voting time was allready over --Simonizer (talk) 11:24, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Agapanthus Prebloom.jpg, not featured[edit]

A flower arrangement from an Agapanthus plant before blooming.

Er, sorry, but, do you really think such comments are helpful? Do you really think I don't know what DOF is? I know that you have to use a narrow DOF in the macro photography, but the point is that the subject still has to be sharp: Just have a look at this image as an example. Your picture does not even have a DOF, as there is nothing in focus/sharp. As such, this has nothing to do with DOF, but more with poor technical quality. —αἰτίας discussion 21:07, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Well I was shooting with a 100mm macro lens(quite a sharp lens I may add). But the picture you gave me was a single flower. This set of flowers has a diameter of 100mm? Trying to get that all in focus is quite difficult. If you see the picture at full size you can obviously see where the focus plane is. —victorrocha discussion 21:38, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (rule of th 5th day) -Simonizer (talk) 11:32, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Cheb dřev most 2.jpg[edit]

Wooden bridge over Ohře river in Cheb

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Karelj - uploaded by Karelj - nominated by Karelj -- Karelj (talk) 22:02, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 22:02, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is an interesting place, but the sky is very much overexposed. Why not to take another image at the right time of the day?--Mbz1 (talk) 23:21, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow and tilt to the left. --S23678 (talk) 00:43, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Pictogram voting info.svg Info I think it is correct perspective, not tilt. 71.139.44.122 18:31, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because of tilt and blown sky. MER-C 02:15, 4 July 2008 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Image:Литейный проспект ночью.jpg[edit]

Night view of Liteyny Prospekt (one of the major streets in Saint Petersburg)

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created/uploaded/nominated by George Shuklin (talk)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Add geolocation, and please explain the symbolic meaning or relevance of the picture (a street itself usually has relevance from the attractions along it's route). --S23678 (talk) 17:17, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose random night-shot, could be almost anywhere -- Gorgo (talk) 22:36, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because the objects depicted on the image have no apparent symbolic meaning or relevance. --S23678 (talk) 00:40, 4 July 2008 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Image:Cesar Palace 7011.jpg, not featured[edit]

Cesar Palace of the band 5 Card Studs

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, nominated by Dori --Dori - Talk 02:11, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dori - Talk 02:11, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't see how it contributes to Wikimedia. --Polymath618 (talk) 09:09, 26 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Polymath618 said Wikimedia (the project as a whole including all present and future projects), not Wikipedia. -- Korax1214 (talk) 13:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Why was this nominated is all I can say. The camera work is great but the subject is not exactly amazing. Ecopetition (talk) 18:55, 26 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. -- Lycaon (talk) 11:53, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose "Symbolic meaning or relevance": I can't find those qualities in the picture. --S23678 (talk) 17:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I wasn't going to reply since I thought it was obvious, but he's a player in a known Milwaukee band, playing at a recurring Milwaukee festival. I would think that's "suitable" enough for Wikimedia or Wikipedia to illustrate the person, the band, the summer festivals around Milwaukee, etc. But I can see I am alone in thinking this. --Dori - Talk 22:29, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I sould have clarified my idea, sorry; On the first image, from the description, I understand it's the member of a band, but we see no instrument, or microphone, and it's unclear what he is doing. On the second image, again, we see only part of the instrument, and some kind of weird face. For a better symbolic meaning, it must be clearer that the people are participating in the band. --S23678 (talk) 11:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Ecopetition on this.--Simba123 (talk) 11:48, 29 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral, fifth-day rule => not featured. Korax1214 (talk) 02:07, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Cesar Palace 7023.jpg (alternative), not featured[edit]

Cesar Palace 7023.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, nominated by Dori --Dori - Talk 02:11, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This guy was pretty entertaining to watch. --Dori - Talk 02:11, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I don't see how it contributes to Wikimedia.Polymath618 (talk) 09:09, 26 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Polymath618 said Wikimedia (the project as a whole including all present and future projects), not Wikipedia. -- Korax1214 (talk) 13:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • My bad! --S23678 (talk) 11:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Why was this nominated is all I can say. The camera work is great but the subject is not exactly amazing. -- Ecopetition (talk) 18:54, 26 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. -- Lycaon (talk) 11:53, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Same: "Symbolic meaning or relevance" --S23678 (talk) 17:15, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Ecopetition on this.--Simba123 (talk) 11:48, 29 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wikimedia is a collection of media. Good media = Support --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:22, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice catch! I think in time people will find uses for this picture that we cannot yet fathom. --Specious (talk) 07:23, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 11:15, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition. –Dilaudid 04:46, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:VanGogh-starry night.jpg, not featured[edit]

Vincent van Gogh (1853-1890) - Starry Night (1889)

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Thebrid - uploaded by Thebrid - nominated by Polymath618 -- Polymath618 (talk) 09:50, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Polymath618 (talk) 09:50, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Valuable shot. Freedom to share (talk) 15:13, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question is there a tilt on the portrait itself, or is there a real counterclockwise tilt from the scan? --S23678 (talk) 18:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I love van Gogh and this is really nice picture. But this voting should bee about photography and I don´t see any reason for nominating of reproduction of something for FP. --Karelj (talk) 19:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I always get this one confused with The Scream which is a similar image by a different painter. There are enough artists and photographers between here and other licensed to be free internet locations that it seems a waste to feature old or NASA artists. Also, how does anyone know if the colors are correct? -- carol (talk) 00:03, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - This is a valuable historical image, and has already been featured on the Turkish Wikipedia, so they apparently considered it good enough. I think it deserves a feature.--Eagle01 (talk) 00:09, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
    • User has only 5 edits this one being the fifth. Muhammad 09:02, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
      • And this is important because? If you're accusing him of something just say it. --Calibas (talk) 02:15, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
        • I'm not accusing, just pointing out to the closer. --Muhammad 08:28, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
          • That doesn't matter, as on Commons we count votes (not the same as on en.Wikipedia). --MichaelMaggs (talk) 13:49, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support An excellent, historically valuable image. Wonderful. --Simba123 (talk) 11:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This FP and maybe one or two others should not be closed without reference to the project CheckUsers. Thanks --Herby talk thyme 13:31, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Please note I have struck the votes of three users on this page. There is evidence to suggest that there is abuse of multiple accounts and that the three are linked & operating together. I suggest other votes that they have cast should be subject to review. If anyone requires further information please contact a project CheckUser - all active CUs have been informed of this. --Herby talk thyme 10:04, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unless someone can explain me if there's a reason for the tilt. --S23678 (talk) 12:01, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no geolocation, nominated by subsequently-blocked user, nothing special about this reproduction -- Korax1214 (talk) 01:58, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 11:17, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Oberjoch_Panorama_TK.jpg, not featured[edit]

Panorama view on Oberjoch

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded & nominated by Ukuthenga (talk) 14:53, 26 June 2008 (UTC) 14:53, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ukuthenga (talk) 14:53, 26 June 2008 (UTC) 14:53, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The choice of ISO 400 has resulted in the loss of a lot of detail imo. Some of the areas in the image are really soft imho. Freedom to share (talk) 15:12, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Pictogram voting info.svg Info I did not have a tripod handy. I took the photos freehand using continuous shooting mode of my camera while turning my body. ISO 400 results in short shutter speed. Ukuthenga (talk) 15:56, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
So pretend that he had just down-sampled the image to 1/2 size before uploading it. Then it would be tack sharp and still an enormous image. --Gmaxwell (talk) 19:17, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 15:14, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A little grainy but otherwise well done. Very impressive for a hand-held panorama. --Calibas (talk) 18:24, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I think there's nothing impressive with handheld panos :) I use tripod for two things, preventing camera from shaking, and getting a good horizon, straight out of the camera. 1st point doesn't apply on day shots unless you're looking for the ultimate sharpness, so we're left with the horizon to fix, which is now pretty easy with nowadays' powerful software. Benh (talk) 19:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Same, my current nomination, and almost all my panoramas are hand held (I like to travel light). Parallax errors are almost impossible for such scenery panoramas. I usually don't see such errors past 10 m, when hand held.--S23678 (talk) 19:31, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I would be more inclined to support a tighter crop: less of that tree on the left, and no building and trail on the right. About the pylon... that piece of steel is drawing the attention too much, and ruining an otherwise good sight. --S23678 (talk) 17:28, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Pulsar.co.nr (talk) 22:46, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Yet another boring panorama. This one especially boring. Crapload (talk) 00:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Note to self: at times, I should be more polite. Crapload (talk) 16:24, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition is not sufficiently interesting, in my view. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:42, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Whilst the image is very focused and of a technically high quality, the subject is not particularly impressive.--Simba123 (talk) 11:45, 29 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:59, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Incredibly beautiful --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:20, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per S23678 . Cacophony (talk) 06:09, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 11:19, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Nasa EV Lacertae 250408.jpg, not featured[edit]

Banana Flowers

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Needs better categorization (it's not the sun, it's another star).
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question This is an awsome illustration from NASA, as almost all NASA illustrations. As of now, no Nasa illustration is FP from what I can see. I am wondering if we want to start voting for those images as Nasa has litterally hundreds of such illustrations: robots on mars, satelites, future projects, etc. Should such works of art be notable or of great value in addition of being beautiful? After all, this is the artist's conception of an event (with some personal input such as the blue flames that may not be a real representation), not a picture of the real event itself. If we vote for this one, are we creating a precedent to every illustration that is "simply beautiful"?
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info From the Guidelines: "beautiful does not always mean valuable". (Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral) -- Korax1214 (talk) 05:44, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Value... I think there's too much of the artist's personal input. --S23678 (talk) 17:31, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Eagle01 (talk) 00:06, 27 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:58, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Econt (talk) 15:34, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Sebman81 (talk) 19:33, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I drew some great pictures while in Junior High School, I would expect them to be opposed if nominated here also. -- carol (talk) 00:11, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per S23678. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:41, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think this is a very good image: thoroughly informative, and incredibly impressive.--Simba123 (talk) 11:43, 29 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:58, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As MichaelMaggs. --Karelj (talk) 21:43, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As Simba123--Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:19, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Is it technically accurate? Given that practically all images of sun activity are false colour, I can forgive the mixing of yellow and blue - they could represent long- and short-wave UV. Looking at this, this and these images of the Sun and up-rating the intensity of sunspot and CME activity (the point of the image) everything is feasible, except for the blue rays. Although I am no expert, none of the sun images I have seen have an equivalent, and it looks like it's there purely for Wow factor, which reduces the value of the image to 'just pretty'. Pity, the rest is fantastic. If there is a physical equivalent to 'the Blu-ray effect', I'll support. Dhatfield (talk) 16:05, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose IMO, this is not a best scientific representation. It is the artist's glorification of a phenomenon in the absence of a genuine photograph. This image is beautiful and should compete in a purely artistic competition, but it doesn't have good educational value. --Specious (talk) 07:29, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 11:25, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Leaf epidermis.jpg, featured[edit]

Leaf epidermis

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Louisa Howard - uploaded by Mangostar - nominated by Calibas (talk) 18:50, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Calibas (talk) 18:50, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ecopetition (talk) 18:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. -- Lycaon (talk) 11:52, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 21:58, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. A very good, clear image. --Eagle01 (talk) 00:06, 27 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Umnik (talk) 05:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 08:17, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ukuthenga (talk) 09:19, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportDilaudid 12:50, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 16:23, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Extra-terrestrial skyscrapers from another planet through a telescope, or something else? Impressive picture. --S23678 (talk) 17:33, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't care what other astronomers say, but they're definitely Extra-terrestrial skyscrapers - a leaf would be green - you've got the name wrong! ;-) Pulsar.co.nr (talk) 20:20, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:17, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Simba123 (talk) 11:42, 29 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:18, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 11:44, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Cowsinfield.jpg, not featured[edit]

A group of cows in a fieldTwo Cows in a field (on a drumlin)Two cows in a field

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Pulsar.co.nr - uploaded by Pulsar.co.nr - nominated by Pulsar.co.nr -- Pulsar.co.nr (talk) 22:49, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pulsar.co.nr (talk) 22:49, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - It's not particularly impressive: not worthy for a feature, in my opinion. --Eagle01 (talk) 00:05, 27 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:18, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Awkward crop -- there needs to be more grass at the bottom and I don't know if this image can be repaired to compensate for that. And it needs for a rotation. -- carol (talk) 00:06, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very clear, good composition. The picture simply needs a rotation in order to get the horizon straight. And a bit more sharpness. -- Ukuthenga (talk) 09:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition. –Dilaudid 12:47, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The horizon isn't straight for good reason - it's on a hill! Specifically a drumlin, a dumpy glacial hill which descends quite steeply on one side and fairly shallowly on the other. Pulsar.co.nr (talk) 16:41, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sadly, the crop. The 2 cows on the left are "picture perfect" and I would have supported a picture centered more around them. Also, too much sky, and needs better categorization. On another note, I find your licensing quite original (first time I see that). --S23678 (talk) 17:42, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - Really nice composition, not very good quality or sharpness thought.
result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 12:02, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Edit One, not featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I've taken what you've all said on board, and cropped it down to the two cream-coloured cows in the foreground. I'm working on the categorization through the badges you'll see in my "badge-box" (thanks for the complement btw S23678 - It's entirely of my own invention!).
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment You should add the same colour corrections from the original nomination (It was the little special thing in your original nomination). And, while you put these corrections, I think the new crop is a little bit too tight... sorry! Leave more sky (a balance between original edit and edit 1), and maybe try to tilt the horizon straight (even if the top of the hill is not flat, it will be less noticeable as a cow is not always 90 degrees up) --S23678 (talk) 18:38, 27 June 2008 (UTC) (I will not be connected until next Tuesday, so I will not be able to comment your new modifications)
result: 0 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 12:02, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Edit Two, not featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I'll be away until Monday, so don't expect anymore edits before then I'm afraid! Pulsar.co.nr (talk) 19:32, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This discussion appears to be transcluded onto the description pages for these images. I'm pretty sure that's not meant to happen - can someone fix it? Naerii (talk) 02:46, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry to oppose after doing the edits I've asked for, but I thought the original picture was of higher resolution. The composition is good for me now, but there's not enough details on the cow. --S23678 (talk) 12:24, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 0 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 12:02, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Staten Island Ferry terminal.jpg, featured[edit]

Lower manhattan with Staten Island Ferry and Terminal from the seaside.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, and nominated by Dschwen (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dschwen (talk) 23:01, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nice photo-good composition, and a good illustration with the ferry pictured. Pulsar.co.nr (talk) 23:10, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 23:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A very illustrative image. Good composition.--Eagle01 (talk) 00:03, 27 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Spots were spotted during the light of day, often more are revealed while looking at them in a mostly darkened room with just a little location lighting. -- carol (talk) 00:56, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Or you could crank up th contrast and gamma in your X-settings. Anyway, those spots are now removed. --Dschwen (talk) 12:29, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ukuthenga (talk) 09:33, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportDilaudid 12:46, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S23678 (talk) 17:50, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good composition Muhammad 09:28, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Just a regular cityscape, my wow meter reads about zero. Crapload (talk) 00:42, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Simba123 (talk) 11:41, 29 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support artistic cityscape. --- Anonymous DissidentTalk 12:26, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice quality but no wow --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:17, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no FP JukoFF (talk) 14:29, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 12:08, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Lotte.jpg[edit]

Lotte, 1908

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Carlos Schwabe - uploaded by McLeod - nominated by Econt (talk) 19:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This image of equal size to the original painting
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Econt (talk) 19:34, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because it's too small Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Lycaon (talk) 19:55, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question How many bytes is small? This applies to all types of images (photographs and paintings)?--Econt (talk) 14:43, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • From the guidelines: "Photographs of lower resolution than 2 million pixels are typically rejected unless there are 'strong mitigating reasons'". Also, we are in a digital world: your image size will be the same size than the original painting only if you adjust the pixel size to a precise dimension. So, your image should be of higher resolution, regardless of the size of the original painting. --S23678 (talk) 16:56, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Thank you, you're right on size in the digital world and the image is out of 682000 pixels.--Econt (talk) 17:26, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Parque Grancolombiano - Cúcuta.jpg, not featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Torax - uploaded by Torax - nominated by Torax -- Torax (talk) 08:17, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Torax (talk) 08:17, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It looks ordinary, no wow factor. --Lerdsuwa (talk) 15:37, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As above. --Karelj (talk) 19:13, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose poor contrast --Simonizer (talk) 21:02, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Out of focus and poorly lit; sorry. --Simba123 (talk) 14:26, 2 July 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:15, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very peaceful picture, however, there is some distracting elements (building, metal pole), and some technical problems mentionned above. --S23678 (talk) 14:47, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special, no wow, poor technical quality. —αἰτίας discussion 20:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - per Lerdsuwa. Cacophony (talk) 06:04, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 13:52, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Man of Nootka Sound.jpg[edit]

schöner grauer Man

Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because it is too small --S23678 (talk) 00:13, 6 July 2008 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Image:Cunda church 07832.jpg, not featured[edit]

Cunda, the large former Greek Orthodox cathedral, main landmark of Alibey village.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Nevit • uploaded by Nevit • nominated by Dilaudid • –Dilaudid 13:03, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportDilaudid 13:03, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wow! --Gusme (talk) 13:46, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That's remarkable! --Eagle01 (talk) 16:55, 27 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:56, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 18:16, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Takes time figuring out what exactly you're looking at, but certainly grabs the attention. --Laveol (talk) 22:08, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Hard to discern what it actually is. Are we looking up or across or what? Naerii (talk) 02:44, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
I think that's kind of the point. --Aqwis (talk) 03:12, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I don't think it's a good idea to be promoting images that are confusing and have no discernable subject. Naerii (talk) 17:24, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good! It only needs a bit more sharpness.--Ukuthenga (talk) 07:41, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Laveol and Naerii. --norro 07:57, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support – flamurai 17:29, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting and technically perfect, but too messy for an FP.Crapload (talk) 01:17, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Crapload. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:20, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A really good, impressive image--Simba123 (talk) 11:40, 29 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:56, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too small. --Karelj (talk) 21:47, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Crapload --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very Escher. Beats the pants off an endless parade of technically flawless insects, flowers and birds. Dhatfield (talk) 16:27, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Any picture that makes you stare at it for a minute or more deserves to be FP. --Dori - Talk 00:50, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support How to make borring stairs look amazing! --S23678 (talk) 12:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Perfect. --Manco Capac (talk) 09:00, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too confusing composition. Lycaon (talk) 20:01, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Naerii, Crapload and Lycaon. -- Korax1214 (talk) 01:00, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose confusing. Alvaro qc (talk) 22:57, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 10 support, 9 oppose => not featured. Korax1214 (talk) 15:41, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Daisy Geyser erupting in Yellowstone National Park.jpg, not featured[edit]

Daisy GeyserDaisy Geyser erupting in Yellowstone National Park edit1.jpg Daisy Geyser edit by norro

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created,uploaded and nominated by Mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 06:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 06:18, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice composition and colors --Böhringer (talk) 08:14, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Tilt! --Simonizer (talk) 08:24, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose leaning. and could perhaps be improved by cropping a bit. --norro 08:40, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Muhammad 12:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Tilt. –Dilaudid 12:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination

result: withdrawn => not featured. Korax1214 (talk) 14:10, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Edit 1, not featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Fixed tilt
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Muhammad 12:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment, it is still slightly tilted. --Aqwis (talk) 12:19, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thank you,Muhammad
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Tilt. –Dilaudid 12:45, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination

result: withdrawn => not featured. Korax1214 (talk) 14:10, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Alternative 1, not featured[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 12:56, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • If it is tilt too, please instead of opposing tell me what side to turn it to. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 12:56, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, at first, I thought this was tilted too, but then I checked it in Photoshop. I think an optical effect is causing it to look like it's tilted when it ain't. Support. --Aqwis (talk) 03:16, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Muhammad 06:19, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Korax1214 (talk) 14:10, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Edit 2, featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I like the original version better than the alternative. So I rotated it, slighty reduced the noise and cropped it a bit to avoid the centered composition and to please my eyes. --norro 19:52, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --norro 19:52, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 20:26, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good 1! Crapload (talk) 16:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support jou --Böhringer (talk) 20:48, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Muhammad 04:32, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:15, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --S23678 (talk) 12:39, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Korax1214 (talk) 14:08, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Pronghorn in Yellowstone National Park.jpg, not featured[edit]

PronghornPronghorn in Yellowstone National Park 1.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 06:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 06:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Muhammad 11:46, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Umnik (talk) 14:01, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Eagle01 (talk) 16:54, 27 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:19, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like the composition and the colours. A bit short from a quality point of view too. Benh (talk) 18:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Hardly FP material - I don't see what makes it that special. --Laveol (talk) 22:09, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • IMO an image of an animal taken in the natural habitat is always special and is always FP material.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:25, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Teme (talk) 18:56, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition and lack of wow. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 13:46, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Korax1214 (talk) 13:57, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Alternative 1, not featured[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 14:48, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
At full resolution you could see flies at his legs.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:48, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose--Teme (talk) 18:57, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition and lack of wow. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 13:46, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as Michael --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:16, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I prefer this one for composition, but the snow on the mountain is red. --S23678 (talk) 12:37, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
It is because the image was taken very early in the morning and the snow was lit by the direct sun.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:10, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
But it was took within 1 minute from the other picture, where the snow is white (5h49 vs 5h50) !?! --S23678 (talk) 13:26, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Korax1214 (talk) 13:57, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:American bison rests at hot spring in yellowstone national park.jpg, not featured[edit]

BisonBison

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created ,uploaded and nominated by Mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 16:06, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 16:06, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 22:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Alternative 1, featured[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 16:20, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
At this image you see hot spring boiling--Mbz1 (talk) 16:20, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, there's a rule in photography called "GET CLOSER!!!!!!!!!", but it does not apply here. --Aqwis (talk) 03:14, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Lerdsuwa (talk) 15:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support My souvenir from yellowstone: hot springs and bisons. The picture is not perfect (noise in the sky, per example), but I guess it must be quite a hard/dangerous shot to get. --S23678 (talk) 12:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • You are right. It is quite dangerous to get this kind of shot. There was not one, but two bisons there. As we were warn : "Bison can sprint at 30 mph (48 km/h) or 44 feet per second (13m/second). That is faster than an Olympic sprinter!These animals may appear slow and tame, but are wild animals - unpredictable and dangerous! You are required to stay at least 25 yards (23 m) away from all animals. People are gored by bison every year for not respecting the required distance. Be smart - do not approach bison!" When I was taking the pictures, I was much,much more closer than 23 meters to the closest bison. Besides there was nowhere to run because of hot springs. I left rather fast, when one of the bisons started getting up.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:36, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Muhammad 07:21, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor quality image, and mediocre composition. Lycaon (talk) 14:56, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I can't understand why there is so little detail on the head. Perhaps the focus is a bit off? I'm also not keen from a compositional point of view on all that bare earth. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 08:09, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Here's the link to some safety videos about bisons, just for the information.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:27, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
That doesn't improve the quality of this picture! -- Lycaon (talk) 16:34, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I added the link after the image has passed and only because I would not like somebody to get hurt in trying to repeat my experience with bisons. I always try to prevent Wikipedia readers from getting hurt. Here's for example the article Sunspot. If you go down to the gallery, you will see that I added there: "Please remember observing sunspots at sunsets without proper solar filters may permanently damage your eyes."
    May I please ask you, Hans, if you believe that the link to the safety videos should be added to the description of the image too? Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:47, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 5 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 22:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Dead trees at Mammoth Hot Springs.jpg, featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 23:20, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 23:20, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 03:13, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good work compositionally, sharpness could be better. Freedom to share (talk) 08:26, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Thermos (talk) 08:45, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support EV Muhammad 09:27, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Supportαἰτίας discussion 12:20, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely light. --Dori - Talk 20:36, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Simba123 (talk) 11:39, 29 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:55, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support super --Böhringer (talk) 20:46, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Holy crap --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:13, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Obviously, I'm going to support, but I wonder if it isn't tilted to the left ? Benh (talk) 17:17, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
It is not tilted.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:28, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support trust you then ;) Benh (talk) 20:27, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That's a wow for me. --S23678 (talk) 12:54, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportDilaudid 21:54, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Urban (talk) 15:24, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Really nice composition, very good quality. Nice colors... really nice! //moralist (talk) 19:47, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 22:10, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! what an atmosphere is that! Nice to ilustrate a Geological book cover. added by user:Zimbres. -- Benh (talk) 20:33, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Western tent caterpillars Malacosoma californicum .jpg, not featured[edit]

Western tent caterpillars Western tent caterpillars

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 16:54, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 16:54, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting subject. I think for this image to work, it should be
    1. Tightly cropped.
    2. Super sharp.
...and it's not. Crapload (talk) 01:13, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support cool --norro 21:59, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support double cool. --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:10, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too cool. --Karelj (talk) 19:04, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose because of the branches between the camera and the nest: could have been left there as it's part of the environment of those caterpillars, but they are too much in the way. --S23678 (talk) 13:16, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Surely I could not remove the branch in order do not disturb the nest, but I removed it in a photo shop, which means you should come up with a new reason to oppose the image :-)--Mbz1 (talk) 02:15, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • First, on an administrative aspect, you should not modify an image on which there is already some vote, but instead propose it as an edit (all the actual votes were made on another picture, not the current edit!). Also, from the guidelines: “More extensive manipulations, such as removal of distracting background elements, should be clearly described in the image text, by means of the {{RetouchedPicture}} template”. Now, on the image itself, the edit you did is quite impressive at thumb size, but the seam is visible where only halves of caterpillars have been cloned. Finally, in my opinion, retouched FPC should not have portions of the image entirely replaced by another portion of the same picture. I think the elimination of distracting elements of the picture should only be done by cloning actual photograph of the missing portion (taken from another angle or at a later time). --S23678 (talk) 12:37, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • OK, I reverted it back.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:39, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg 

result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 22:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Edit 1, not featured[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 02:27, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much contrast, colors looks un-natural (like pictures from an old book). --S23678 (talk) 13:16, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg 

result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 22:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:RockyMountainsNationalParkColorado.jpg, not featured[edit]

Rocky Mountain National Park

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Massimo Catarinella - uploaded by Massimo Catarinella - nominated by Massimo Catarinella -- Massimo Catarinella (talk) 03:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Massimo Catarinella (talk) 03:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Nice, but not impressive enough for FP. 71.135.33.48 05:53, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Probably an impressive view, but the picture fails to transmit the wow factor. For improvement, you may want to crop a little the ground in front. Also, as the interesting section looks quite linear, you may want to do a panorama. --S23678 (talk) 17:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Low quality. --Karelj (talk) 18:49, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As S23678 mentioned, the picture fails to transmit the wow factor. —αἰτίας discussion 20:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 22:27, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Kibaha panorama.jpg, not featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Muhammad Mahdi Karim -- Muhammad 05:38, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Panorama of Kibaha Landscape. First one available online!
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Muhammad 05:38, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's technically quite good I guess, but there's nothing very striking or interesting about it. It's just some hills/scrubland. Naerii (talk) 07:08, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As per Naerii. You're in Tanzania? Just photograph some beautiful sceneries very unique to your region with the same quality and it should be easy to promote them FP. Also, don't forget to geolocate. --S23678 (talk) 17:47, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Yup, I live in Tanzania. I visited this school in Kibaha and from one of the construction sites, saw this and I thought it looked great. Anyways, what do you think about the quality of this image? Geocoding is a bit difficult though as Google Earth has not covered the remote areas in detail. Muhammad 18:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
      • Overall quality is good, I see no big flaws. Some “tuning” you could do IMO is; contrast: the left area of the picture is directly lit by the sun (a side lighting is usually better to give more texture and volume), exposition: (the clouds are near overexposition), and colors: in post-processing in photoshop, try adjusting the levels to make the colors more vivid. But I saw no stitching errors. You mainly need a better scenery. For geolocation, an approximate location with the mention “approximate geolocation” could be good in my opinion. At least, it's better than nothing --S23678 (talk) 19:02, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As above - nothing special, wow factor missing. --Karelj (talk) 18:54, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Overexposed. I think the ground looks goods, but some blue sky that won't drown out the electric lines and the pylons in the distance would complete this quality photograph. --Specious (talk) 07:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 22:27, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Orange Spring Mound in Yellowstone National Park 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 15:35, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 15:35, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support stunning picture, well done. —αἰτίας discussion 16:22, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour (talk) 08:34, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturated. Lycaon (talk) 14:27, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
    At first after reading the comment I wanted to make my image look dull (not "Oversaturated"), but then I decided what for? You would come with another reason to oppose, don't you, Hans. BTW about "Oversaturated", here are few samples from Flickr [4] (103 comments 99 faves};[5] ( 19 comments 27 faves} and a dull one (not "Oversaturated") [6] ( no comments no faves}. No my image is not oversaturated at all. The image correctly represents the beautiful and briliant colors of the mound.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:53, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I feel like it was unproperly processed; resulting in soft parts mixed with sharp parts. Is it due to NR ? Colours aren't as impressive as the ones on the links provided (but they seem have used polarizer filters contrary to you). Benh (talk) 20:47, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I even do not know (and do not like to know) what NR is. How you know they used polarizer filters? Please do not respond. It is just a a rhetorical question.The rock has uneven structure and that's why some parts are sharper than another. Here's one more sample from Flickr [7] to compare. In a mean time I've got more than enough from way too smart for me reviews. Pictogram voting delete.svg --Mbz1 (talk) 21:17, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 22:29, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Tracks of Ursus americanus, the American black bear in Yellowstone.jpg, not featured[edit]

Bear tracks

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 17:50, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info It is harder to find the tracks of a bear than a bear himself.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:50, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 17:50, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because the main subject is unsharp and the general quality is low --S23678 (talk) 12:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.
  • The discussion is moved here--Mbz1 (talk) 18:57, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg 

result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 22:30, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Black bear in yellowstone 3.jpg, not featured[edit]

Black bearBlack bear

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 18:38, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info There were two bears in a meadow. I asked them many times to look at me and to smile for Wikipedia. They did not. Eventually a ranger came and "smiled" at me. He said that I endanger not only my life, but his life too by approaching the bears so close. It was silly. Who is going to be afraid to meet a bear in a forest after meeting reviewers of FP candidates at Commons? Besides one should get very, very unlucky to get attacked by a black bear, but I had no choice, but to leave without taking an image of a smiling bear. I know the composition of the image is not very good, but IMO it is interesting to show that a black bear is not always black. Besides I had strong mitigating circumstances (two bears and a ranger) :-)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 18:38, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice shot. I admire your courage, I came within about twenty feet of a Black bear in the Great Smokey Mountains National park a few years ago and I didn't hang around to take it's picture.--Paloma Walker (talk) 04:02, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm sure you expected opposes, Mila. The focus is on the bear's rear end, leaving the head out of focus. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 08:17, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Don't you find that the rear end of the bear is so wet and so cute?--Mbz1 (talk) 14:15, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg 

result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 22:31, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Alternative 1 , not featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info May I please ask you to notice the focal length of the lens for taking this image (19 mm). The idea was not to show the bear close up (it could be shown in a Zoo image too), but rather the bear in his natural habitat.--17:03, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 14:15, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg 

result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 22:31, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Arachnis picta.jpg, featured[edit]

Painted Arachnis (Arachnis picta)

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created/uploaded/nominated by Calibas (talk) 00:08, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support My first try at focus bracketing. --Calibas (talk) 00:08, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 03:13, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice first try :) Muhammad 09:27, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Laitche (talk) 17:07, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose while it is technically flawless, I feel no wow. Crapload (talk) 01:16, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:37, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A wonderful image --Simba123 (talk) 11:37, 29 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:54, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great image with excellent detail. Jordan Busson (talk) 13:46, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 20:45, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:09, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As per crapload. Another perspective would have been more impressive. --S23678 (talk) 13:03, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral After some thinking, not enough "no wow" to oppose. --S23678 (talk) 02:30, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very impressive use of DOF. --–Dilaudid 14:46, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 16:13, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Namibie Himba 0716a.jpg, not featured[edit]

Namibia, girl Himba

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Himba is a ethnic group in Namibia.

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Econt (talk) 14:04, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support – flamurai 17:29, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It seems like every nude Himba woman (or girl as in this case) is being put to FP. I wonder if that would be the case if they weren't nude. I have nothing against nudity, but I don't think it's all that fair to them. --Dori - Talk 20:19, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Dori and also poor light. Lycaon (talk) 22:22, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support She's not nude. --Calibas (talk) 23:37, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor light. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:36, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Light on her face is poor, bag in the top-left is distracting - Peripitus (talk) 10:51, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as MichaelMaggs --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:10, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor light, too reddish especially the top area on her right shoulder and object on the left is distracting.--Paloma Walker (talk) 03:47, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support JukoFF (talk) 14:27, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral =>not featured. Simonizer (talk) 16:14, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:StPaulBronco.jpg, not featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, and nominated by Cacophony (talk) 06:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cacophony (talk) 06:34, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The foreground action is excellent (horses and cowboys). What draws my support away is the background: it dwarfs the main subject, and the white stripe draws a lot of attention. Perhaps a different crop can deal with this problem (perhaps not) --S23678 (talk) 01:13, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition. Sorry, Ben Aveling 06:08, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per BenAveling. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 08:01, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral =>not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 16:16, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Frankfurt Am Main-Peter Becker-Frankfurts Vorstadt Sachsenhausen zu Anfang des 17 Jahrhunderts-1889.jpg - failed[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Sachsenhausen, suburbia of Frankfurt on the Main, around 1600 (opposite direction view of a already featured image)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Doenertier82 - uploaded by Doenertier82 - renominated by Ben Aveling 01:53, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This just failed because it didn't have enough support. But it looked like it had enough support to pass, until two votes were struck. So I suspect that, were it not for those invalid votes, it would attracted other, valid, votes. So I'm going to renominate it and give it another chance. Regards, Ben Aveling 01:53, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Although I voted in favour of your picture in the first nomination, I don't think it's appropriate to nominate again a picture that just failed the FPC process, at least not before a certain time (6 months to a year seems to be a good time to re-nominate IMO). The same situation of this FPC may occur with another FPC where only 1 late oppose vote makes the picture fails. For your nomination. every voter had 9 days to vote, and if they didn't, it's probably because either they had no opinion on your picture, were not feeling comfortable voting for this kind of image, or it's a subject that does not interest them (I rarely vote for birds or flowers myself for that reason), not because they thought there was enough votes to make it FP IMO. I suggest you withdraw your nomination and you re-nominate at a later time, giving other voters the chance to join and to evaluate your image. --S23678 (talk) 04:30, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • The struck votes I was referring to were not mine, but Eagle01/Simba123. That is, it looked like it had 6 votes in favour, and none in opposition - not counting the nominator who did not vote for some reason. 2 of those votes were struck with one or two days of time left to vote, by which stage people would have seen it, seen that it had enough support, and not bothered to vote. Having been around a while, I've seen that people are more likely to vote if the vote is close. Once it lost the 2 votes, it was a long way down the page, where most people wouldn't realise that anything had changed. Regards, Ben Aveling 04:58, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because it was very recently declined (please wait a reasonable time to renominate) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Lycaon (talk) 13:14, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Lycaon, S23678, the nominator did not vote on this. Another 4 people who thought this is FP worthy did. (Not counting myself - I didn't vote until too late because I thought it already had sufficient support). Exactly zero people voted against it. What would you consider a reasonable time to wait? 12:35, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • 6 month to 1 year IMO. I understand the special situation for this nomination (I supported the image!), but I think we should apply the same rules to everyone to make it fair. I think the main goal of this is not to encourage people to resubmit over and over again the same image until it passes the voting process. The delay changes nothing to this image, it's just longer to make it FP (if it becomes FP). --S23678 (talk) 13:00, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I don't believe there is any rule on this. For me, the question is, what is sensible. If it is FP quality now, then why can't it be nominated? If it isn't FP quality, what difference does 6 months make? Regards, Ben Aveling 08:13, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I also believe it is good practice to wait a bit to renominate, though a couple of months (say 3-4) should suffice IMO. Lycaon (talk) 08:42, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:thunderstorm_in_sydney_2000x1500.png[edit]

Thunderstorm in Sydney, Australia

Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because it is extremely noisy, tilted an possibly upscaled. Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Lycaon (talk) 13:13, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

====Edit 1 ====

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Noisy? Yes. Upscaled? Maybe. And huge "wow"!--Mbz1 (talk) 15:39, 6 July 2008 (UTC)The edit was removed by the creator of the image.--Mbz1 (talk) 20:05, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info It's not tilted. This is the horizon and it's going into a slope from East to West Sydney (you are looking at Sydney airport on the horizon)
If you do not like my edit, you could remove it, but it should be removed together with my vote.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:22, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Still noisy, possibly upscaled (jagged edges) and tilted (unless buildings are all leaning down under;-)). Oh yes, forgot to mention missing EXIF and geolocation—though they by themselves would not be enough reason to oppose. Lycaon (talk) 16:31, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Sorry to desagree, but this picture is not tilted at all. The left building is tilted on the right and the right building on the left, this is because the picture is taken with a wide angle camera, wich always gives a "perspective" effect. As for he noise, yes, there is because this is not a digital picture (we are in 1991) but a paper print scanned. I lost the negative in my return from Australia. The exceptional event shown here (one lightning every 30 seconds for two hours...), is more relevant than the technical quality of the picture. When I look at the first steps on the moon, I don't discuss how many pixels there are and if the flag is upright or not. This picture has been used by many storm chasers sites, by the Australian severe weather bureau, by scientific magazines and as a print cover by a book about electro-magnetism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Patriiick (talk • contribs) 17:35, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The subject is: Wow! But: The quality is too poor. Maybe a better scan will do. And by the way: Definitely it is tilted! Look at the printed date in the lower right corner (is this picture printed on the magazine covers with this number???). It indicates a tilt of approximately 0.8 degrees. At a rotation of approx. 1.8 degrees counterclockwise it looks straight. --Ukuthenga (talk) 18:54, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very bad quality. --Lerdsuwa (talk) 12:27, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Normalsi - Mirek 'Koniu' Mazurczyk 02.JPG[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

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

-- Crapload (talk) 02:22, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Cliff swallow 7427.jpg, not featured[edit]

A cliff swallow (Petrochelidon pyrrhonota)

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, nominated by Dori
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A cliff swallow (Petrochelidon pyrrhonota]]) --Dori - Talk 20:51, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dori - Talk 20:51, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Simba123 (talk) 10:14, 30 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:11, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Prefer the full body view, good detail.--Paloma Walker (talk) 03:37, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I dunno. I am missing wow. I suspect it takes a telescope to take this kind of picture, but that alone dos not bring wow, I am sorry. Crapload (talk) 04:55, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lerdsuwa (talk) 13:56, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 supports, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 20:19, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Cliff swallow 7488.jpg (alternative), featured[edit]

A closeup of the cliff swallow

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, nominated by Dori
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A closeup of the cliff swallow for those that prefer even more detail. --Dori - Talk 20:51, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dori - Talk 20:51, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice details of the eyes --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:04, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Simba123 (talk) 10:13, 30 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:11, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I dunno. I am missing wow. Crapload (talk) 04:53, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lerdsuwa (talk) 13:56, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A nice and difficult bird close. Congratulation (a birdwatcher) Zimbres (talk) 20:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Ken Thomas (talk) 20:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Don't like crop nor DOF. Lycaon (talk) 20:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportDilaudid 12:02, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 6 supports, 2 opposes, 0 neutral => featured. Benh (talk) 20:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Northern rough-winged swallow 7435.jpg, featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, nominated by Dori
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A northern rough-winged swallow juvenile (Stelgidopteryx serripennis). --Dori - Talk 20:53, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dori - Talk 20:53, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Appealing composition --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:05, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't find it impressive enough, sorry. --Simba123 (talk) 10:13, 30 June 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:10, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Benh (talk) 17:13, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 18:42, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient details and sharpness in the feathers. Lycaon (talk) 20:29, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support-crisp, detailed and informative. --- Anonymous DissidentTalk 16:10, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Avala (talk) 23:19, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Symbol of freedom. --Pauk (talk) 03:47, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lerdsuwa (talk) 13:55, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ken Thomas (talk) 20:22, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Lycaon -- Crapload (talk) 03:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 9 supports, 2 opposes, 0 neutral => featured. Benh (talk) 20:14, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Time passes.jpg, not featured[edit]

Time Passes

This picture shows a man standing alone. With the shutters speed very slow, the cars that pass are in a blur, giving a sense of time passing and that we humans, so small can not do anything about it but witness its passage.

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Muhammad 17:11, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm really sorry, but this is nothing special. Neither the subject, nor the technical quality. —αἰτίας discussion 19:49, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question What is this supposed to show? --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:07, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
    • IMO it shows time passing, due to the motion blur. Muhammad 05:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral nice idea. The composition is also ok but maybe there should have been some more moving cars in the pic. --AngMoKio (talk) 14:05, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose great idea, but you haven't quite captured it. I can't say what it needs, but something. Sorry, Ben Aveling 20:52, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support there's something in the image that appeals to me.--Mbz1 (talk) 02:04, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There is definitly something appealing in the relevance of this picture, IMO it's quite an original way to show time passing by. I like the simple, un-attractive street that is putting emphasis on the 2 main subjects. But the image visually is missing that wow, that something to make it FP. I encourage you to improve this idea: try different locations, light conditions, angle of view. --S23678 (talk) 13:53, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thank you all for your comments, supports and opposes. I am learning a lot. A note to others, please leave your comments if you do not want to vote, so that I may improve future pictures. Thanks. Muhammad 14:32, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Having just a bit of the far side of the road is a negative - barrel correction would fix that. I'd be curious to see a version without break lights - nor sure it would be better, but maybe. I think a version without the tree might work better - but I think the lamp post is good, it breaks up what would otherwise be very dominating horizontal lines. Maybe, just maybe, it might work better if the near lane was just a bit less than half the picture rather than a bit more than half. I think that one car heading in each direction works well - the front of the car at the top left is, I think, a negative. I could be wrong. As other people have said, variations on this image would be well worth exploring. Regards, Ben Aveling 09:16, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as Mbz1 --Ukuthenga (talk) 19:54, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Needs more wow. Also, there appears to be some barrel distortion -- the far edge of the street looks curved.--Specious (talk) 07:32, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As αἰτίας. --Karelj (talk) 15:59, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - I love the composition, it is very nice. Thought the picture's quality and the subject isn't as convincing. //moralist (talk) 19:40, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Aitias. Cacophony (talk) 06:06, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 6 opposes, 2 neutrals => not featured. Benh (talk) 20:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Reine i Lofoten LC0148.jpg[edit]

Reine i Lofoten

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Reine on the Lofot island Moskenes, Norway; created, uploaded and nominated by LC-de -- LC-de (talk) 15:36, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LC-de (talk) 15:36, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love Lofoten and Vesteralen. --Karelj (talk) 19:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, highlights are overexposed. -- Crapload (talk) 03:19, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I will sit on the fence considering S23678's comment. Crapload (talk) 05:25, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support From the guidelines: "Burned highlights in large areas are a distracting element". I think the overexposure is fairly small here and the beauty of the picture takes over this detail IMO. I like the proportion here, the big sky and the mountains makes this village looking small, nested in the scenery. Very peaceful picture. --S23678 (talk) 03:39, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - MartinD (talk) 10:05, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very atmospheric. –Dilaudid 13:04, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeSymbol neutral vote.svg Neutral, nice light and composition, but the high amount of artifical local contrast ruins it. --Aqwis (talk) 14:34, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Aqwis. Insufficient technical quality. —αἰτίας discussion 18:04, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
    • New version with minor changes uploaded, that should deal the problem. --LC-de (talk) 21:21, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
      • Do not overwrite an image already going through the voting process. Propose the new version as an edit. I reverted the file to the original FPC version--S23678 (talk) 02:25, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Ok, then I withdraw my nomination. I will nominate the edit someday ... maybe. --LC-de (talk) 07:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Caligo memnon (Wroclaw zoo)-1.JPG[edit]

Caligo memnon species

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 overexposed. 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.

--Crapload (talk) 03:16, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This picture was taken in a dark room without sun and low light, how it could be overexposed? Guérin Nicolas (messages) 08:29, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Thalurania glaucopis-5.jpg[edit]

A Brazilian Hummingbird

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 Image was declined just two weeks ago. Please do not resubmit so soon. Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Lycaon (talk) 20:15, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. Because I made the edit later than 24 hours later--Mbz1 (talk) 05:26, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Agapanthus Postbloom.jpg, not featured[edit]

An Agapanthus flower arrangement after most of the flowers have bloomed.

An alternate to the first picture taken with different focusing planes.
result: 3 supports, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 19:49, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Cote Granite Rose pano.jpg, featured[edit]

Pink granite rocks coast, Brittany, France

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Benh (talk) 17:08, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Benh (talk) 17:08, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support well done, good picture. —αἰτίας discussion 17:27, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support with no questions.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:55, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Vassil (talk) 19:58, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Boffo. --Calibas (talk) 22:09, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, I set my vacation on standby just to support this. ;) --Aqwis (talk) 08:36, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good, but not as good as your other panos. --Ukuthenga (talk) 09:40, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor composition, missing wow factror. --Karelj (talk) 19:08, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice Muhammad 05:23, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Besoin de géolocation. --S23678 (talk) 14:10, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I don't really think so: the appropriate details are given.--Simba123 (talk) 14:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Unfortunately, I don't yet own a GPS, so I always geolocalise by looking at google maps. I haven't figured out from the lowres map (google maps quality is uneven across france) what my position was, and it might even be on a place covered by sea since I took it at low tide. I'll add the geolocalisation when I figure it out, but for now, one has to live with only the "near Ploumanach" clue ;) Benh (talk) 15:09, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fair enough. --S23678 (talk) 16:01, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. A wonderful image. --Simba123 (talk) 14:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:16, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Little wow. Crapload (talk) 21:35, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Romeo Bravo (T | C) 20:49, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lerdsuwa (talk) 14:05, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose after some thought due to the tight crop on the upper right hand corner. –Dilaudid 11:59, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 11 supports, 3 opposes, 0 neutral => featured. Benh (talk) 19:50, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:2008-07-04 Kenworth truck on I-85 in Durham.jpg, not featured[edit]

Truck passes

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Specious - uploaded by Specious - nominated by Specious -- Specious (talk) 14:36, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Specious (talk) 14:36, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Not very good focus, not special subject //moralist (talk) 19:21, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - not a very captivating image. Cacophony (talk) 06:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting subject, but poor composition and no 'wow' at all. -- MJJR (talk) 21:25, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I see that no one finds my picture interesting. I thought it was interesting because this truck is moving at high speed, and the motion blur is on the background, not the truck. Plus the early morning shadows don't look bad on the bridge support. Is the motion blur actually bad or does it not stand out enough? --Specious (talk) 22:18, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I'd say it's a good try at background motion blur with a moving subject, as you may have had some difficulties with the lightning and the high speed of the vehicles. However, when I'm voting for FPC, I'm searching for "that special thing" that makes the picture stands out. On your picture, the motion blur stands out as the "special thing", but other things like the perspective (flat view on the side of the truck), crop (missing part of the truck's wheel) and background (although there's the morning light, this concrete and steel bridge is not the cutest background) scales the "wow" factor down to an average photography. Just try again and keep in mind that less than 0.1% of the pictures on commons are FPC, so it may take a lot of time to get "that perfect shot". --S23678 (talk) 03:59, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As per discussed above. --S23678 (talk) 03:59, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured (rule of the 5th day)Benh (talk) 20:09, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Boiling lake in Yellowstone National Park.jpg, not featured[edit]

Hot spring Hot springHot spring

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 17:15, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Once Churning Caldron was a cool spring covered with colorful mats of microorganisms. This all has changed after earthquakes in 1978-79 superheated the water and killed the microbes. This once cool pool now averages 164°F and in 1996, it began throwing water 3-5 feet.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 17:15, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question why is the colorspace "65536" ? is this a 16-bit picture ? Benh (talk) 17:21, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Ah, Benh, I cannot disclose all my secrets to you :-). The question is, if you like the image or you do not.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:37, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Tell me your secret, I'll tell you if I like the picture or not ;). I've checked the picture and it seems it's in 16bit (65000 colors instead of 16 millions). I guess it's a mistake from editing it ?? Maybe you should upload a true color version of the picture. Benh (talk) 18:08, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • These are true colors. Here are some samples I found at the NET: [8], [9];[10][11]--Mbz1 (talk) 23:22, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • no, I'm not talking about the colours accuracy, I meant 24bit colours (16 million or something), sorry for the poor english. Your picture has 65000 and something (16bit). I see no reason for that. At least one of your other nomination below has 65000 colours too. Benh (talk) 15:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • It doesn't have "65000 colors" it's just a weird misuse of the exif tag. --Gmaxwell (talk) 19:14, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
Then how did you check ? I'm still looking how to.. Benh (talk) 20:26, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
I guess it has to do with 16-bit processing (so 48 bits in total) in Photoshop Elements but I don't have that program to play with. :) --Lerdsuwa (talk) 02:48, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support well done, nice picture. —αἰτίας discussion 17:25, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Is it tilted? Look at the people in the background. Regards, Ben Aveling 20:47, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I cannot see the tilt, but please tell me to what side the image should be rotated. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:56, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I think a few degrees counter clockwise might be required. I could be wrong, it's hard to tell for sure with water when it's bubbling like that, but that would make the curved line at the bottom of the bubbling water sort of flat. And the people seem to be leaning too much to the right, as if the ground is actually more tilted than it looks in the picture. On the other hand, the trees on the left look about right. So I don't know, but I wondered, so I thought I'd ask. Regards, Ben Aveling 11:47, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Thank you, Ben. I tried and it did not look right to me. If you'd like to try it yourself and upload your version please do.--Mbz1 (talk) 14:57, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 19:09, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose regretfully, some denoise filtering or compression artifact leaves the image with a splotchy feel. It's a neat subject, but I think this isn't quite our best work. --Gmaxwell (talk) 19:12, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This one looks better than the edit. Muhammad 05:21, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition good, but, as per Gmaxwell, there's an overprecessed feel to the image. Did you took this with a EOS Rebel XSi? If yes, I'm surprised not to have a sharper image after a 4 to 1 pixel downsampling (if the camera is not the Rebel XSi, ignore my last sentence). a downsampling. --S23678 (talk) 14:27, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I've no Canon XSi.--14:58, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Sorry, (XTi?, I'm looking at your other pictures to find your camera). Anyway, my point was about sharpness from downsampling. --S23678 (talk) 16:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Have to agree with Gmaxwell. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 08:13, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 4 supports, 3 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 19:54, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Edit 1, not featured[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 19:47, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Crapload (talk) 03:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC) came after 5 days, not counted, as per rule of the 5th day - Benh (talk) 19:54, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured (rule of the 5th day). Benh (talk) 19:54, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Alternative 1, not featured[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mbz1 (talk) 04:26, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I guess nobody cares much about hot spring
result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 10:14, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Three saddhus at Kathmandu Durbar Square.jpg, featured[edit]

Three Saddhus sitting on the Vishnu Temple of Kathmandu's Durbar Square, Nepal, performing the vitarka mudrā.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Markus Koljonen (Dilaudid) - uploaded by Dilaudid - nominated by Econt (talk) 12:47, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Econt (talk) 12:47, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lerdsuwa (talk) 15:36, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! --Karelj (talk) 19:14, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very nice --AngMoKio (talk) 20:24, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Simonizer (talk) 20:59, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jontts (talk) 09:56, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't know exactly what they are practising but the three people seem to be much aware of the presence of the photographer and as a result, it looks very fake to me. Benh (talk) 22:18, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment In Kathmandu and the rest of Nepal, this is what saddhus do – they greet and bless people. –Dilaudid 09:46, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment These people are supposed to be detached from the world. I have seen them posing for more photographs then some other famous people. Muhammad 05:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment They might not be “true” saddhus who are supposed to abandon all their earthly fortune – notice the middle gentleman's watch... :) –Dilaudid 09:46, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting, for the reasons written above. Vassil (talk) 12:00, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Simba123 (talk) 14:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:14, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Either it's an awesome authentic picture of the saddhus performing a special mudra to the photographer to either, I don't know, bless him, welcome him, etc. Or it's a turist trap and these are actors or bad saddhus. But in either case, it's not clear for me. Unless someone can convince me it's authentic, or adapts the description to reflect the touristic aspect of the scene, I will oppose. For technical aspect, I think the picture is very good. --S23678 (talk) 17:01, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for your comment. I've now altered the description to better reflect the uncertainty as to the real backgrounds of the pictured gentlemen and the nature of their religious life, if any. –Dilaudid 21:13, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
      • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great. --S23678 (talk) 21:37, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Those exotic strangers do not wow me. Crapload (talk) 21:37, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Almost forgot :) Wowed me then and still does. –Dilaudid 19:33, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Thermos (talk) 22:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like the composition, the colors and the glasses on the right one. //moralist (talk) 19:35, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mathias hu (talk) 15:54, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wow --Sfu (talk) 20:12, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Richard Bartz (talk) 15:33, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks great. --Aktron (talk) 09:02, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:51, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 16 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 10:15, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Bitwa o Berlin rekonstrukcja.JPG, not featured[edit]

The historical reenactment of the Battle of Berlin (1945) at Modlin fortress.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Cezary p - nominated by Econt (talk) 12:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The historical reenactment of the Battle of Berlin (1945) at Modlin fortress.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Econt (talk) 12:55, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lerdsuwa (talk) 15:36, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose it's a good photo, but I can't support a photo of a historical reenactment of a heavily photographed war. I don't see the usefulness of this photo outside of the context of historical reenactment. – flamurai 18:15, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As flamurai. I do not like photos of killing and killed peoples. this statement was added by Karelj
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose doesn't convince me --AngMoKio (talk) 20:21, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The lack of smoke means this surely isn't war. Dhatfield (talk) 23:15, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Flamurai: this photo serves no real educational purpose, in my opinion. --Simba123 (talk) 14:24, 2 July 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:14, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose More smoke, more dirt! --S23678 (talk) 17:04, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support JukoFF (talk) 14:25, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Even thought it is not very trustworthy, I do like the composition and the good quality. //moralist (talk) 19:33, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose there is nothing special that can tell me this is the Battle of Berlin, it could be any other battle from WWII. Alvaro qc (talk) 22:45, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good photo, clearly labelled as reenactment. --Specious (talk) 18:14, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 10:17, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Cote Emeraude Fort La Latte.jpg, featured[edit]

Green Emerald Coast, from dungeon of fort la Latte castle.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Benh (talk) 20:24, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Sky is very bright because I was facing sun. I do not want to correct because I think this is how it should look like (if one faces sun, he won't see deep blue sky). Horizon shouldn't be curved, but I chose fish-eye like projection for artistic purpose. One could achieve the same with a fisheye lens. Hope you'll like it this way.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Benh (talk) 20:24, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks good Muhammad 05:22, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. An incredible picture. Really detailed and thoroughly informative.--Simba123 (talk) 14:21, 2 July 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:13, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well done. --S23678 (talk) 17:06, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 18:32, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support L'effet "contre-jour" est un peu osé, mais le résultat est magnifique. Netteté et qualité des détails sont excellents. Il faudrait envoyer cette image à Thalassa, le programme de FR3 qui à la rentrée commencera une série d'émissions sur les côtes françaises, illustrées notamment par des photos et des vidéos envoyées par les téléspectateurs. -- MJJR (talk) 20:21, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
    • c'est flatteur, mais non voulu. Malheureusement, je fais avec la lumière qu'il y a au moment où je suis sur place. En fait, j'aurais bien aimé que la lumière vienne un peu du côté. Le seul moyen aurait été de prendre la photo le matin. Une prochaine fois peut être ? j'ai des amis en Bretagne :) Benh (talk) 20:22, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, poor composition. --Aqwis (talk) 09:39, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
    • You were supposed to be on holidays !! ;) Benh (talk) 20:22, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
      • FPC addict visiting a cybercafé? :-) -- Korax1214 (talk) 00:30, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
        • ^^ --Aqwis (talk) 10:44, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Thermos (talk) 22:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Well done technically but I'm not liking the fisheye look. --Dori - Talk 04:27, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support-- MartinD (talk) 12:22, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Special picture, I like it very much! //moralist (talk) 19:31, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (weak). Wonderful, beatiful panorama, but the sky seems to be overexposed, which is just lame. It is unfortunate the focus of the picture - the castle has its facade shadowed. If anyone can convince me the sky is not overexposed, I will change my vote. Crapload (talk) 01:23, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • As I said to user:MJJR I'd have prefered a light litting the scene from aside, I believe it would have made the scene looks better. But I got there at the wrong time and got that contre-jour lighting as a result. The sky is blownout for sure, and it shows on the histogram, but I think the picture is faithfull to what I saw. So I'm not trying to convince you the sky isn't overexposed, but that this is how it should look like at that time of the day (4:00pm). Maybe I could have tried some multiple exposures shots for HDR purpose, but I couldn't use tripod because I had to "lean over the wall" (don't know how to say in english) to get the unobstructed view. Or maybe it's been taken the wrong way and to be fair, I'd certainly have raised the point if the picture hadn't been mine. Benh (talk) 08:10, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Zimbres (talk) 20:15, 7 July 2008 (UTC) I like it
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great quality even in all dark corners!--Mbz1 (talk) 04:45, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 10 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 10:18, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Baba in Nepal.jpg, featured[edit]

Old sadhu with white beard and coiled dreadlocks in Nepal.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Wen-Yan King - Reviewer by Ranveig - nominated by Econt (talk) 20:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Econt (talk) 20:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Simba123 (talk) 14:16, 2 July 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:12, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks like a real beard --S23678 (talk) 17:08, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 18:55, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great -- Gorgo (talk) 22:37, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The portrait is great, too bad about the background. Especially the yellow that is next to the face disturbs and unbalances the picture. A great pity, because the face is the face of a living person, not just yet another face. Haros (talk) 08:36, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --libertad0 ॐ (talk) 12:35, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Thermos (talk) 22:04, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The face is great, not the portrait. The background is very disturbing.--Frode Inge Helland (talk) 07:45, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting subject, but background is disturbing and it seems that the beard is overexposed and the hair on top is not in focus. Crapload (talk) 01:16, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour (talk) 08:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:49, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 8 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 10:19, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:BarnSwallow cajay.jpg, not featured[edit]

Barn Swallow

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Cajay - uploaded by Cajay - nominated by Cajay -- Cajay (talk) 02:15, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cajay (talk) 02:15, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it, but it would be even better if you denoised it a bit. --Dori - Talk 02:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose very noisy and few details left as result. Benh (talk) 18:02, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too noisy. —αἰτίας discussion 20:49, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noise. --Lerdsuwa (talk) 02:43, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose noisy. Alvaro qc (talk) 22:41, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose it would be fine, if sharp and if you mute other branches. Go closer next time.:-)--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 21:25, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. --Simonizer (talk) 10:22, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:2008-06-26 White German Shepherd Dog Posing 2.jpg, not featured[edit]

White German Shepherd Puppy White German Shepherd Dog Posing.jpg

Original, not featured[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Specious - uploaded by Specious - nominated by Specious -- Specious (talk) 02:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Specious (talk) 02:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Econt (talk) 10:30, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noise & composition: I'm not convinced by the horizontal shot, and the red flag is too distracting. (cropping it out might work?) –Dilaudid 15:38, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the composition. Good details, provided the image is 3888 × 2592 pixels. --S23678 (talk) 17:26, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 18:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. The flag in the left acts as a counterbalance to the building in the right. The image just needs a bit more sharpness and a rotation counterclockwise.--Ukuthenga (talk) 20:06, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distracting background, but even worse: Very very noisy and not sharp at full resolution. Not enough for a FP. —αἰτίας discussion 20:48, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distracting background. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:53, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quality is insufficient. Lycaon (talk) 16:32, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beatiful dog. Crapload (talk) 02:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 6 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. --Simonizer (talk) 10:25, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Edit 1, not featured[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely dog. -- Crapload (talk) 21:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As above: Noisy and not sharp at full resolution. —αἰτίας discussion 22:02, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very noisy. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:54, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not high enough quality to size ratio. –Dilaudid 08:44, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 3 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured (rule of the 5th day). Benh (talk) 20:11, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Lavandula multifida.jpg, featured[edit]

Lavandula multifida

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Laitche -- Laitche (talk) 04:05, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Laitche (talk) 04:05, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition. (Nice website too:-) Muhammad 05:41, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support High quality & good value. –Dilaudid 15:40, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Could be sharper at full resolution, but still a good picture. —αἰτίας discussion 20:42, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (weak). With loads of beautiful macros already featured, I do not think this one reaches the same level. Crapload (talk) 21:53, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 20:23, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Zimbres (talk) 20:11, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lycaon (talk) 17:55, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral its nice, but I dont understand its composition. Evne the background float with the object.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 21:19, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral => featured. --Simonizer (talk) 10:26, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Indígena da etnia Tapirapé.jpg

Image:Crodarossaampezzo4.JPG, not featured[edit]

The Croda Rossa d'Ampezzo in Veneto, Italy

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llorenzi - uploaded by Llorenzi - nominated by Llorenzi -- Llorenzi (talk) 21:00, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llorenzi (talk) 21:00, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The trees look really bad. Maybe the image is saved with too low JPEG quality. --Lerdsuwa (talk) 12:26, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Please add geolocation. --S23678 (talk) 12:28, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No geolocation, no detailed description, no date (have a look at point 2), and low quality when looking at the trees. --S23678 (talk) 18:01, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Due to insufficient technical quality. —αἰτίας discussion 18:09, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad technical quality. But go ahead man, one day, you can be a good photographer.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 20:59, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) --Simonizer (talk) 10:29, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Финляндский вокзал утром.jpg, not featured[edit]

Finlyandsky Rail Terminal Less sharped, fixed tilt

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by George Shuklin - uploaded by George Shuklin - nominated by Korax1214 -- Korax1214 (talk) 02:05, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment "Finlyandsky Rail Terminal, view from under Liteyniy bridge." I found this one when browsing geocoded images. I've also added it to the widescreen-wallpaper category.
  • Further Pictogram voting info.svg Info From map linked to geolocation, image was taken in St. Petersburg (across the River Neva), and in a direction of approx. NNE
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Korax1214 (talk) 02:05, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Tilted, slight over-sharpened with white halos quite evident when scaled to fit my display. --Lerdsuwa (talk) 12:12, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Sorry, where do you see tilt? Look at final of building - it's vertical. #!George Shuklin (talk) 15:01, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • The spike is tilted to the left, check with the side of your browser window. --S23678 (talk) 16:40, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice sunset, like all others No value to illustrate the Finlyandsky Rail Terminal, Neva river or St. Petersburg. --S23678 (talk) 12:40, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment From both the camera direction and the time of taking, it's a sunrise, not a sunset. -- Korax1214 (talk) 13:13, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice morning, nice colors, but not well positioned and the most important object is in very dark colors. --Aktron (talk) 20:35, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Buildings to dark, even the second one is better.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 20:48, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose but its about the sky and what tells us the central part? To many buildings. Hard to know what is the railway station and what not.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 20:50, 11 July 2008 (UTC) Sorry, only one vote per user allowed (although changing one's vote is permitted) -- Korax1214 (talk) 02:45, 12 July 2008 (UTC) - sorry, It was mentioned as a comment, probably I forgot to change a template, as I always copy them.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 09:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) --Simonizer (talk) 10:30, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Siemiradzki-Nimfa.jpg, not featured[edit]

Nymph

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Henryk Siemiradzki - uploaded by Ejdzej - nominated by Econt (talk) 02:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg InfoScanning this reproduction was made possible through the financial support of Wikimedia Polska.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Econt (talk) 02:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --58.8.23.110 12:21, 7 July 2008 (UTC) Please log on to vote. --S23678 (talk) 12:56, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Econ, can you enlight me on the notoriety of the 3 paintings you nominated (what makes these paintings stand out from all other paintings?). --S23678 (talk) 12:53, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
    • They are not small, were financed by a local chapter and I liked them.--Econt (talk) 21:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very low quality reproduction of some old painting. --Karelj (talk) 18:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Relevance: IMO, a work of art should have some notoriety for it's scan to be FP. It's a welcomed addition to commons, but not FP. --S23678 (talk) 23:53, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question could you provide more information to description? Anyway, I dont think so books are Public Domain. It will be copyrighted by the photographer.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 20:41, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) --Simonizer (talk) 10:31, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Modeltrain2.jpg, not featured[edit]

simple Model train by Märklin

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Wuzur -- Wuzur (talk) 16:23, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Is another perspective possible? This picture is at the good sharpness, lightning, resolution IMO, but it's very flat, neutral. A view of the rest of the carriage, while turning such as [12] and [13] (disregard the quality) with elements of a normal train model scenery (bridge, tunnel, village, vegetation, etc) would greatly improve the wow effect IMO. --S23678 (talk) 04:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg InfoI can make another shot, sure, but this is what I wanted to achive with this photograph. --Wuzur (talk) 06:52, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As per discussed above, a better perspective is needed IMO. --S23678 (talk) 17:36, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I see nothing extraordinary about this subject, so I don't want to support for Featured Picture. But this could be a Quality Image. Good lighting, good DOF, good background. Only thing is, there's some dust on the train. --Specious (talk) 15:46, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - nothing special to be FP.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 20:29, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 0 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) --Simonizer (talk) 10:33, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Girl at the River Near Momostenango.jpg, not featured[edit]

Girl at the River Near Momostenango

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by David Dennis - uploaded by Kelly - nominated by Econt (talk) 01:26, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Econt (talk) 01:26, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I do not like the crop, but I could not resist the reflection in her eyes.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:53, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Even thought it is a nice image, it isn't very good focus, and not a very special image. Also not very good crop. //moralist (talk) 19:24, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - the crop is strange. Cacophony (talk) 06:01, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Captivating, but unfortuately not very sharp. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 17:07, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I love the composition of what is not crop (as per Mbz1), but sadly, I can't find the value of such a crop face for FPC. In addition to Featured, Quality and Value images, we should have a fourth nomination process for images that are simply cute. I nominate this picture for the first vote. --S23678 (talk) 03:22, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Incredibly sweet picture (new category, anyone?), but as others have said, the crop just isn't right. -- Korax1214 (talk) 13:32, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lerdsuwa (talk) 14:05, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose DOF. –Dilaudid 12:58, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
 result: 3 supports, 6 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk)

Image:Inde bondo 8593a.jpg, featured[edit]

Inde Chatisgaht, jeune fille sur le chemin du marché.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Yves Picq - nominated by Econt (talk) 01:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Econt (talk) 01:37, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 01:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support JukoFF (talk) 14:24, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This picture could need some more information, and if possible location. Enjoyable, so, by the way, are also a few of the other pictures by the same photographer taken at the same place. Haros (talk) 17:07, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unfortunate crop. Would've liked to see the whole load on her head. Lycaon (talk) 15:00, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lighting is poor, causing her eyes to be in shadow. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 17:05, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I believe he is a boy.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:21, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • A young girl on the way to market, India.--Econt (talk) 17:30, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Thank you. It might be a good idea to add description in English.--Mbz1 (talk) 18:11, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The face being the focus of the picture, I take the basket on her head as an accessory, just as her clothes are, so I consider the crop to be appropriate. --S23678 (talk) 03:31, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Zimbres (talk) 20:07, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:48, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bright clothes --Base64 (talk) 11:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unfortunate crop--Beyond silence 19:36, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great capture. Tight crops are often used by the best photographers. Crapload (talk) 16:18, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 result: 8 supports, 4 opposes, 0 neutral => featured. Benh (talk) 20:04, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Reflections of Earth 9.jpg, edit featured[edit]

edited version

Original, not featured (link)[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, and nominated by me. -- bdesham  23:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think that the play of fireworks and water makes this photo pretty striking. -- bdesham  23:59, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 03:13, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I prefer it to have more denoising (only time when I'd suggest over-denoising as it makes the colorful fireworks stand out better). --Dori - Talk 20:40, 28 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Powershot has generated a lot of noise, sorry. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:22, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support if denoised --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 06:13, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition: the bottom and the middle third are nice, but the top third is filled with un-impressive trails of light. —Preceding unsigned comment added by S23678 (talk • contribs) 12:59, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice, but only if denoised.--sNappy 17:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 22:12, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Edit[edit]

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info denoised in Photoshop. Should I denoise even further? --bdesham  22:52, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment One or both versions could, with a slight crop, fit into one of the desktop wallpaper categories. As they stand, with an aspect of 0.6667 they're slightly too square for widescreen, not square enough for traditional. (See Template:Aspectratiotable.) -- Korax1214 (talk) 00:51, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support bdesham  00:55, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Bravissimo! Crapload (talk) 03:11, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dori - Talk 23:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 23:50, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:55, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Korax1214 (talk) 19:19, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MJJR (talk) 19:26, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful! --Specious (talk) 15:42, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice picture. —αἰτίας discussion 17:24, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- I support with pleasure despite the little loss of definition (especially the colours of the far buildings).--sNappy 18:17, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support it is OK now. Lycaon (talk) 15:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Muhammad 16:09, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As my above vote --Reflection of Perfection (talk) 17:35, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 result: 13 supports, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Benh (talk)

Image:Hooker Valley Pano MC.jpg, not featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTIONSHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by chmehl - nominated by Benh (talk) 21:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Mehlführer's pics remind me a little Lucag's superbe sceneries, with similar mood, and a better quality. I find this picture incredible because of the weather, but also because of that piece of cloud covering right part of the mountain. Hope you do think like me -- Benh (talk) 21:56, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Moved support -- Benh (talk) 06:31, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. An amazing image. --Simba123 (talk) 14:15, 2 July 2008 (UTC) Vote of blocked user struck. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 19:11, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Is it possible to correct the (too) dark area in the left sky? Autrement, très bonne image, je vais supporter si le ciel est corrigé. --S23678 (talk) 17:14, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Bien noté. I'll try to leave a message to the author. There's a lot of posterization on the sky as well. Benh (talk) 18:04, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I'll try to do something about it this evening. Luckily I have RAW files. Chmehl (talk) 06:25, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 18:47, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice, but not enough wow. Crapload (talk) 21:39, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice, enough wow. --Aqwis (talk) 09:38, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MJJR () 18:48, 3 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MartinD (talk) 12:23, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful! It's a pity that the JPG-compression results in a few "abriss" (this is german, is it "noise" in english?) in the sky. --Ukuthenga (talk) 19:20, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I prefer the edit. Lycaon (talk) 22:20, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose So do I --Simonizer (talk) 07:52, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. --Simonizer (talk) 10:21, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose what a shame to have there photographers shade!--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 21:39, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Edited version Image:Hooker Valley Pano MC edit1.jpg, featured[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In this edit I cloned out the tripod and saved the jpeg with maximum file size and minimum compression to reduce posterization effects. There is nothing I can do about the dark/uneven sky. This image has a rather large field of view (stitched of 5 images at 10mm taken with a 30D) which causes the uneven color of the sky. Chmehl (talk) 16:56, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support much better --Simonizer (talk) 10:00, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support much better -- Lycaon (talk) 13:19, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Now also the quality is perfect! Wow! And I like the little moon above the mountain. --Ukuthenga (talk) 19:30, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 21:24, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Benh (talk) 06:31, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:40, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 16:28, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kjetil_r 00:26, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment. This a beautiful scene, but a terrible photo at full resolution. Much better photos have been taken of the NZ Alps. 150.203.230.27 12:28, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • I have difficulty to understand your point about full resolution. This image is a downsampled version of the original images used in the panorama. It can hardly be more sharp and detailed. Even more, remember that large images don't need to be perfect at full resolution, since they can be modified (downsampled, cropped, etc) later on with a much higher quality than if it was a perfect-at-full-resolution 2mpx picture --S23678 (talk) 13:26, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 15:54, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wow. --Balû (talk) 10:32, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:USS Bunker Hill hit by two Kamikazes.jpg, featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by US Navy - uploaded by Quercusrobur - nominated by Ben Aveling 06:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ben Aveling 06:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow in abundance. --Calibas (talk) 14:08, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great image!--Mbz1 (talk) 15:36, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MichaelMaggs (talk) 17:06, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive... -- MJJR (talk) 21:22, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Although not perfect technically, very impressive. --S23678 (talk) 04:04, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very impressive.--Paloma Walker (talk) 04:08, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Thermos (talk) 09:17, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour (talk) 08:34, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support stunning. —αἰτίας discussion 18:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - historical and informative. Very good display of weapon power and a very good, spare of the moment shot of such a deadly event. --- Anonymous DissidentTalk 15:48, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, great image, quite useful across projects. Cirt (talk) 19:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, impressive image. deltarium
result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Simonizer (talk) 15:55, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Vilnius - Panorama 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Panorama of Vilnius

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Lestat -- Lestat (talk) 19:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lestat (talk) 19:02, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition. --Calibas (talk) 21:10, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It is a great picture. But why is it a "quality image"? Something has happened with sharpness! Edges are sharp but the rest seems to be a "painting" --Ukuthenga (talk) 19:08, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question As per Ukuthenga, there's an un-natural look to the picture. What kind of post processing was done here? --S23678 (talk) 12:22, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Zimbres (talk) 20:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A very nice picture, spoiled by the processing (or bad camera ?) and the curved horizon (unless it's on purpose). Really a pity :(Benh (talk) 20:37, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Benh. --S23678 (talk) 17:54, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beatiful example of panorama. Crapload (talk) 03:08, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor quality: all the trees are smudged. Lycaon (talk) 15:48, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose see Lycaon. --Balû (talk) 10:30, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 15:56, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Superior mirage of an island.jpg, not featured[edit]

Superior mirage

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created , uploaded and nominated by Mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 17:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment May I please ask you to imagine a man, who's desperately lost in the endless ocean. He is thirsty and hungry, almost delusional. Hi's constantly looking at horizon and tries to see a boat, that would bring him to safety. Suddenly he sees something, but what it is? It looks strange, almost as UFO. The glare from the sun playing with waves prevents him from seeing it clearly, but no, now he's certain it is a boat... Well, it is not. It is a very rare superior mirage of a distant island, which lies below the horizon. Please think about this: the island cannot be seen from the place I took the image from, but its mirage could. I would also like to point out that the shapes of the miraged island are changing constantly. Here's the image of the same miraged island taken few hours later at the same day: Image:Superior mirage of a distant island 2.jpg. May I please ask you before opposing the image for the quality to think about the quality of the image as about a mirage? --Mbz1 (talk) 17:59, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 17:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose strange, how linear the mirage is. What about to try to nominee it for valued picture?--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 10:08, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • That's right, it is better to have another FP of a sharp and beautiful landscape than one unique image of a rare superior mirage.I cannot try VI simply because I cannot say which superior mirage image is the most valued one.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:55, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • And you think it its a mirage? Anyway, are you angry?--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 21:08, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
May I please make myself absolutely clear? I do not think it is a mirage. I know it is a mirage. I also know that it is not just a common inferior mirage, but complex and rare superior mirage. No I am not angry. I used to opposes for my rare atmospherical optics phenomenon images. I am sorry, if I sounded as I am angry. As a matter of fact I'd like to thank you for the vote. At least somebody payed atention to the image.May I please ask why you doubt that it is a mirage? Have you seen objects that are hanging on above the ocean, if they are not planes, not birds and not clouds? What else it could be in your opinion?--Mbz1 (talk) 21:58, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg 

result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 21:57, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Femalewithduckling.JPG[edit]

Female mallard and duckling searching for food

Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because the image has serious DOF problems. Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Lycaon (talk) 18:10, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Ten-lined-June-Beetle.jpg, not featured[edit]

Ten-line June Beetle

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info creatuploadominated by Calibas (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ten-lined June Beetle (Polyphylla decemlineata) --Calibas (talk) 06:38, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, suboptimal lighting and part of animal cut off. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:57, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The head of the "animal" is present (who cares about rear end?) and I like the image!--Mbz1 (talk) 15:15, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It is a pity that the animal was not taken in its natural environment and with natural light. Under studio conditions one would expect perfect lighting, DOF, sharpness and crop. Lycaon (talk) 16:19, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Studio conditions? This was taken outside in the middle of the night. And what is it's natural environment? Animals have adapted to live around humans, concrete is it's natural environment now. --Calibas (talk) 18:05, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Adult P. decemlineata feed on coniferous leaves (not concrete AFAIK). Try there during daylight. Lycaon (talk) 18:30, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Please use standard support/oppose templates. These other symbols are confusing enumeration of votes and are not according to guidelines. Thanks. Lycaon (talk) 17:27, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
718smiley.svg No. These are tallied up by a human being who can easily tell it's a support. I'm not really one for following silly rules. Feel free to report me to the admins, they're who I learned about the 718smiley.svg Awesome!

template from. --Calibas (talk) 18:05, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

  • Yes I learned it from administrator too. BTW Hans is an administrator himself.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:08, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Please use the normal support templates. Its not a silly rule. It makes closing work easier. Did you ever close FPCs? No? Then you would know how much work that is. I need about 15-60 minutes (depends on the amount of pictures) for the closing process. So i appreciate using the normal support templates, because then it is easier and faster to count them. Thanks --Simonizer (talk) 14:34, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
May I add it's also a good practice to get used to, in case a bot is written some day. I've though about that already, and one of the challenges is taking votes into account in a proper way. I'm also about to ask FPC nomination to be categorized during nomination process as a first step, because obviously, it will be hard to make a bot categorizing FP properly. Benh (talk) 21:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Mainly because it's cut off. Benh (talk) 20:50, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Crop... sadly... only reason to oppose. --S23678 (talk) 23:46, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question what the picture is about?--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 21:09, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 supports, 4 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 21:03, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Chiesapratodrava.JPG, not featured[edit]

The church of Prato alla Drava in South Tyrol, Italy

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llorenzi - uploaded by Llorenzi - nominated by Llorenzi -- Llorenzi (talk) 21:04, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llorenzi (talk) 21:04, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the white balance is off and the steeple appears distorted. Cacophony (talk) 23:14, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Cacophony. --Lerdsuwa (talk) 12:26, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, the general quality is low (colour, noise, sharpness) --S23678 (talk) 12:32, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Size of image is not very good, but thema and composition are very nice. Wow factor +. --Karelj (talk) 17:25, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Due to insufficient technical quality. —αἰτίας discussion 18:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not sharp, to much sky, bad positioned, now wow effect. On the other side I see that author likes to play with images taking. Go ahead, next time it will be better.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 20:56, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 supports, 5 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 21:04, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Orange Spring Mound in Yellowstone National Park 2.jpg, not featured[edit]

I mistakenly removed the two nominations because I believed they were both withdrawn. I'm putting it on top again in the hope this will compensate my mistake. I also hope you'll accept to have its voting period extended by one day. My apologies to everyone. Benh (talk) 21:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
SHORT DESCRIPTIONSHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created,uploaded and nominated by Mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 03:59, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info It is a not an edit of the image which was withdrawn. It is a different image taken with different settings.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 03:59, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment If you have used f/10, much quality is lost. --Base64 (talk) 08:18, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • The user has agreed that his comment was irresponsible and false, yet he even did not care to cross it out.--Mbz1 (talk) 11:39, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LadyofHats (talk) 11:11, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Technically not perfect, but still a good picture. —αἰτίας discussion 20:27, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unproperly processed (lots of red artifacts can be seen on left part of picture), and seems oversaturated. You probably can fix this (and if not, I'd be happy to help if you can provide the original picture). Benh (talk) 20:50, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Muhammad 10:50, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question do you know, when you have taken this imagine. Year and month would be enought.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 20:14, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
  • The image was taken in June of 2008. The info is seen in EFIX data, but I updated the image description too. Thank you.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:22, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Both are fine --Kimse (talk) 05:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Over-processed (saturation is off the scale!). Lycaon (talk) 15:46, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • We've already talked about oversaturation last time. May I please remind you about this? "At first after reading the comment I wanted to make my image look dull (not "Oversaturated"), but then I decided what for? You would come with another reason to oppose, don't you, Hans. BTW about "Oversaturated", here are few samples from Flickr [14] (103 comments 99 faves};[15] ( 19 comments 27 faves} and a dull one (not "Oversaturated") [16] ( no comments no faves}. No, my image is not oversaturated at all. The image correctly represents the beautiful and briliant colors of the mound."--Mbz1 (talk) 17:03, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose agree with Benh. Even the composition is a little bit difficult.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 09:57, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Over what? --Sensl (talk) 20:07, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Original nomination was never withdrawn.--Mbz1 (talk) 23:05, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Its a nice picture, but i also find it oversaturated --Simonizer (talk) 21:02, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
  • The votes for the nomination have ended at 03:59 July 17.The nomination was removed for 30 minutes maybe less, which makes it to end of votes at 4:30 July 17, so I believe the last vote by Simonizer is against the rules, but on the other hand I hardly care about that nomination any more, so whatever.--Mbz1 (talk) 22:01, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
  • You are wrong, just look at the bottom of the page. Voting is open until day 9 which is Friday the 18. in this case --Simonizer (talk) 07:27, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg 
result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 14:30, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

edit 1, not featured[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 21:46, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Both are fine --Kimse (talk) 05:58, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment this one is better. What about those two guys, it is possible to remove them? Still thinking about the composition.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 09:57, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • It is possible, but I will not remove hardly visible people. So go ahead with your oppose.--Mbz1 (talk) 15:57, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Well, I dont think so, that two shoulders can stay behind my oppose. But firstly let me understand its compossition.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 21:11, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Hope you won't take it personaly again. I maintain this is oversaturated, or at least unproperly processed. Look at the people and their orange skin. I don't believe this is due to sunbathing. Benh (talk) 20:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Just another unfair speculation from the user. here's the original image Image:Orange spring mound original.jpg. look at their skin. they were American Indians.Oh and btw, please don't try to reprocess my original. I am not interested in getting any help from you.--Mbz1 (talk) 21:02, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Indians don't have orange/red skins as far as I know. The ones on this picture are not exception to this. And you should temper yourself down a bit sometimes. I'm just here to give my opinion, and that's what you must get ready for when you nominate a picture on FPC. I always try to justify any of my opposes, and am ready to discuss with any person willing the same. Benh (talk) 21:13, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
  • They are tan American Indians.I am ready for valid opposes. This oppose as few of your other opposes are way too picky as I am concern.BTW here's the prove how picky you are Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Pāhoehoe Lava flow.JPG You have not opposed that one (you found it too late in a game to oppose), but only look at your comment!--Mbz1 (talk) 21:37, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Well, I don't think "tan american Indians" have red orange flashy skin. Your nomination has been significantly saturated, as can know be proven by comparing it to original. Lycaon noticed it too, other people noticed too. Why not, sometimes, admitting when there's something wrong on one of your nomination, and try to fix it, or have it fixed ? My comment on lava flow nomination was justified I believe. Quality could be better, and composition wasn't to my taste. As you often like to refer, a bad picture of a very difficult subject is a better picture than a good picture of an ordinary subject, but there are limits to this. I would have opposed, but knew this wouldn't have changed anything. I won't justify to you again. Benh (talk) 06:53, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
  • You're mistaken. My lava image is a good picture of of a very difficult subject. It was supported by 24 people (me exluded) and opposed by none (blessing God you found it too late). It got 46th place in Picture of the Year voted by 120 people above any of your "good quality" images. That's why your so called "justifying" of the quality of the image only proves one more time what quality, fairness and validity your "justifying" and your voting are.You won't justify to me again? Thank you! It is going to be really hard, but I'll live with this.--Mbz1 (talk) 03:39, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg 

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support even better--Sensl (talk) 20:08, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
result: withdrawn => not featured. Simonizer (talk) 14:30, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Hrošč na rmanu.jpg[edit]

Unknown fly

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded & nominated by Miha (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Miha (talk) 09:49, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Can someone specify this fly? --Miha (talk) 09:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Looks like Brachycera - Orthorrhapha (Tabanidae) to me .. possibly female Philipomyia sp. Should be identifyied here --Richard Bartz (talk) 10:30, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because identification is lacking 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.

Please do identification attempts before you nominate. Thanks. Lycaon (talk) 17:45, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Harvestmen Close Macro.jpg[edit]

Harvestmen Macro

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Mehran Moghtadai - uploaded by Arad - nominated by Arad -- Arad (talk) 18:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arad (talk) 18:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bad composition/crop -- Gorgo (talk) 12:08, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because it is not identified, the crop is unfortunate and the DOF is insufficient. Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Lycaon (talk) 17:47, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:ArturGrottger.Rekonesans.ws.jpg, not featured[edit]

Reconnaissance

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Artur Grottger - uploaded by Ejdzej - nominated by Econt (talk) 02:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg InfoScanning this reproduction was made possible through the financial support of Wikimedia Polska.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Econt (talk) 02:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lerdsuwa (talk) 12:13, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very low quality reproduction of some old painting. --Karelj (talk) 17:28, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Relevance: IMO, a work of art should have some notoriety for it's scan to be FP. --S23678 (talk) 23:53, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question could you provide more information to description? Anyway, I dont think so books are Public Domain. It will be copyrighted by the photographer.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 20:41, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose low quality.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 15:32, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I propose to transfer painting scans and SVG images to either Quality Images or Valued Images. Discussion here --S23678 (talk) 16:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 supports, 3 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 20:26, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:W parku by Józef Szermentowski.jpg, not featured[edit]

W parku

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Józef Szermentowski - uploaded by Ejdzej - nominated by Econt (talk) 02:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg InfoScanning this reproduction was made possible through the financial support of Wikimedia Polska.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Econt (talk) 02:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Strange contrast. Is this color real? Do you use a calibrating device for scanner? #!George Shuklin (talk) 02:59, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lerdsuwa (talk) 12:13, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Low quality reproduction of some old painting. --Karelj (talk) 18:14, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Relevance: IMO, a work of art should have some notoriety for it's scan to be FP. --S23678 (talk) 23:53, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question could you provide more information to description? Anyway, I dont think so books are Public Domain. It will be copyrighted by the photographer.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 20:41, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I propose to transfer painting scans and SVG images to either Quality Images or Valued Images. Discussion here --S23678 (talk) 16:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 supports, 2 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 20:26, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Thomise 3.jpg, featured[edit]

Misumena vatia with Syrphidae

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Luc Viatour (talk) - uploaded by Luc Viatour (talk) - nominated by -- Luc Viatour (talk) 08:31, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Luc Viatour (talk) 08:31, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Noisy, probably due to heavy sharpening. --58.8.23.110 12:22, 7 July 2008 (UTC)Please log it to vote.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:13, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Noisy, probably due to heavy sharpening. --Lerdsuwa (talk) 08:16, 8 July 2008 (UTC) (my session expired last time)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great macro action shot!--Mbz1 (talk) 13:13, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A little noisy but everything else more than makes up for it. --Calibas (talk) 15:49, 7 July 2008 (UTC)Tl
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question why is a pic made with a D300 at ISO 200 so noisy? Is there an explanation for this? --AngMoKio (talk) 17:33, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Ok it has a heavy sharpening too. I cut a more normal value! It is better? --Luc Viatour (talk) 18:17, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Head of spider seems to be out of focus. --Karelj (talk) 18:19, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Here I do not understand, the sharpness is perfect for me! It is highly expanded more than the ratio 1:1!--Luc Viatour (talk) 21:08, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment She is going to inject the hoverfly with digestive enzymes. Those will dissolve most of the inside and then the spider is going to suck up the liquid parts and the only part which will be left will be an empty chitinous husk. Lycaon (talk) 17:50, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Definintley an interesting moment, but... busy composition, harsh light, and highlights seem to be overexposed. Crapload (talk) 03:22, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting moment + difficult to take + good quality picture. Guérin Nicolas (messages) 08:04, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- i do like it -LadyofHats (talk) 11:21, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- i do like it --Böhringer (talk) 10:47, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose flash, quality --Beyond silence 19:38, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
no flash view exif... --Luc Viatour (talk) 07:34, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose chaotic, bad background.--Juan de Vojníkov (talk) 20:31, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressionnant -- Benh (talk) 20:45, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Might have benefited from a bit more noise reduction, but still... (la vote qui manquait). Lycaon (talk) 21:21, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 10 supports, 5 opposes, 0 neutral => featured. Benh (talk) 20:28, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Stinkfliege Coenomyia ferruginea.jpg, featured[edit]

SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded & nominated by -- Richard Bartz (talk) 16:49, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Mating season. Awl-flies (Coenomyia ferruginea) mating on a branchlet. On top the female, below the male.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Richard Bartz (talk) 16:49, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Why insects having sex is so popular to macro-photographers. --S23678 (talk) 16:52, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Because they are less mobile in that stage of life and so easier to capture... Lycaon (talk) 16:58, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Thanks, I'll be less stupid going to bed tonight ; ) (It's an expression in French, in Québec. I don't know if it makes any sense in English) --S23678 (talk) 17:09, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • For the project it's more interesting when having both genders on one picture - here you can see this animal species from all sides - only flying would be better --Richard Bartz (talk) 17:14, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 9 supports, 0 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Benh (talk) 20:29, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Donde Estan.JPG, not featured[edit]

Popular demonstration commemorating the "disappeared" in Chile on September 11, 2004 in the Santiago de Chile cemetery, in front of the monument for the disappeared.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Uri R - uploaded by Uri R - nominated by Uri R -- Uri R (talk) 20:45, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Popular demonstration commemorating the "disappeared" in Chile on September 11, 2004 in the Santiago de Chile cemetery, in front of the monument for the disappeared.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uri R (talk) 20:45, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing standing out from this picture. A more dramatic scene would illustrate better the still open wounds from Pinochet's regime. --S23678 (talk) 17:13, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Don't get me wrong - I am not here to lobby - vote as you understand. However, I see a dramatic event in this picture: first, the sign, portraying an individual, is a strong contrast to the list on names of the disappeared on the monument in the background. This contrast gives a name and face to each laconic name on the stone, and at the same time puts the individual in its numeric context. the fact the monument is not shown in full only strengthen this effect. Second, the directions in the scene create a fictive-highly real dialog. The face on the sign, as the names on the monument, are facing the demonstrating audience. Thus, a silent dialog is created between the appears and the disappears, between the living and the dead, between the picture and the viewer. To me, the picture captured a dramatic moment, a silent one, which shoves the political into the viewer's face through a hint of violence, through the non-evident tension of the moment, through the different dialogs it documents. Again, this is what I see in it. Thanks, Uri R (talk) 22:41, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
      • Every picture speaks to the viewer. I admire the way you analysed the picture, you saw it at a very deep level, and it made me look at your picture with a different eye. I will however keep my vote as it is, and I will explain you why by doing a comparison with movies, paintings and books. Some movies have been analysed very deeply, such as this one, by making sometimes connexions to historical/religious figures or events, making the movie more deep than just a mix of sound and images. Same thing for paintings, where some people take huge amounts of time analyzing the meaning of every little details to make theories about the "real meaning" of the picture. Same thing for books (I think you understand the pattern). But the big thing about these analysis is that, in the end, they are personal. No mather how other are analyzing a movie in it's deepest, as a person, you either like or don't like the movie. The painter may have wanted to transmit an emotion to the viewer, but it's to the viewer to do his own analysis, and to draw it's own conclusions and emotions without having to read the detailed description from the author. You saw all the connexions you talked about, but I saw a normal shot framing a portrait, a monument and some randomly disposed people. After a careful look at your picture (from my first vote), I did not saw the emotions you saw because my interpretation was different. In no way I want to say that your opinion is wrong, it's just different than me. --S23678 (talk) 03:16, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
        • Many thanks for your comment. I agree that interpretation is subjective, and I am sorry I could not make you see it through my eyes, regardless to the vote. Thanks again, Uri R (talk) 00:18, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not enough contrasts, "milky" --Alipho (talk) 18:00, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 04:05, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not enough quality -- LadyofHats (talk) 11:15, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Washed out blacks. –Dilaudid 11:51, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No "wow", nothing special and the colors are no good. --Aktron (talk) 20:33, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
result: 2 supports, 5 opposes, 0 neutral => not featured. Benh (talk) 20:30, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Koh Samui Lipa Noi2.jpg, delisted[edit]

Koh Samui

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Low technical qualities: very low resolution (1024x768px), noise, vignetting. May be more suited for Valued Image. Was proposed for delisting in 2006, where 4 votes supported the following idea "Delistings should be restricted to severe errors of judgement", compared to the actual delisting guideline that all FP should meet the current FPC standard. I don't think it would survive long in the FPC process right now without a FPX tag --S23678 (talk) 14:39, 7 July 2008 (UTC)(Original nomination), (Removal nomination in October 2006)