Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/May 2021

File:Boat with autumny mountains at Digermulen, Hinnøya, Norway, Norway, 2015 September.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2021 at 19:56:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Norway#Northern Norway (Nord-Norge/Nord-Noreg)
Info IMO a harmonious and satisfying composition with interesting light, crisp reflections, and the boat to provide a nice counterpoint. created by Ximonic - uploaded by Ximonic - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 19:56, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 19:56, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice composition, reflections, mood — Rhododendrites ^talk | 20:25, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It does look nice, but as the camera is capable of a higher resolution and this is a nature landscape, I'd like a bigger version before supporting it.--Peulle (talk) 21:27, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 00:16, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice image ~~but the white balance is wrong IMO. The temperature shouldn't be so warm at 3:22 pm in September in Norway~~ -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:04, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support the new version -- Basile Morin (talk) 19:54, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support, but I'm agree with Basile. --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:03, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice, but something may be wrong with the colors. It looks a little bit like golden hour, may be WB is too warm. --XRay 💬 08:42, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sunset time at this place on the 21st Sept 2015 was 7:08 pm, then it's too early for golden glow -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:06, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Golden glow has to do with how high the sun is on the horizon, not when it rises and sets, and this far north the sun is low all day long in the autumn. --Cart (talk) 10:23, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Compare here at 5:45 pm, more than 2 hours later. Regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:37, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and the light is very golden to the right where the sun is shining on the hills, the rest of the photo, in shadows, is blue as shadows usually are. --Cart (talk) 10:47, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yellowish sky here, not blue. Yellowish rocks, too -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:56, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating the old photo. I changed the white balance a bit. A polarizing filter was used in taking the photograph which reduced some atmospheric haze but may also have altered the colors, like filters usually do. Matter of taste, matter of decisions. --Ximonic (talk) 18:35, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done Not a bit, quite enough :-) Fixed now, thank you. And thanks also for the new resolution with more pixels -- Basile Morin (talk) 19:54, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This is up at Lofoten where the sun is low on the horizon in September so it can give a golden glow all day, especially if it's a bit cloudy. --Cart (talk) 09:42, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 09:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:39, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:47, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:20, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:49, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks better after adjustment. Buidhe (talk) 04:59, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Buidhe --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:10, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 08:58, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:54, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 12:11, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:37, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 09:46, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The colors look quite pale - is this realistic at this time in Norway? --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:30, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:41, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support it hurts that the boat is modern --Wilfredor (talk) 01:27, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 22:05, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Perhaps we should have an "Autumn in the Arctic" category for this (I know, I know, it may not yet have been autumn; I can't remember when the September equinox was that year; it's as likely to fall on the 20th or 22nd as the 21st. But given the color on the trees already, it may not matter so much above 66º33'). Daniel Case (talk) 14:31, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:56, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Norway#Northern Norway (Nord-Norge/Nord-Noreg)

File:Latarnia morska w Kolobrzegu.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2021 at 15:30:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#Poland
Info created by Jar.ciurus - uploaded by Jar.ciurus - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 15:30, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 15:30, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 18:14, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 19:18, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Basotxerri (talk) 20:35, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:57, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:17, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Nice light but I'm not sure about the distortions at the top of the tower. Cmao20 (talk) 16:36, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:28, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:25, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:40, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:47, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 07:37, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:58, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Towers#Poland

File:SL Kandy asv2020-01 img39 Sacred Tooth Temple.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2021 at 18:33:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Sri Lanka
Info Main entrance portal of Sri Dalada Maligawa (Temple of the Tooth) in Kandy ---- all by A.Savin --A.Savin 18:33, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 18:33, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fascinating place and good quality photo Cmao20 (talk) 20:05, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not with the blurry people. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:29, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support it's very difficult that there is no one when a photo is taked Ezarateesteban 20:34, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 21:11, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Charlesjsharp --Co mmon ists 22:04, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. In this discussion, it has been decided to strike out all his votes. --Aristeas (talk) 13:59, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 08:25, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry per Charles --Michielverbeek (talk) 05:33, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 09:03, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Charles.Ermell (talk) 21:03, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mosbatho (talk) 21:35, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose compo, symmetry.--Mile (talk) 05:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above --Andrei (talk) 17:51, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The motion blur isn't too bad, and it's not really noticeable. I don't think this image could have been possible at any lesser exposure. Daniel Case (talk) 15:24, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:57, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vista Geral do Museu de Arte Contemporânea de Niterói... MAC.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2021 at 04:30:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Brazil
Info created and uploaded by Maria Fátima Leite - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 04:30, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 04:30, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very interesting. Modern and nature, a little bit Science fiction. --XRay 💬 05:46, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support from 3%? ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:38, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 09:51, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 22:08, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support A landing UFO? --Llez (talk) 15:22, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not perfect but the composition is so amazing that it makes up for minor quality flaws Cmao20 (talk) 16:45, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
🛸 -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:45, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Info @XRay, Llez, Cmao20, and Basile Morin: by the way, the museum was designed by one of the world's greatest architects. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 23:58, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

104 years: long life! -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:04, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 06:40, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 09:55, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:36, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Gnosis (talk) 19:25, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Muito linda,ótima composiçao --Wilfredor (talk) 01:03, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:32, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:27, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:43, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per llez — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:37, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 18:24, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 22:02, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support It looks like Ten-Forward is checking out Rio ... Daniel Case (talk) 00:05, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:34, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Brazil

File:Dülmen, Kreuzkapelle, Bänke -- 2021 -- 7365.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2021 at 08:32:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Others
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 08:32, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 08:32, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:08, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 13:42, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:50, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely motif. Cmao20 (talk) 16:46, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good details --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:46, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent quality, nice pattern -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:40, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 06:39, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:57, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Michielverbeek.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:28, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:31, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:09, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:32, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:22, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting detail. Is there no categorie for that kind of wood?--Ermell (talk) 18:21, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't found a category for fronts of church benches. But sometimes I don't find the right term. --XRay 💬 19:15, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've added "Furniture ornaments" as category. --XRay 💬 08:45, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:16, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Others

File:Seruling Gambuh Bali.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2021 at 09:19:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Musicians_and_singers_performing
Info created by RaiyaniM - uploaded by RaiyaniM - nominated by Danu Widjajanto -- Danu Widjajanto (talk) 09:19, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Danu Widjajanto (talk) 09:19, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:19, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Both a nice portrait and a good photo about music; it shows the musician’s inner concentration through the only slightly open eyes. --Aristeas (talk) 10:02, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. As a musician, that illustration of concentration didn't strike me until I read that remark. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:08, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support would like some additional information/context about this person/event, but support either way. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:21, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:09, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:22, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support RaiyaniM (talk) 21:29, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support It could be a pipe of opium, but it's different 🎵 :-) Acceptable quality at lower resolution (3000 px large) -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:49, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 22:01, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Quality is OK, motif is superb Cmao20 (talk) 06:55, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:17, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People#Musicians_and_singers_performing

File:Église de Notre-Dame de Douch - 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 May 2021 at 18:58:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#France
Info created - uploaded - nominated by me. -- Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:58, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:58, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 20:00, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good light, nice contrast between the warm colours in the golden sun and the cold colours in the shadow. --Aristeas (talk) 10:04, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
SupportErmell (talk) 20:56, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I do not see here anything so special fol FP nomination, disturbing information table in centre, no wow. -- Karelj (talk) 20:17, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I like the warm light but find the trees on the left and the one that's in front of part of the church problematic and believe they prevent this from being a really satisfying composition, so I consider this to be only a very good QI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:23, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan --Andrei (talk) 17:50, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 18:32, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas --Christof46 (talk) 19:38, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
on the edge of Neutral and weak oppose per ikan — Rhododendrites ^talk | 20:29, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:47, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good composition and light. Cmao20 (talk) 13:29, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Compositionally, it is a little busy but the overall mood works—so well that I at first thought this to have been taken at sunset in the late fall rather than sunrise in the early spring (it's that rare combination of crepuscular times of the day and year that can create that confusion). Looking at it I feel a heavy outer coat on myself zipped up tight to the neck, and see the clouds of my exhalations. Good work. Daniel Case (talk) 18:47, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Daniel Case: , thanks, while going by car towards the start of a hike, I stopped to take this photo, getting out of my car dressed to walk and not to stand still I was indeed cold and I confirm that I could see my exhalations...I warmed up when I got back in the car. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:00, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:23, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:28, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I am pleased by this image and it's hard to describe why. So I just support. --Ximonic (talk) 12:20, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:09, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#France

File:Flicker hole in CP (31848).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2021 at 22:36:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Picidae (Woodpeckers)
Info A male northern flicker, yellow-shafted variety (Colaptes auratus auratus) peeking out from its nest in Central Park. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:36, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:36, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support So many birds, you find! But you know where they're hidden, don't you? :-) Basile Morin (talk) 23:34, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Sometimes. But not enough! Never enough! :) I spent hours this weekend searching for a Prothonotary warbler, but never found one. But then if they were all easy to find, it probably wouldn't be as fun. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:30, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fun to find them on FPC in any case :-) I wish you success in your quest --Basile Morin (talk) 15:19, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:24, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:09, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 06:37, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 08:19, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:42, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:03, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 10:05, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 18:07, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:38, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:26, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:56, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 22:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:31, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:10, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hi, flicker, how are you? --Schnobby (talk) 07:55, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- hey — Rhododendrites ^talk | 11:55, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:33, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:29, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:23, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 05:54, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Unusual and excellent quality Cmao20 (talk) 06:56, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 11:51, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:10, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family%20:%20Picidae%20(Woodpeckers)

File:Kinney Lake and Mount Whitehorn.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 May 2021 at 06:29:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#British Columbia
Info: Kinney Lake and Mount Whitehorn, Mount Robson Provincial Park; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 06:29, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 06:29, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. Perhaps the crops could have been more generous on the top and bottom (depending on where the margin of the lake was), but deserves the star, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 10:03, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like it. May there are some points to improve the image like to see the full mountain as reflection in the lake, but IMO it's OK. --XRay 💬 12:57, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:11, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:25, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This same scene was already featured in a photo taken 9 years earlier, although that was in high summer without the snow and ice. Buidhe (talk) 16:46, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support although I would like more of the reflection. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:26, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thanks for posting the link. I think this is a significantly different composition, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:05, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:55, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 22:32, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 01:01, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support very nice. it reminds me of the feeling I got when visiting the Maroon Bells in Colorado -- the amazing spectacle of the scene. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:24, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nicely composed, well controlled colors. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:16, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:30, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:11, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:33, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:31, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:24, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 05:53, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Beautiful! MartinD (talk) 09:28, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 06:56, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 13:45, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:27, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:54, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:09, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Canada#British Columbia

File:WLM - 2020 - Хотинська фортеця - 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 May 2021 at 05:41:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Ukraine
Info created & uploaded by Moahim - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 05:41, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 05:41, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very nice, but too horizontal a composition for me. I'd need more vertical deviation or a circular motion for this composition to be great to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:21, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose seems to be too dark, so most of the fortess is lost --Andrei (talk) 17:50, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sad there has been little support for this, to my mind it is a strong candidate. Beautiful motif, good quality, crisp reflections and nice light. Cmao20 (talk) 13:31, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice summer-evening mood. Daniel Case (talk) 04:09, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice atmosphere, good colours and light, good sharpness (we can even study the interesting ornament on the walls of the castle). --Aristeas (talk) 09:06, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 16:22, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too many parts in the shadow. Thus, the green sections are a bit boring, and they are in addition duplicated with the reflection -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:39, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:08, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hamamelis x intermedia 'Angelly'. 18-04-2021. (d.j.b).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 May 2021 at 15:19:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Hamamelidaceae
Info New leaves emerging after the flowering of a Hamamelis x intermedia 'Angelly' (witch hazel) In the early morning. Focus stack of 12 photos.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:19, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:19, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Could have been shot in a little more light, perhaps, but overall, quite impressive and informative. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:07, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support good light conditions. --Ivar (talk) 17:22, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:35, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:28, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:30, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:49, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:12, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:24, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 05:52, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good light and colours, beautiful soft background. --Aristeas (talk) 08:09, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:13, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 06:56, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:24, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:25, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Hamamelidaceae

File:Manhattan at night north of Rockefeller Center (11226).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 May 2021 at 22:22:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Settlements#United_States
Info A hazy night in Manhattan as seen from the 70th floor of Rockefeller Center, facing east. The moon is flanked by ~~skyline ruiner~~ 432 Park Ave on the left, at the time the tallest residential building in the world, and Citigroup Center on the right. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:22, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:22, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really excellent photo (And I hate that building, too. Screws up my view of the Chrysler Building from many places on the Lower East Side.) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:28, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 22:29, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --StellarHalo (talk) 07:06, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:16, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:53, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 09:44, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Was there a few days ago. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 14:34, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:25, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:06, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:55, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Buidhe (talk) 02:29, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 05:52, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:27, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:48, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very impressive. --Aristeas (talk) 08:10, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 14:01, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:48, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:53, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 06:57, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:27, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:30, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:22, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Settlements#United_States

File:Kirchschönbach Kirche Taufstein-20210321-RM-170747.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2021 at 08:25:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Others
Info created & uploaded by User:Ermell - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:25, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great resolution and a symmetrical background. I find this a very restful composition and pretty darn close to perfect. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:25, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think the PoV is too low. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:32, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The number of pixels in the image isn't a guarantee of resolution. The long exposure (0.4s) will have required tripod but something went wrong. Shutter shake? Was a remote-control used or did the camera move after pressing the shutter button? Compare File:Kirchschönbach Kirche Taufstein-20210321-RM-170941.jpg, which is very much sharper. This is 72 blurred megapixels vs 62 sharp ones, though the other image has weaker composition. I also wonder about the subject. It says 1604 but it looks about as old as something I'd find for sale in my local garden centre. Is this a reproduction, and the original is elsewhere, or lost? -- Colin (talk) 09:54, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Much less interesting composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:19, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question Yes, not old. Is AB the same as AD? Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:49, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Probably indicating the Lectionary. 1604 was a "B" year. --Cart (talk) 11:21, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

clap, clap, clap! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:04, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I could be wrong, of course, but it's my guess. --Cart (talk) 15:26, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
sounds unlikely - why would it be AB? 'AB 1604' could be German for 'from 1604', but you can see plaster peeling off the base. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:30, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another good guess. Where are the church historians when you need them? :-) --Cart (talk) 17:00, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose sorry, looks like shutter shock or camera shake spoiled it, and there was room for higher ISO. --Ivar (talk) 17:17, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination. No point in spending more time on this. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:19, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kapelle auf dem Michaelsberg - Untergrombach 09 - Deckengemälde Michael.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 May 2021 at 07:22:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Germany
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 07:22, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 07:22, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:29, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 09:16, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 19:09, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:37, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:27, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:01, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Please, use {{Artwork}} --Wilfredor (talk) 00:53, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Awesome Buidhe (talk) 02:17, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:00, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:26, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent. It may look simple but often it is quite difficult to get a clean, completely symmetric photo of such a ceiling painting. --Aristeas (talk) 08:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Book cover. --Mile (talk) 09:03, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:59, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stunning artwork Cmao20 (talk) 06:59, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 13:48, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:27, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Germany

File:Wittenburg 1922 299 Pfennig.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 May 2021 at 07:08:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Money & Seals
Info created & uploaded by User:Palauenc05 - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:08, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think this is a particularly beautiful and entertaining example of Notgeld. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:08, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:34, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:26, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for nominating. --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:15, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're most welcome! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:33, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Looking forward to discovering the $ 299.78 bill 💵 :-) Educative -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:36, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:59, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:27, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination. --Aristeas (talk) 08:10, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 06:59, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:10, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:26, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Money & Seals

File:Zeche-Hasenwinkel-Maschinenhaus-2021.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 May 2021 at 06:40:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Engine house of former coal mine Zeche Hasenwinkel in Bochum

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info all by Tuxyso This photo shows the engine house of former coal mine Zeche Hasenwinkel in Bochum (Germany). -- Tuxyso (talk) 06:40, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support I could photograph from a small embankment very close to the building for a more interesting (higher above ground) shooting position. There was imho also favorable light. I look forward to your comments-- Tuxyso (talk) 06:40, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice image, but the building looks strange, leaning. Composition not so good.--Mile (talk) 07:41, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Thanks for your review. Could you please specify what is leaning, Mile. I used the internal leveler of my camera and very slight fine corrections in post. I've checked again: Every vertical is perfectly straight. Probably the slight higher shooting positions (above ground on an embankment) misleads you with your judgement? --Tuxyso (talk) 07:54, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Done. PD corection made top much biger in size than botom. --Mile (talk) 08:06, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Mile, the part you've marked is perfectly straight (please check that with a higher resolution, see here) As mentioned: my post-editing was VERY moderate, for illustration purposes I've uploaded the out-of-camera original (without further editing). --Tuxyso (talk) 08:32, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I removed my vote. --Mile (talk) 08:47, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 17:12, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm not sure whether this building is interesting enough for an FP, but the shapes of the foliage distract my eyes and cause this not to be a great composition, in my opinion, and the shadows don't help in this case, either. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:17, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- What do you mean by shape of the foiliage, Ikan Kekek? The shadows of the branches on the Building? —Tuxyso (talk) 22:06, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The trees themselves (literally, their leaves, but also the branches). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:35, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Ikan --iMahesh (talk) 15:16, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per ikan --Andrei (talk) 17:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. --Basotxerri (talk) 20:41, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice building but I agree with Ikan, the shadows falling on the building tend to make the composition a bit overly complex and unsatisfying. Cmao20 (talk) 16:38, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support To be honest, I like it, especially with the complex pattern the shadows draw on the building. But I agree that this really is a matter of taste. --Aristeas (talk) 09:18, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's not just the trees that distract, per Ikan, it's the shadows of the trees on the building, otherwise framed at a very nice three-quarters angle. Daniel Case (talk) 14:59, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with above. Other than that it's still very nice documentary image of this building to have in Commons, and good quality. --Ximonic (talk) 12:17, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I somehow like the scenery. --Mosbatho (talk) 09:47, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:25, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Angelina Pagano HD.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 May 2021 at 22:16:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/People
Info created/uploaded by Dei 777 - nominated by Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 22:16, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ezarateesteban 22:16, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Needs better copyright info: who drew the image? Is it the same as the uploader? Needs to be more clear in the image description. Buidhe (talk) 02:15, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is a drawing made and digitalized by the uploader himself, it is part of a contest. Description uploaded. Thanks!! --Ezarateesteban 12:31, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Interesting drawing but I'm not sure it stands out enough from other sketches of this kind to be FP, and I'm not sure the quality of digitisation is FP level (e.g. green colour cast in the darker areas). Cmao20 (talk) 07:05, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 22:48, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:13, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Piece of chocolate cake on a white plate decorated with chocolate sauce.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 May 2021 at 11:34:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Sweet food
Info created by Daria Yakovleva - found by Basile Morin and uploaded by his Subsidiary account - nominated by W.carter -- Cart (talk) 11:34, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Appetizing, a bit artistic, clean, sharp, nothing cut, sufficient DoF. -- Cart (talk) 11:34, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
🍰 Appetizing! Thanks, Cart, for the nomination -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 12:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support great. Tomer T (talk) 14:23, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 16:00, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 16:32, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 18:32, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:35, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment rotating it a few degress makes it easier on the eye. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:46, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. --Cart (talk) 19:01, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:32, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support I'm hungry --Co mmon ists 19:39, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 19:51, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:03, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Outstanding! Great nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:50, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you started it. :-) --Cart (talk) 20:54, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ivar (talk) 05:12, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:21, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 05:34, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:55, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:59, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really good. Cmao20 (talk) 07:01, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Like! :-) --XRay 💬 08:43, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Shows what a good photo can do: normally that kind of cake is not to my taste (sorry, don’t know why), but this photo makes me want to order a piece ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 09:19, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:42, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 15:37, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:24, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 11:48, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I almost went to get out a fork and knife ... Daniel Case (talk) 03:16, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:13, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food and drink#Sweet food

File:Krakow-Collegium Novum.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2021 at 15:49:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Interiors#Poland
Info created by Jar.ciurus - uploaded by Jar.ciurus - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 15:49, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 15:49, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing interesting for me, sorry --Co mmon ists 18:12, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 19:15, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support dramatic shadows/lighting — Rhododendrites ^talk | 18:26, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting combination of light and darkness --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:46, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Rhododendrites and Michielverbeek --GRDN711 (talk) 04:34, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support I like the light and shadows, the structures. Sharpness could be a little bit better and the lights are a little bit too bright. --XRay 💬 05:48, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:57, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:03, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support might also work in b&w --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:34, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 12:20, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Martin. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 13:42, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:56, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:18, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Outstanding atmosphere . Cmao20 (talk) 16:36, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Rhododendrites, Michiel, Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 09:53, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:29, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:41, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:51, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I dissent on this one. It's hard to say why, exactly, but it doesn't wow me. Nothing is spectacular to me about it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:21, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 21:12, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors#Poland

File:Lemon - whole and split.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2021 at 13:04:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food_and_drink#Fruits_(raw)
Info all by Ivar (talk) 13:04, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 13:04, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:09, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support --iMahesh (talk) 15:11, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Andrei (talk) 16:31, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very detailed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:34, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 18:11, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 19:19, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 18:27, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 20:40, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:59, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Exhibits good technique in focus stacking but IMO does not have enough wow for FP --GRDN711 (talk) 02:59, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:58, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:03, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support :-) --XRay 💬 08:29, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:45, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:16, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 16:32, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support high EV Buidhe (talk) 02:49, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:44, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:51, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:40, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:27, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:39, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per GRDN711. -- Karelj (talk) 16:27, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:17, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 21:11, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food_and_drink#Fruits_(raw)

File:SantaCruz-CuevaManos-P2210651b.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2021 at 23:50:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Handprints at Cueva de las manos dating back to 13,000 to 9,000 BC

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Other places by country or region
Info created by Mariano - uploaded by Mariano - nominated by Tyrone Madera -- Tyrone Madera (talk) 23:50, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Info This is a photograph of Cueva de las manos in Argentina. These hand stencils were created around 13,000 to 9,000 BC, and are the earliest and the best material evidence of early hunter-gatherers in South America.
Support -- Tyrone Madera (talk) 23:50, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: It is smaller than the absolute minimum of 2 megapixels which is required for consideration here. Consider a nomination at COM:VIC if this is the best photo in its scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:18, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:1665 Girl with a Pearl Earring.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2021 at 03:51:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/People#Paintings
Info The famous Girl with a Pearl Earring by Dutch Golden Age painter Johannes Vermeer. created by Johannes Vermeer - uploaded by Agatyr - nominated by StellarHalo -- StellarHalo (talk) 03:51, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- StellarHalo (talk) 03:51, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support high EV as a great quality photograph of a notable painting Buidhe (talk) 04:11, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Crazy-high resolution! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:28, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:57, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:00, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Iconic and beautiful Cmao20 (talk) 07:02, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:55, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:45, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:43, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 12:04, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Andrei (talk) 17:32, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 07:30, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:27, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:26, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/People#Paintings

File:Dülmen, Kreuzkapelle, Treppe zur Empore -- 2021 -- 7409.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2021 at 08:39:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Germany
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 08:39, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 08:39, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm just fascinated by looking at this. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:52, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for this one, very abstract and different. --Wilfredor (talk) 19:52, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:42, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:33, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:20, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very creative Cmao20 (talk) 12:10, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 13:46, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support per Wilfredor. Daniel Case (talk) 15:08, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:11, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 12:30, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Fences and railings

File:Gazania rigens cultivar in Conques.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2021 at 05:55:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asterales#Subfamily_:_Cichorioideae
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 05:55, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 05:55, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice. I think the one crossing green leave is a nice eye-catcher. -- -donald- (talk) 06:10, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:35, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 08:40, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 09:52, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 18:20, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:52, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Striking. Cmao20 (talk) 16:45, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Selective denoising could be applied to the background -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:42, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 07:57, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:43, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:56, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Nice flower but for me the background is too noisy.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:34, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support wonderful colors, but no reason not to do a denoise — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:20, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:32, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:06, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:44, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 16:29, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 18:22, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No response to request to denoise. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:36, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral pending denoise. Daniel Case (talk) 04:09, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 12:25, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Asterales#Subfamily_:_Cichorioideae

File:Lac des Mines d'Or 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2021 at 05:58:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Haute-Savoie
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 05:58, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 05:58, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:32, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:47, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:29, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:08, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:21, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:21, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 05:56, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:13, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hanooz 19:17, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 12:26, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/France#Haute-Savoie

File:Mapa do Tocantins.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2021 at 04:17:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Brazil
Info created by and uploaded by Antonio Azevedo Filho - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 04:17, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 04:17, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Nice composition but a bit low quality (sharpness etc.), would not be unhappy to see it get promoted though. Cmao20 (talk) 16:43, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Neither the foreground nor the background is all that sharp. Buidhe (talk) 00:36, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice. -- Karelj (talk) 16:33, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Buidhe. --Fischer.H (talk) 17:34, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Busy composition. Perhaps it would have been better if had just been the opening and the people. Daniel Case (talk) 23:42, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:27, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:PK Manora near Karachi asv2020-02 img3.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2021 at 00:09:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Others
Info Abandoned St. Paul's Church, Manora / near Karachi, Pakistan. Kind of (unintended) street photography? ---- All by A.Savin 00:09, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 00:09, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not a wow for me. --Gnosis (talk) 06:21, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Gnosis --Co mmon ists 09:51, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. In this discussion, it has been decided to strike out all his votes. --Aristeas (talk) 13:55, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Complex but rewarding composition - the family walking in the foreground, the church with its ruined slates in the background, and the washing line to add a splash of contrasting colour. Composition is thoughtfully done with lots of elements corresponding to the rule of thirds. Quality good as ever. Overall a really nice photo. Cmao20 (talk) 16:42, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looking at the photo for some time in full size it grows for me; Cmao20 has put it very well. --Aristeas (talk) 10:06, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Cmao20. Not only an excellent portrayal of an abandoned building that is a cultural heritage monument in Pakistan but includes wonderful details of human life going on around it, down to the sandals on the boys' feet. Krok6kola (talk) 19:57, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:42, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Gnosis. -- Karelj (talk) 16:31, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It would have been fortuitous if there had been a larger cloud on the upper right, but Support per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:46, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Busy composition and flat light. Daniel Case (talk) 14:32, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:28, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Peresean Traditional Sport of Sasak Tribe.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2021 at 09:20:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
Info created by RaiyaniM - uploaded by RaiyaniM - nominated by Danu Widjajanto -- Danu Widjajanto (talk) 09:20, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Danu Widjajanto (talk) 09:20, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Spectular photo, but technical quality too low for FP. It's too grainy for me. --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:44, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow James2813 (talk) 20:55, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is one of the coolest pictures that I've seen on the Commons in a while. It captures the heat of the moment, the tenseness of the fighters, and the enthusiasm of the audience in a really nice way. Honestly, the graininess doesn't bother me enough to oppose this. — Angry Red Hammer Guy <💬> 15:37, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support RaiyaniM (talk) 21:28, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Quality could be better and the top crop is unfortunate but still a very impressive scene; IMHO one of the most interesting photos submitted for Wiki Loves Folklore 2021. --Aristeas (talk) 08:08, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 18:12, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 22:00, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 06:56, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment No vote right now, just a statement that it would be great if there were some brief explanation of what the object and action of this sport are. It could be in Indonesian and I could work on translating it, but something that would help explain what we are seeing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:08, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Michiel. Daniel Case (talk) 17:08, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 12:28, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People#Events

File:Petite Venise depuis le pont de la rue des Écoles (Colmar) (8).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2021 at 08:02:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#France
Info created by Gzen92 - uploaded by Gzen92 - nominated by Gzen92 -- Gzen92 ^[discuter] 08:02, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Gzen92 ^[discuter] 08:02, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I feel like it could be sharper, but I like the form as a whole, all the elements of it, and the atmosphere. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:27, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A normal scene for me,sorry --Co mmon ists 10:05, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 19:49, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:32, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Commonists. -- Karelj (talk) 16:36, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:14, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 06:55, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:27, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:05, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:52, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 12:27, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#France

File:Hazelnuts (Corylus avellana) - whole with kernels.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2021 at 20:11:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food_and_drink#Fruits_(raw)
Info created by Ivar Leidus - uploaded by Iifar - nominated by Fabro -- Fabro (talk) 20:11, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Fabro (talk) 20:11, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:56, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:15, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 07:04, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Buidhe (talk) 09:38, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--NANöR (talk) 10:24, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 11:26, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 12:00, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:25, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hanooz 18:54, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:16, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 12:44, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support imo this came out quite good. --Ivar (talk) 17:40, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:01, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:43, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 16:04, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 18:49, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:36, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:21, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:35, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:14, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 15:00, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 18:22, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:24, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food_and_drink#Fruits_(raw)

File:Pear-shaped leucauge spider (Opadometa fastigata) webs.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2021 at 14:28:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida#Family : Tetragnathidae (Long-jawed Orb Weavers)
Info I can't help but imagine a breathy David Attenborough voiceover: And here, in the depths of the Central Indian jungle, we find what many believe to be the closest relative of the endangered vinyl.
All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:28, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:28, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very special --Michielverbeek (talk) 17:25, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:19, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Credit to you and the spiders for this composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:57, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very well composed photo. Cmao20 (talk) 12:11, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 15:46, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:45, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:35, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:10, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:12, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:23, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida#Family : Tetragnathidae (Long-jawed Orb Weavers)

File:Rusty-margined flycatcher (Myiozetetes cayanensis hellmayri).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2021 at 14:34:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Tyrannidae (Tyrant Flycatchers)
Info All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:34, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:34, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 16:22, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:52, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:18, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:52, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 12:17, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:23, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:13, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 13:47, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 17:51, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:44, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:35, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:24, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:12, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:23, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Tyrannidae (Tyrant Flycatchers)

File:Close-up photograph of a calf's head looking at the viewer with pricked ears in Don Det Laos.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2021 at 00:13:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Bovidae (Bovids)
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:13, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:13, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support That's really good, and I like it better than your last calf photo that passed here. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:50, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agree this face is more expressive. Two different specimen, with singular behaviors. Thanks for your support to both! -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:21, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:06, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Yes, I wasn't interested in the other one. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:17, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Andrei (talk) 17:30, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:32, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:20, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 17:49, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:39, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:17, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:43, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:37, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:21, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 15:00, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I can't help but be slightly reminded of our late vice president Hubert Humphrey, or at least the way he was often caricatured, minus the ears. Daniel Case (talk) 15:03, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 08:56, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Bovidae (Bovids)

File:Salvador Dali NYWTS.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2021 at 22:51:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info created by Roger Higgins - uploaded by Davepape - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 22:51, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 22:51, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ 👀 Famous historical photograph of a celebrity. The outlines around the hair and eyes come from the original: I guess it was the post-processing style of the time? -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:19, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like he is wearing one of those berets or Catalan hats he was so fond of. --Cart (talk) 06:12, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

True Dali was fond of fashion and even collaborated with designers (#13). But here these lines seem rather added, afterwards, with a marker (this style, as Man Ray was friend of Dali) -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:33, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vote changed per below -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:26, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question Was so much darkening necessary or appropriate as part of a digital restoration? It seems to me, all that was needed was to remove the evidence of a tear on the lower left and edit out other surface damage. I feel like restoration should be done conservatively, with a light touch. Tell me why I'm wrong. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:56, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

After comparing this picture to the original, I agree the post-treatment is excessive and a bit destructive (too contrasted). Good candidate, but not this version -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:26, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Basile. Daniel Case (talk) 05:37, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 08:57, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:ISS020-E-09048 Sarychev.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2021 at 06:10:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Volcanism
Info Sarychev Peak eruption on June 12, 2009. Astronaut photography of ISS Expedition 20. created by ISS Expedition 20 Crew - uploaded by Monfornot - nominated by StellarHalo -- StellarHalo (talk) 06:10, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- StellarHalo (talk) 06:10, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Smallish for 2021, but the photo was taken in 2009, it's exciting, and the quality holds up. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:31, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree with concideration by Ikan Kekek. I'm impressed by this photo. --Ximonic (talk) 11:57, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I wish this photo was taken in 2021, but a strong wow for me --Michielverbeek (talk) 17:26, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Cool! --Andrei (talk) 17:30, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:35, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:20, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 15:44, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan --Ivar (talk) 17:49, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:40, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:17, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:51, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:22, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I thought it was a fungus on some forest floor at first ... Daniel Case (talk) 17:55, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:12, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena#Volcanism

File:Plaza Pogorzelica 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2021 at 12:33:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural#Poland
Info created by Jar.ciurus - uploaded by Jar.ciurus - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 12:33, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 12:33, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support A very nice composition, the sand looks like snow (check date to be sure) and the background is well done --Michielverbeek (talk) 17:21, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:04, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 19:08, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Michielverbeek -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:29, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:21, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 17:48, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:02, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:38, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:28, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:45, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:38, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral IMO the sharpness should be better. And it looks like JPEG artifacts. --XRay 💬 06:20, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:24, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:13, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Poland

File:Kamal-ud-din Bihzad 001.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2021 at 18:52:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/People#Groups
Info created by Kamāl ud-Dīn Behzād - uploaded by Sette-quattro - nominated by Hanooz -- Hanooz 18:52, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Hanooz 18:52, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really interesting, and an unusual subject. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:49, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:32, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:42, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 07:28, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support lovely details and vivid colors --Kritzolina (talk) 09:46, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 15:42, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:02, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:45, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:38, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:25, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 09:03, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:34, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 21:09, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/People#Groups

File:Mount Robson panorama.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 May 2021 at 00:35:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#British Columbia
Info: Mount Robson panorama, Mount Robson Provincial Park; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:35, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:42, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:18, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, not as good as the other nomination (composition with the cropped summit at the left), and I doubt that the WB is correct --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:37, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment nice, but I do think you may have done yourself a disservice nominating at the same time as the other one, which invites comparison (and the other one is really good) :) — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:29, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral white balance does look off, and the image would be improved by selectively denoising sky IMO Buidhe (talk) 02:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment looks too purple. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:32, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The composition in the other one is better, but still FP to me. Cmao20 (talk) 06:58, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The mountaintops at the left are cut off. (Also WB is too blue, but that's a fixable problem.) -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:26, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too similar to the other image, and that one was IMO better. Daniel Case (talk) 21:06, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Done: better crop, correct white balance Uoaei1, Rhododendrites, Buidhe, Charlesjsharp, King of Hearts --The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:18, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Better, I like it. The lenticular cloud really pops out with this crop. (FYI, your ping didn't work because you didn't sign the post.) Buidhe (talk) 01:57, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - Oops, thank you! --The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:18, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 11:28, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chat tacheté.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2021 at 10:30:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: [[Commons:Featured pictures/<add the gallery here>]]
Info created by Thenror - uploaded by Thenror - nominated by Thenror -- Thenror
Oppose Not close to QI standard. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:35, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: the focus of this image falls short of what's expected at FPC

Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Flap-necked chameleon (Chamaeleo dilepis) female 2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2021 at 07:14:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Chamaeleonidae_(Chameleons)
Info A very sharp image and in my view a very satisfying composition. No FPs of this species. created by Charlesjsharp - uploaded by Charlesjsharp - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 07:14, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 07:14, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:12, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Grumpy critter -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:17, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My browser blocked this link due to phishing FYI — Rhododendrites ^talk | 16:46, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Schnobby (talk) 15:41, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 16:08, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice pose. --Ivar (talk) 17:47, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:03, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

and have a look at the metadata. The camera was old even by the standards of 2014! The quality is outstanding nevertheless. (ok, the lens is great) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:07, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I just had the one EOS70D for my 100-400mm and used my earlier 450D with the macro lens. I don't like swopping lenses in the field. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:46, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:44, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:36, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:15, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:28, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:49, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:26, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:30, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 16:46, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:39, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:50, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:26, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 14:59, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:37, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:47, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tagooty (talk) 03:15, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 18:18, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Chamaeleonidae_(Chameleons)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/

File:Fallas2017 18 Museo Fallero.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 May 2021 at 14:07:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Spain
Info created & uploaded by Rafesmar - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 14:07, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 14:07, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose sorry, nothing special here, a cropped figure and nothing else Ezarateesteban 17:05, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm undecided, but I disagree with this review. I find this a striking and unusual viewpoint, and the background is not nothing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:43, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose I actually find the composition interesting, and the colors are really nice. For me, though, to get away with this kind of composition I want the main subject to be more in focus. More DoF in general I think would help here, but a nice idea/motif. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:33, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support OK shot. Could be croped on rigth side - glass. --Mile (talk) 08:53, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Striking composition. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 13:51, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Only if croped on rigth side. --Gnosis (talk) 00:24, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Frank --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:01, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Composition seems unbalnced. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:33, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rhododendrites' points are well taken, but I ultimately come down on the side of the statue being sharp enough, and the composition works very well for me. It's sometimes worthwhile to feature photos that are a little offbeat and atypical. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:59, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
weak oppose per Rhododendrites. --Ivar (talk) 17:54, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Rhododendrites, noise. Daniel Case (talk) 22:46, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
weak oppose per Rhododendrites. -- Karelj (talk) 21:30, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:01, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Biserica fortificată Cisnădioara, iarna. Ianuarie 2020.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 May 2021 at 20:19:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Romania
Info A beautiful photo of a fortified church in Romania, which won first prize in WLM Romania in 2020. The metadata shows it was taken using a drone, which probably makes it pretty unique, and given this, the quality is very good. created by Ridethefog - uploaded by Ridethefog - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 20:19, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 20:19, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Quite sharp for a drone photo. I like it Buidhe (talk) 04:06, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 05:10, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 06:09, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:53, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:43, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fascinating. Nice angle -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:38, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quality is not good even for a drone. Sky is very noisy and in upper parts there is a harsh border between noise and extensive NR (poor post-process for sure). The wow effect from this picture is by far not as strong to make me ignore quality issues. --A.Savin 13:54, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 17:32, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I think this could be improved by reworking the noisy parts in raw. I have the same drone and I believe it's currently among the best UAVs you can get for a reasonable price. It has a little smaller sensor from APS-C but i'm impressed. --Ximonic (talk) 12:12, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much uninteresting foreground with all those barren trees, and what's on the right isn't all that interesting, either. I will propose a crop that focuses more narrowly on the church and the snow-capped mountains in the background. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:18, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:36, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The dark mountain on the right detracts from the image. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 13:47, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks no darker than a typical late winter afternoon to me. Daniel Case (talk) 03:22, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:52, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 22:30, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Romania

File:Gosling in GWC (43721).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2021 at 17:22:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus_:_Branta
Info Just a peaceful gosling (Branta canadensis) sleeping in the grass and clover by a pond in a cemetery in Brooklyn. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 17:22, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 17:22, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Touching! --Ivar (talk) 18:11, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cute. I imagine the parents were just off-screen. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:20, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- and siblings. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 18:28, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:23, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Buidhe (talk) 22:00, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:36, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:31, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice composition and colours. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:52, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 13:04, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Peaceful. --Aristeas (talk) 17:21, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:56, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Pssst! Don't disturb. --Llez (talk) 08:55, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 14:58, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:28, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:36, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:29, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cute --RolfHill (talk) 08:52, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 13:49, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:31, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 22:31, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus_:_Branta

File:Pollution in the Saint-Charles river, Quebec city, Canada.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2021 at 19:50:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry#Canada
Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 19:50, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good composition, IMO. However, I think you should change the filename to a more specific one after the nomination period. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:55, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done Thanks for your sugestion --Wilfredor (talk) 00:34, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wilfredor, Ikan said you should change the file name AFTER the nomination, not during it. When you move the file, you have to move the nomination page with it, or the FPCBot will not be able to process the image correctly if it is promoted. The Bot can't follow re-directs and it will promote the re-direct instead of the photo. Please remember this in the future. I have fixed this for you now. --Cart (talk) 09:30, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I underestand now, thanks for move it carter. --Wilfredor (talk) 15:04, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:25, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the colours --Llez (talk) 08:14, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose IHMO, no reason for nomination of some sewerage parts for FP. Quality good, but nothing extra... -- Karelj (talk) 17:22, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Karelj RolfHill (talk) 08:59, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:27, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stibnite - Herja mine, Maramures, Romania.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2021 at 14:32:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Rocks_and_minerals#Minerals
Info all by Ivar (talk) 14:32, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 14:32, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support high EV Buidhe (talk) 21:40, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:30, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- --GRDN711 (talk) 01:06, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:58, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 04:27, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 04:32, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:34, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Striking image. --Tagooty (talk) 09:54, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support fascinating. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:11, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 13:46, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 18:00, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 18:40, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 21:42, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Cayambe (talk) 19:23, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:24, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 07:28, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:03, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Piotr Bart (talk) 20:19, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support With a bit of dirt / alien elements, but Looks ok to me --RolfHill (talk) 08:45, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:34, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 13:48, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:39, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:37, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --NANöR (talk) 08:09, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:24, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Rocks_and_minerals#Minerals

File:Fawn and white Welsh Corgi puppy standing on rear legs and sticking out the tongue.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2021 at 00:07:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family : Canidae (Canids)
Info created by Huoadg5888 - uploaded by my Subsidiary account - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:07, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Funny -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:07, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I looked for the fawn and then realized that the word is being used for a color. New one on me, but yes, funny and good. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:51, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I found this word by searching a relevant category. There's an article Fawn (colour) on Wikipedia, but I can't tell if the word is widely used in English (probably not). In French we say "fauve", word translated as Fulvous in Wikidata, but no equivalent category seems to exist on Wikimedia Commons. For sure not a green dog in any case Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:54, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Excellent ... though I'd like to see part of the uppermost area slightly cropped away. --Cayambe (talk) 07:01, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I had the same idea at first, but after thinking I wonder if this large framing is not better this way, as lead room. Funny to imagine this puppy could jump in the frame :-) Thank you! -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:28, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Karelj (talk) 10:19, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 11:58, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Bad crop, top should be croped.--Mile (talk) 12:15, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Andrei (talk) 17:31, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hanooz 18:59, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:17, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:02, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:42, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:37, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 19:14, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 18:01, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support The crop is OK for me --Llez (talk) 08:20, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Love the photographer or someone else reflected in the dog's eyes. Daniel Case (talk) 14:58, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Agree, top crop needed, still nice --RolfHill (talk) 08:58, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 13:49, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:48, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 11:41, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family : Canidae (Canids)

File:Sea Girt Lighthouse October 2020.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2021 at 06:36:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#United States
Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:36, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:36, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Possibly too close, or is it the 24mm lens?. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:18, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is the furthest away I could get without including distracting elements like the curb. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:44, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I am ok with the composition. Great quality. --Clément Bardot (talk) 12:23, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very sharp photo and a balanced composition, but not anything special for me --Michielverbeek (talk) 17:24, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not the flashiest FP, but solid, nonetheless. I like the building and the colors, and the angle is a clever way to avoid having the bushes block anything important while still showing them and the sign, which I find important. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:15, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow-y enough for me. Cmao20 (talk) 12:20, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 17:38, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Cayambe (talk) 09:46, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose just good quality image of house, no reason for FP nomimation. -- Karelj (talk) 21:35, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:23, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It is QI but miss something more for FP. --Mile (talk) 10:31, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Could have been nothing FP-level but ... the color and detail is crisp and natural looking, and the clouds behind actually frame it quite well. Daniel Case (talk) 18:03, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality, but no wow factor. --Tagooty (talk) 09:47, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:49, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:10, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above --RolfHill (talk) 08:57, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above --Co mmon ists 19:33, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sock puppet of Livioandronico2013. In this discussion, it has been decided to strike out all his votes. --Aristeas (talk) 16:07, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 11:46, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Updated results:

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 16:07, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Towers#United States

File:Golden orb-weaver spider (Nephila inaurata madagascariensis) female 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2021 at 10:33:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida#Family : Araneidae (Orb-weaver Spiders)
Info The golden orb-eaver spiders weave a golden web. The colour is more distinct under flash. The image is best seen on a large screen or in close-up so you can see that six of her seven legs are in use, with the seventh just about to help. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:33, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:33, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not seeing what is FP about this. The angle is awkward with the head hidden by a leg and facing away. The background distracting. The composition is just "subject in centre of frame". The lighting from the flash causes harsh reflections off the body that are especially troublesome as the sides have white markings and the white we mostly see here is reflected flash. There are other FP in this genus: File:Nephila inaurata dsc07682.jpg and File:Spider Nephila clavata 0911.jpg. -- Colin (talk) 16:38, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see there are 2 FPs. The two images are located in the FP gallery under a spurious family Nephilidae which doesn't exist, which I why I missed them. To give a response as to what is FP about this in my view - most spider images (e.g. all our FPs) are of stationary animals. This one is at work weaving its web with a skill that very few spider species possess. To capture that is quite a challenge. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:43, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

But you haven't "captured that": it is not at all apparent that this spider is "at work". They just seem to be hanging about and the photographer is at at an unfortunate angle wrt its head. So that's a negative, rather than positive. Perhaps a short movie clip would be better, along with more suitable lighting. -- Colin (talk) 07:56, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support I find this interesting to move my eye around, and that's enough for me to consider it an FP, along with Charles' point above about what he captured. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:54, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose quite distracting background. --Ivar (talk) 07:19, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above --RolfHill (talk) 08:38, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Considering the size --Llez (talk) 10:41, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ivar. Daniel Case (talk) 17:18, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ivar. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:23, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:24, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Neighborhood Church of Chico, April 2021.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2021 at 03:50:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#United States
Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:50, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:50, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 04:27, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:34, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:56, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:55, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Gallery fixed. And while I did that, I was struck by how few exteriors (7) of religious buildings we have from such a big country. Small hint for photographers living in the US. --Cart (talk) 08:45, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thanks so much, Cart. I didn't even know that gallery existed. Weirdly enough, two of the seven images are mine :-D --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:55, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Must be your German heritage shining through. :-) --Cart (talk) 16:02, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

During the big push at the beginning of the NRHP project over a decade ago, I took a lot of photos of churches, and some synagogues, big and small. Most of those were when I still used a DP/S. So, the pictures I've taken of religious buildings that are FP-quality compositionally are not there technically, and vice versa. Daniel Case (talk) 14:42, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 13:47, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 17:13, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 18:40, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 19:40, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Tagooty (talk) 03:09, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:27, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 07:27, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:47, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support though maybe a slightly more oblong aspect ratio would be better. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:28, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Nice but I find the crop at both sides to narrow --RolfHill (talk) 08:40, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:36, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:38, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:42, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:51, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#United States

File:CP GE AC4400CW 9739 Exshaw.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2021 at 18:10:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles
Info created & uploaded by David Gubler - nominated by Ivar (talk) 18:10, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 18:10, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:42, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing composition! Cmao20 (talk) 19:53, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 20:44, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wonderful. How long did you have to stand out in the cold for this? Did the sheep interact with you? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:21, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Actually we took a picture of the same train 45 minutes earlier and then overtook it by car, so we didn't have to wait long. Our main concern was that the sheep would run away from us and onto the tracks, so we had to be very careful and keep as much distance as possible. --Kabelleger (talk) 10:24, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ Nah, he brought the sheep with him, silly. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:27, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I missed the branches top right until Frank spotted them. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:57, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support The train, the sheep and the mountains, all elegantly positioned inside the composition, wow! -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:01, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:27, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 05:16, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 05:44, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:14, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Buidhe (talk) 06:16, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:59, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 08:33, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 16:02, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 17:14, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Hanooz 16:16, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 16:16, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Danu Widjajanto (talk) 17:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:24, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Gnosis (talk) 22:32, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:18, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:50, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:52, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very busy scene, not sure what the subject is. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:57, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely scene. --Tagooty (talk) 09:42, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:07, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Frank Schulenburg --RolfHill (talk) 08:55, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 13:49, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Seriously, I'm not sure what's going on here. Could you please at least remove the branch on the top right? --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:58, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 25 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 20:51, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Other#Canada

File:E-burg asv2019-05 img68 PrKosmonavtov metro station.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2021 at 12:39:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Transport#Metro stations
Info Prospekt Kosmonavtov metro station in Yekaterinburg, Russia ---- all by A.Savin --A.Savin 12:39, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 12:39, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:05, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Classy and stylish photo Cmao20 (talk) 19:55, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:34, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:21, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 22:44, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:27, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support high EV Buidhe (talk) 06:18, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:55, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:23, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose People annoy me, distorted, I don't like the crop of the lamp above and it doesn't seem to be in focus.--Co mmon ists 16:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sock puppet of Livioandronico2013. In this discussion, it has been decided to strike out all his votes. --Aristeas (talk) 17:29, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

what's supposed to be distorted? There's some degree of unavoidable, optically necessary "perspective distortion" - which is no real "distortion" in a narrower sense of the word. Unfortunately the English language does not differentiate between (in German) Verzeichnung and Verzerrung... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:32, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Martin Falbisoner: Pingen Sie es an, wenn Sie wollen, dass ich es sehe, aber es ist immer noch verzerrt.--Co mmon ists 13:19, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Commonists: Naja, es sieht aus, wie es eben mit 14mm im Kleinbildformat aussieht - und gangbare Alternativen zu solch einem Bildwinkel sehe ich bei einem dergelagerten Motiv in praktischer Hinsicht keine. Letztlich ist alles natürlich Geschmacksfrage. :-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:21, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Martin Falbisoner: Auf jeden Fall. Ich mag eigentlich keine Weitwinkelobjektive. :)--Co mmon ists 15:06, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:40, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:18, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For croping the bulbs. --Mile (talk) 07:35, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose IHMO, good image, but no reason for nomination for FP. -- Karelj (talk) 17:40, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Mile. --Tagooty (talk) 03:16, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose nice place, but unfortunate crop on top and sides is ruining the result. --Ivar (talk) 07:29, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:36, 7 May 2021 (UTC)~[reply]
Weak oppose bad crop --Piotr Bart (talk) 20:15, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Top crop --RolfHill (talk) 08:55, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:41, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re-evaluation after removing the sock-puppet vote:

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 17:48, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Transport#Metro stations

File:Schloss der Commanderie (St-Pieters-Voeren) 2017.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2021 at 14:28:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Belgium
Info created by Ladislaus Hoffner - uploaded by Ladislaus Hoffner - nominated by Danu Widjajanto -- Danu Widjajanto (talk) 14:28, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Danu Widjajanto (talk) 14:28, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too dark, crushed blacks. -- Colin (talk) 16:47, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Darkness does not add anything to the composition --Michielverbeek (talk) 17:12, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Basotxerri (talk) 14:48, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others --Piotr Bart (talk) 20:17, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others --RolfHill (talk) 08:37, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Underexposure or some processing mistake, per others. Daniel Case (talk) 01:41, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 20:53, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:WLM - 2020 - Catedral-basílica de Nuestra Señora del Pilar - 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2021 at 07:29:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Spain
Info created & uploaded by Moahim - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 07:29, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 07:29, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love it! A kind of fairytale-like glow to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:11, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:17, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:34, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think the coords are incorrect, as they show the church itself and not the camera location. Looking at the maps, one would presume that the photographer took it from the other side of the river, but how come that the water is as still? --A.Savin 12:53, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
~~I have to Oppose for now, as I'd like an explanation by Moahim. --A.Savin 12:20, 5 May 2021 (UTC)~~[reply]

Coordinates was accepted automatically during uploading, I guess. I'll correct them. Also, You can look at this image to check location. About still water - I was lucky with quiet riverflow and long exposure of the brightest shot, of course. --Moahim (talk) 10:23, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done Correct coordinates. --Moahim (talk) 10:27, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, striking the oppose; still not sure if I should support though, and actually you should fix the coords completely including SDC. --A.Savin 00:22, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:04, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 18:13, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:43, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:54, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:35, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:15, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:27, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:53, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose PD correction is a bit too much here. --Mile (talk) 07:45, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question What is PD? I'm not finding it at Commons:Photography terms (I looked). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:01, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ikan Kekek, 'perspective distortion', perhaps? Cmao20 (talk) 11:06, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, probably. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:11, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That PD, yes. He made shot at least of 2 photos, but not sure where he centered them. Shot could be done better. Strong echo at left tower is also strange, cant be seen on rigth side. --Mile (talk) 07:35, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:39, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:51, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 14:59, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I can forgive some technical imperfections in long-exposure photos of buildings at night ... but not that horribly posterized area at the first-second stage transition on the right-hand tower where what looks like the low-pressure sodium-vapor light below is illuminating a corner. It might be fixable, I don't know. But we have seen better here. Daniel Case (talk) 17:32, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Piotr Bart (talk) 20:12, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --RolfHill (talk) 08:57, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 13:49, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:43, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:41, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Spain

File:Golden Ears seen from the Viewpoint Beach.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2021 at 02:09:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#British Columbia
Info: Golden Ears seen from the Viewpoint Beach, Golden Ears Provincial Park; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:09, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:09, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support The snow is slightly blown out, but overall still a very nice panorama. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:26, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Awesome Buidhe (talk) 06:15, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The clouds block too much. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:34, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Charles, just too much clouds --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:26, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- IMO the clouds are a plus in aesthetic terms and accurately represent common weather in the Pacific Northwest. Buidhe (talk) 21:59, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - Indeed! I waited for a break in the clouds, so that they are just flanking the peak. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:32, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - In fact, I probably wouldn't have supported if the clouds weren't there. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:30, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like these clouds, colors, composition and that dead tree on the left. --Grtek (talk) 07:43, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per others --Llez (talk) 08:53, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love the clouds --Co mmon ists 17:06, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. In this discussion, it has been decided to strike out all his votes. --Aristeas (talk) 16:30, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Nice clouds :-) --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:56, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would consider to crop one third from the right --Uoaei1 (talk) 04:31, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:37, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Buidhe’s explanation. --Aristeas (talk) 13:45, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Charles. -- Karelj (talk) 17:45, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Charlesjsharp --Tagooty (talk) 03:11, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Buidhe. Daniel Case (talk) 02:12, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above --RolfHill (talk) 08:54, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:42, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:14, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. --Milseburg (talk) 13:07, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:35, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Canada#British Columbia

Updated results:

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 16:30, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jankar Nala Rarik Oct20 D72 18292.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2021 at 02:59:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#India
Info created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 02:59, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tagooty (talk) 02:59, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comparing this version to the first uploaded version, I actually prefer the original (except for the CAs). The current one looks Overprocessed with excessive sharpening and a weird blue tint on some of the mountains. The light is also quite harsh but that may be inevitable at this location. Buidhe (talk) 06:59, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Harsh light and bluish tint is normal due to the high altitude. The ridge is about 6 km long, so the mountains are fairly distant. --Tagooty (talk) 11:17, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Ligthing, colors, compo, quality not at FP level to me --RolfHill (talk) 08:36, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose per Buidhe. Beautiful scene but upper mountains look very unnatural. Daniel Case (talk) 01:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:32, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Suzhou canals November 2017 003.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2021 at 04:30:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#China
Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:30, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:30, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Steven Sun (talk) 07:03, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice but I don't see anything special,sorry --Co mmon ists 16:12, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 21:45, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Nice view. With a slightly different editing and crop, this would look better IMO. Just a thought. (No color change, just light- and exposure-related sliders tweaked) --Cart (talk) 19:13, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@W.carter: Really? It looks like the WB was made much more yellow - what did you adjust? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:34, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is usually more color hidden in very white or black areas than you might think. I have made screenshots of the Lightroom edits. General settings plus a few gradient filters to tone down some bright areas and give the water an extra boost. My settings are in Swedish, but I think you can figure them out anyway since the order of LR functions is the same. Keep in mind that values work a bit differently when editing a jpeg vs the raw. --Cart (talk) 08:32, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose No wow --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:25, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very good, but I need something (like a cloud) in the upper right corner for the composition to be fully satisfying to me. Could be an excellent VI with the name of the canal identified in the scope, though, and definitely a superior QI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:16, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose I was OK with it at first but now, having seen Cart's edit, I'd like to see that one nominated instead. Daniel Case (talk) 05:03, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above, too ordinary --RolfHill (talk) 08:53, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:34, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bourdon terrestre (Bombus terrestris) (1).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 May 2021 at 13:26:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera#Family : Apidae (Bumble Bees, Honey Bees, Carpenter Bees, Cuckoo Bees, Orchid Bees, and Stingless Bees)
Info created by Gzen92 - uploaded by Gzen92 - nominated by Gzen92 -- Gzen92 ^[discuter] 13:26, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Gzen92 ^[discuter] 13:26, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose You might wish to check exisitng FPs before submitting one that really cannot compare. A bee on concrete? And too small. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:46, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I really like this pic for some reason. But you are unlikely to get many supports for the reason Charlesjsharp says. Buidhe (talk) 21:26, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support: I find it very pleasing aesthetically --The Cosmonaut (talk) 04:27, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Charlesjsharp. --Tagooty (talk) 09:39, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose doesn't stand out if compared other Fp-s of this category. --Ivar (talk) 07:22, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above, wrong environment RolfHill (talk) 08:43, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. Daniel Case (talk) 06:17, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination I understand, you are right. Gzen92 ^[discuter] 06:20, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Утро на Кипарисовом озере.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 May 2021 at 12:12:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Russia#Southern Federal District
Info created & uploaded by Ted.ns - nominated by Ivar (talk) 12:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 12:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment We have this FP of the same place for comparison. --Cart (talk) 13:01, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is interesting with the higher water level, but the other is a superior composition. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:50, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination --Ivar (talk) 15:18, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hieflau and Gesäuse from Rotmauer panorama 20210424.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2021 at 11:36:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Austria#Styria
Info created by Domob - uploaded by Domob - nominated by Domob -- Domob (talk) 11:36, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The view from Rotmauer is one of the clearest (e.g. with fewest obstructing trees in an area covered mostly by forest) one can get of the Gesäuse mountains from the east. This panorama is high resolution and shows a lot of detail both of the rocks on the mountains as well as the parts of Hieflau visible in the valley. --Domob (talk) 11:36, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Domob (talk) 11:36, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very good, but can you make the verticals of buildings and posts straigth, they look a bit tilted and are leaning out especially at the right. --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:04, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thanks for your feedback! I've compared the picture against a grid, and I can't really see any systematic leaning of verticals. The buildings in particular (everywhere on the picture) look pretty vertical. Some posts are not exactly straight, but I assume that is because they are leaning for real. Do you have any particular building or post in mind that you think needs to be corrected? I'm happy to do so of course. --Domob (talk) 09:56, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Well, I see some buildings in Hieflau which look a bit tilted, but it is a rather minor issue. --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:03, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support The trees are vertical, as far as I can see --Llez (talk) 10:49, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 13:48, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Not very sharp but nice --Co mmon ists 19:25, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 18:54, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ermell (talk) 21:39, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice composition, and huge resolution. The perspective is fine to me. Top down view, and the subject is not architecture -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:49, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support good EV and very high resolution Buidhe (talk) 05:46, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:18, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:51, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:53, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:58, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Qualified support Snow is a bit bright at full-size, but maybe there's nothing you could have done about that. Daniel Case (talk) 17:34, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 08:25, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:13, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Austria#Styria

File:Wells Cathedral Arches, Somerset, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2021 at 11:11:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#United Kingdom
Info To my mind this might be the strongest and most interesting Diliff photo not yet to become FP. It shows the so-called 'scissor arches' in Wells Cathedral - an unusual and almost unique architectural feature inserted to stabilise the cathedral's structure during the fourteenth century. The light is really nice and the composition and image quality are good as usual. Created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 11:11, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 11:11, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:59, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fascinating architectonic peculiarity, very good composition and quality. --Aristeas (talk) 15:25, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hanooz 18:22, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I can really feel the smell and (probably) cool air of this Gothic church while looking at this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:58, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:43, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 13:48, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:15, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:22, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:37, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Nice but I don't like the rays of light from the lamp in the centre above the altar --Co mmon ists 19:28, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:28, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:06, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:53, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 11:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:28, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:47, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 08:25, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#United Kingdom

File:Isfandiyar’s Fifth Ordeal.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2021 at 18:17:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/People#Groups
Info uploaded and nominated by Hanooz -- Hanooz 18:17, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Hanooz 18:17, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Shiasun (talk) 19:54, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support He's slaying a dragon, right? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:56, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. It's called Simurgh but probably not the famous one. Hanooz 16:20, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cbrescia (talk) 10:03, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:49, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 11:02, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent reproduction of a great miniature. (Very impressive how the blood is painted.) --Aristeas (talk) 11:19, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The illustrator probably isolated the area and used a brush splatter technique, which is rare to see in illuminated drawings and manuscripts. --Cart (talk) 13:51, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:18, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:22, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:36, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 19:25, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 19:05, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support. --Gnosis (talk) 22:44, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:25, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:57, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 08:25, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:16, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic_media/People#Groups

File:Langweerderwielen-Langwarder Wielen. 19-03-2021. (actm) 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2021 at 15:50:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural# Netherlands Friesland
Info View of Langweerderwielen from the Zandvlakte in the early morning. (Golden hour landscapes.)
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:50, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:50, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:17, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice mood and colours. There is a dust spot in the sky (see the image note), I would suggest to remove it. --Aristeas (talk) 17:24, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Removed spots. Thank you for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:42, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Nothing special for FP nomnation, no WOW. -- Karelj (talk) 21:40, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:49, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:55, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 14:58, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Karelj Buidhe (talk) 21:41, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support One of those images that shouldn't work but does. I think it has something to do with the tree. And maybe the color. Just the perfect winter-is-going morning mood. Daniel Case (talk) 05:08, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lighting is good but the compo isn't striking --RolfHill (talk) 08:53, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 13:09, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:17, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:White-throated sparrow in CP close up (02081).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2021 at 20:07:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Passerellidae_(New_world_sparrows)
Info Close-up of a white-throated sparrow (Zonotrichia albicollis), perhaps the most handsome of the relatively common sparrows where I live. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 20:07, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 20:07, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Peulle (talk) 20:46, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Looks nice in preview, but I don't like the unfocused lower part, sorry. --A.Savin 21:30, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I like the head of the bird and would support with a tighter crop at left and bottom that cut out some of the more unfocused bits. Buidhe (talk) 21:56, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- I considered cropping before nominating, but I prefer the composition this way. Will wait for some additional opinions here before giving it a try. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:16, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:36, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support great portrait! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:30, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 13:03, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support (I would not crop it.) --Aristeas (talk) 17:21, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very sharp for 500 mm, i found eye is on ideal 33%, 66%. Crop would spoil it. Good work. --Mile (talk) 18:31, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:01, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:56, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 14:58, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice light -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:29, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:53, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:35, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 05:06, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good portrait of a bird, but not FP IMO. --Tagooty (talk) 09:44, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:32, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --RolfHill (talk) 08:51, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 13:48, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Love the ice and water on his beak, and your reflection in his eye. Daniel Case (talk) 14:36, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:40, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 08:25, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:17, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Passerellidae_(New_world_sparrows)

File:Epipactis helleborine - Keila.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2021 at 12:47:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family_:_Orchidaceae
Info all by Ivar (talk) 12:47, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 12:47, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm not sure this angle shows the flowers off to the best advantage. Orchids have such a lovely shape. Is it because the buds aren't fully out? Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:35, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:55, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:50, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality but the subject looks too ordinary to me, RolfHill (talk) 12:06, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
RolfHill: nothing is ordinary here. Compare light and composition with other photos in the E. helleborine flower category. --Ivar (talk) 12:52, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Ivar (talk) 16:23, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Upacara adat Pasola.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 May 2021 at 09:07:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports
Info created & uploaded by Fakhri Anindita - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:07, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:07, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment downsized. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:24, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
strong Oppose Halos around the horsemans, looks like copied. White balance. Je-str (talk) 11:09, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above Buidhe (talk) 16:49, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 11:23, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:American Black Duck pair at Green Wood Cemetery, Brooklyn (62110).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2021 at 23:28:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus_:_Anas
Info A pair of American black ducks (Anas rubripes) over looking Sylvan Water in Brooklyn. The male has the yellow bill. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 23:28, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 23:28, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Moderate Support Sweet. I don't love the blurry thing (clod of dirt?) that's right between them and the viewer, but still an FP to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:41, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 08:05, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm afraid the rock is a problem and I don't like the man-made surface. The water has really nice colours. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:35, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I agree that the rock, clod of dirt or whatever is a problem. I don't agree that ducks being photographed in a park on a man-made surface is a problem. They are part of the ecosystem we live in, including cities. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:18, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:50, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't like the composition and the clutter in the image. I like the tenacity of your recent nominations, though – seems like your camera is getting a real workout ;-) --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:51, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 12:37, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:26, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Quite ordinary image in my view. Dull light, busy foreground, not rare birds, compo a bit boring -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:54, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose If it had just been the ducks ... but there's so much else going on. Daniel Case (talk) 03:19, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile Morin RolfHill (talk) 12:12, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination — Rhododendrites ^talk | 12:33, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Uitlopende bladknop van een paardenkastanje (Aesculus). 18-04-2021. (d.j.b) 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2021 at 05:21:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Sapindaceae
Info Emerging leaf bud of a Aesculus. In the early morning.. Focus stack of 16 photos.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:21, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:21, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive and high educational value. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:42, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 13:48, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 14:50, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hanooz 16:55, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 19:26, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:30, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:46, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:46, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 07:32, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--IamMM (talk) 07:57, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 18:31, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:00, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:56, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 08:33, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rootless Cosmopolitan (talk) 21:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support RolfHill (talk) 12:19, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:10, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Sapindaceae

File:Polystichum setiferum-20210427-RM-165358.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2021 at 13:36:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Dryopteridaceae
Info Shoots of a fern in a garden in Bamberg. Focus stack of 6 frames processed with Helicon focus. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 13:36, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 13:36, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful contre-jour photo which shows the fascinating unrolling of the fern in an excellent way. --Aristeas (talk) 17:26, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:57, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 04:33, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:35, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too dark. -- Karelj (talk) 17:55, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Karelj,sorry --Co mmon ists 18:41, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 06:15, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others Piotr Bart (talk) 20:19, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not really contre-jour, still not the best ligthing option for this subject, I believe RolfHill (talk) 08:50, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question RolfHill, just for my edification, what would make it really contre-jour? Would the light have to hit it straight-on? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:46, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The light source would have to be almost directly behind the plant and visible in the image. Daniel Case (talk) 02:35, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

So I have to apologize for using the terminus technicus in a wrong way. I am very sorry. The German word Gegenlicht which I tried to translate (misguided by the dictionaries) as contre-jour is often, even by some classic books about photography (e.g. by Andreas Feininger), used in a more general way for lighting of the subject from behind; that may explain my error. Anyway, this is my fault, so please do not vote against Ermell’s photo because I have incorrectly called it contre-jour ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 09:03, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:35, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:53, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Photograph of Socks the Cat Sitting Behind the President's Desk in the Oval Office- 01-07-1994 (6461515323).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2021 at 22:43:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family : Felidae (Felids)
Info created by the White House Photograph Office of Bill Clinton - uploaded by Vanished Account Byeznhpyxeuztibuo - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 22:43, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 22:43, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Fun, but not FP level. Noise, perspective, too many distracting things. --A.Savin 12:22, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per A. Savin. Daniel Case (talk) 01:09, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above RolfHill (talk) 12:12, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:40, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:View from the Chapel on the Michaelsberg on the Upper Rhine Plain.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 May 2021 at 09:17:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#Baden-Württemberg
Info This panorama shows the Upper Rhine Plain over a distance of about 100 km, from the Fremersberg in the south to the Biblis Nuclear Power Plant in the north; created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 09:17, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 09:17, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, this isn't making me go wow, nor do I think it is a great photo. I think even panoramas need some composition choice and an interesting subject. Most of the view is nearby grass, sky, or distant landscape with heat haze blurring any detail. The nearby village isn't picturesque. At about 1/3 from the left, the buildings and poles are leaning. -- Colin (talk) 09:29, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:03, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I can see Colin's point, but on the other hand this is quite an encyclopedically useful image; I put a cropped version on the de:Untergrombach article. Buidhe (talk) 21:39, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Info @Buidhe: I changed the file description in your version, for neither the Fremersberg nor the Biblis Nuclear Power Plant are visible in your verion. They they are cropped --Llez (talk) 04:29, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not unusual. --Tagooty (talk) 02:44, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Piotr Bart (talk) 20:18, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree, a good shot, but not at extraordinary level --RolfHill (talk) 08:44, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is surely good and very useful, but I can't decide whether it's an FP or not. I realize the distances are great, but there's a lot of haze, so I wonder whether a different time of year or different weather might work better. In any case, this would surely be a useful VI if nominated at VIC, regardless of what happens to this nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:21, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Even without viewing it at full size, I think it's done in by the rather flat terrain below, unlike other such panos of Germany we've seen. Daniel Case (talk) 06:17, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too hazy for enthusiasm and the horizon is slightly bulged. --Milseburg (talk) 13:06, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:04, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Close-up photograph of the eye of a baby with reflection of the scene in the pupil.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2021 at 01:19:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Others
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:19, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:19, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Interesting question: Should this have a personality rights template? I don't know. Anyway, I like the photo and think it merits a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:15, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In uncertainty, added. Good question, indeed. Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:26, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support special to me.--Famberhorst (talk) 04:40, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The reflection isn't appealing (photographer lying on a bed?). The focus stack result just looks weird with bits randomly in and out of focus, and quite a lot of the eye itself is not in focus. What is in focus is the skin, some random bits of hair, and the photographer. Compare File:003 2016 02 23 Augenpflege.jpg which just looks more natural. -- Colin (talk) 11:02, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think it would have been better if you had tried to make the photographer/yourself less conspicuous in the photo and let the window (or the world outside) be the center if the kid's attention. A big dark man creeping up on a child that looks startled is no doubt an effect, but probably not the effect you were looking for. --Cart (talk) 11:38, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above, idea and quality are good but the exuction isn't. Try it outside with a nice landscape and the photographer not direct the eye to avoid its reflection RolfHill (talk) 11:48, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The reflection and the quality of the focus stacking. Is the subject's head tilted too? Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:13, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very special and well done, but the area around the eye is IMO a bit too large here. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:43, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Christian Ferrer, for your suggestion. I propose the alternative below -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:26, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Info The depth of field of a macro lens is very shallow, all the more camera held by hand. You need to be very close. Shooting with an angle would create more blur around. It might be possible to use a tripod, but then the "story" told in the picture would be slightly different -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:26, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The blue sky and the trees through the windows create a kind of mise en abyme, adding a new dimension by separating the interior from the exterior, in the pupil -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:26, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:08, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 05:03, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There is a gap between. Suppose manual was set. --Mile (talk) 12:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose (I think people who already voted should be pinged that there's an alt). Same issues as the other one. I don't think cropping further helps, as it just focuses everything more on the dark creepy figure lying on a bed! -- Colin (talk) 14:21, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose A bold idea that just didn't make it in this iteration. I like the reflection of the photographer, but the eyelashes every which way are distracting (not much you could do about that, I concede) and as noted by other !voters the focus stack isn't working. Daniel Case (talk) 20:38, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:33, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Manene Tradisi Ganti Baju Mayat di Tana Toraja.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 May 2021 at 13:46:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Traditions
Info created by RaiyaniM - uploaded by RaiyaniM - nominated by Danu Widjajanto -- Danu Widjajanto (talk) 13:46, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Danu Widjajanto (talk) 13:46, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 15:42, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Some may find it shocking, but great EV in fact, and I'm not sure if we have other pictures on Commons about such customs, never mind any highlighted content. --A.Savin 17:11, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Really ordinary composition. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:26, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Charles --Co mmon ists 18:32, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sock puppet of Livioandronico2013. In this discussion, it has been decided to strike out all his votes. --Aristeas (talk) 16:07, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Fixed new section, Commons:Featured pictures/People#Traditions. So far, photos like this and other images of religious practice/solemn occations/traditional doings have been a little awkwardly bunched with theatre/festivals/reenactments or in the 'Others' section. --Cart (talk) 18:33, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Huge educational value. The guidelines state: A bad picture of a very difficult subject is better than a good picture of an ordinary subject. Here the rarity overwhelms the flaws, in my opinion. This image calls out in relation to customs and cultural diversity in the world -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:58, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not relevant; this is a very easy subject. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:09, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Difficult because 1) the opportunity doesn't come often, 2) there are psychological obstacles to overcome.

What is rare is precious. How many pictures like this one do we have on Commons? -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:41, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Googling the subject, it's clear that this tradition is becoming a hotspot for photographers, much like the mud racing we had earlier. And yes, not that difficult to shoot since the main subjects are not moving about a lot here. But it is a good quality photo, a rarity with high EV and something we haven't had on Commons before so I tend to agree with Basile on this. It is a photo of gentleness and caring that certainly makes you look twice; that is also a kind of 'wow' that takes this over the bar for FP IMO. --Cart (talk) 11:56, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 02:04, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support RaiyaniM (talk) 07:34, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support A photo like this is more about storytelling (even if there is an element of performing for the cameras). -- Colin (talk) 17:12, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. I also don't really like the background, especially the cigarettes --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:25, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's a shocking picture, it is distasteful but makes you want to dig about this culture. --Gnosis (talk) 08:02, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above and tilted RolfHill (talk) 08:42, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Tempered Support: I feel like there's too much black doorway on the left, but maybe one could see something metaphoric in that. But I find it a compelling image. I don't think it matters that the entrance is tilted, and the body on the left looks actually tilted. The background with the cigarettes, water bottles and so forth doesn't add much, but we can see this as an outdoor workshop, and workshops are often a bit messy. However, his work in making the clothing fit just right on the bodies is painstaking. To some up, I'm not losing the forest by nitpicking the trees, and sometimes, it's really the whole and the impact that it makes that's more important than x, y and z details that fall short of some theoretical ideal that we don't have before us. If we get several much greater photos of this practice, we can always reconsider, but right now, the question is whether this is one of the best photos that's actually on Commons - however we define "best". And overall, I think it is. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:15, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Depicting very rare tradition, perhaps will disappear in the next two decades. Pinerineks (talk) 08:58, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

+1 -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:15, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Getting ready for the Zombie Day parade ... Daniel Case (talk) 14:34, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose unusual motif but not outstanding in any way. --Milseburg (talk) 13:03, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Charles. -- Karelj (talk) 21:29, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 08:25, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Receives 344 hits at TinEye. The image lives from the creepy effect although the ritual is another way to commemorate the deceased. Photographically not a big challenge.--Ermell (talk) 22:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:35, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Updated results:

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 15:43, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People#Traditions

File:Muscari botryoides-20210428-RM-121422.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2021 at 20:40:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family_:_Asparagaceae
InfoFlower of a pearl hyacinth. Focus stack of 13 images. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 20:40, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 20:40, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:17, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:49, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ich kann es riechen... -- -donald- (talk) 07:38, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Couldn't be croped to center ? --Mile (talk) 07:59, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment If you include the background pattern, I don't think it looks off-centre. If you take away something on the right, the proportions change in an unfavourable way. The camera should have moved a little to the left, but unfortunately it's too late for that.--Ermell (talk) 21:43, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:04, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 12:50, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:14, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:44, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:26, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 12:37, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:27, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support.--Vulp here 08:33, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:28, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm not wowed but the subject, too ordinary, but the level of detail is just exceptional and made me support it. What SW did you use for the stacking? RolfHill (talk) 12:11, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:11, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:36, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Asparagales#Family_:_Asparagaceae

File:Lower Antelope Canyon November 2018 006.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2021 at 00:57:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United States#Arizona
Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:57, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:57, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:44, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Frank. Always wanted to visit Antelope Canyon... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:05, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 09:14, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:02, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Question Have you tried lightening the shadows? I did it and it looks so much better. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:22, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Much better thanks. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:26, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose The upper part is blurred, in the middle there are strange halos, some red or white spots (however, these can be corrected). If you don't open the pic it looks very nice, but it has flaws, sorry. --Co mmon ists 12:41, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately that's the limitation of depth of field. I'm already using f/11, and focus stacking and/or a narrower aperture is not possible because tripods are not allowed inside. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:56, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Per Charles. -- -donald- (talk) 12:55, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- -donald- (talk) 06:04, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:45, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Frank Schulenburg, Martin Falbisoner, XRay, Agnes Monkelbaan, Charlesjsharp, Commonists, -donald-, and Michielverbeek: I have brightened the image, please take another look. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:56, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@King of Hearts: Remove the dots I've put in the notes and that's fine by me, even if a crop of the blurred part would be better, but not necessary, however infinitely better.Thanks. --Co mmon ists 10:34, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Commonists: Fixed -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:37, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

IMO still FP. Thank you for the improvements. --XRay 💬 03:51, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
even better! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:14, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Striking view. Ok @4000px large -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:01, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 08:34, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 17:24, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:39, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hanooz 18:28, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 19:47, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 08:33, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:24, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support RolfHill (talk) 12:02, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 13:24, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support How yonic ... Daniel Case (talk) 17:46, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:10, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:58, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ivar (talk) 06:00, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/United States#Arizona

File:Stonechat (Saxicola rubicola) male, Beaulieu, Hampshire.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2021 at 10:43:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Muscicapidae (Old World Flycatchers)
Info The male stonechat (here on gorse) choses a prominent perch to attract a mate. One exisiting FP. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:43, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:43, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good EV Buidhe (talk) 11:27, 6 May 2021 (UTC) — The new version is definitely better though Buidhe (talk) 01:58, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Charles, can you please check your gallery link is correct. I've fixed it for you. I think you've lifted the shadows a bit too much on this one. It is fine as an identification photo but FP? Bird on blue sky in hard light. Compare existing FP File:Saxtor.jpg which is a much more animated fellow, and pleasing composition/colours. -- Colin (talk) 17:00, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your preferred image doesn't have as much definition or sharpness. And too much wood for me. I wouldn't put it up for FP these days. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:16, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Charles, we're talking about capturing the moment, good light, good colours, good composition. Pixel peeping the other photo just shows that the point is being missed. -- Colin (talk) 08:09, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FPC has certainly lost good composition to identify-species and technical perfection over the years. I'm thrilled that Rhododendrites is bringing it back for bird photos. --Cart (talk) 19:47, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment You might consider cropping out half the sky above the bird. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:52, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a suggested crop on the left Ikan Kekek leaving eye on rule of thirds. What do you think? Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:02, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That looks good except that you could leave just a tiny bit more room to the left of the plant. But I also still think removing some of the sky above the bird would be good. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:07, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

let's see if others have an opinion, before cropping. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:10, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can we please put the rule of thirds to death at FPC. Or at least, anyone who quotes it should be required to refrain from opposing another image due to "composition". It's a poor guide for newbies who don't know any better yet. Since FPC serves as a teaching environment for some new photographs, it would be sad if they felt this "rule" had any merit. -- Colin (talk) 08:09, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The rule of thirds does have merit. Since when was FPC supposed to serve as a teaching environment? Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:20, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FPC was not designed to be a teaching environment, nevertheless it has become that. New photographers come here to learn from comments made about photos and to make their first tentative nominations all the time. I can think of a number of users who have improved their photography skills thanks to this forum. The page views for this forum, plus the list, in English only is at an average of about 450/day. Add to that the 32 other languages that redirects here. A lot more people than the voters read these comments. --Cart (talk) 11:25, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Good image, but lacking wow factor. --Tagooty (talk) 02:36, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Regardless of any theoretical backing, I agree with the proposed vertical crop as it looks pleasing to my eye. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:27, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment New version uploaded, cropped on three sides, Ikan Kekek, King of ♥ Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:45, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:52, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:26, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Tagooty RolfHill (talk) 08:38, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:42, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Though I agree that cropped to a square (or almost one) would help it even more, with still more coming off the top). See note. Daniel Case (talk) 17:26, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 11:44, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 08:25, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Rootless Cosmopolitan (talk) 21:17, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 06:02, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ivar (talk) 05:57, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Muscicapidae (Old World Flycatchers)

File:Three-eyed lizard (Chalarodon madagascariensis) male Toliara.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2021 at 17:32:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family : Opluridae (Madagascan iguanas)
Info A family of reptiles unique to Madagascar. They have never been properly studied, so we don't know if this is a male raising its tail to look heroic, or a female raising it to attract a male. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support impressive sharpness! --Ivar (talk) 18:11, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sharp from head till tail! --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:35, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 21:36, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:46, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:50, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:03, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:58, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The tail is great -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:56, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive capture. This kind of photo is not so easy to take. --Clément Bardot (talk) 07:09, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK if you don't mind getting covered in dust slithering around on the ground like a snake! Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:29, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support.--Vulp here 08:34, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Mind-blowing sharpness and resolution! And that pose — it's like it knows it's being photographed! Rootless Cosmopolitan (talk) 21:08, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 22:00, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The background isn't good but nice quality and subject, though RolfHill (talk) 12:04, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 16:32, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:11, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ivar (talk) 05:59, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles#Family : Opluridae (Madagascan iguanas)

File:Torre del Pian dell'Isola in Rignano sull'Arno risalente all'anno 1100 D.C. circa.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2021 at 11:31:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#Italy
Info created, uploaded and nominated by PROPOLI87 -- (⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 10:26, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- (⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 10:26, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quality could be better, and the crop of the cypress is distracting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:00, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow, bottom and top crop not well done --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:36, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ikan --Co mmon ists 12:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:27, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Bad crop and busy. Daniel Case (talk) 04:48, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above RolfHill (talk) 12:07, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ivar (talk) 05:58, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lightning in the sky over Tuntorp.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2021 at 12:39:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Lightning
Info Here we go, experimenting again. Photographing lightning in daylight is a bit different than at night, you can't just leave the shutter open and let the flash fix the exposure, so there aren't that many such photos here on Commons and no FPs. With a thunderstorm coming in from the sea, I set up the camera on a tripod, pointed it in the direction I hoped the flashes would appear (that also had the best foreground) set the video rolling and hoped for the best.

I managed to get three flashes on video and one of them looked pretty nice, so I selected the best frame and used it as "raw" to process a photo. Hence the small size. And yes, my camera can shoot video in 4K, but only at 25 frames/sec. With flashes being rather quick it was better to set it to full HD and get 50 frames/sec instead. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 12:39, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Abstain as author. -- Cart (talk) 12:39, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too small. Compare with File:Port and lighthouse overnight storm with lightning in Port-la-Nouvelle.jpg for example -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:26, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's a nighttime shot, so different technique. This is shot in daylight as explained above. --Cart (talk) 07:50, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Only 2 Mpx, this resolution was maybe fine in 2005 or 2006, but in 2021 modern equipment allow to produce much bigger images, more impressive. Even my mobile phone takes 8K videos (33 Mpx x 24 frames per second), that look great when downsized at 4K. But this picture is not 4K, it is really tiny, reaching the acceptable limit of the guidelines without real justification. Also posterized sky with visible artifacts at the left -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:22, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know, but you need 50 frames per second to properly capture a flash of lightning so that limits the size. With 24 fps you can miss it or it will get blurry. --Cart (talk) 08:40, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree. I made similar videos when I was in Vientiane (that day), from which I could extract pictures perfectly fine at 24 fps -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:53, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! You can extract perfect shots of lightning in daylight from a 24 fps. Please show us, I would love to see that and it would be great to have them on Commons. Posterization fixed, thanks for pointing it out. --Cart (talk) 09:04, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not fixed ;
Yes, when I'll have time I'll upload them. Still have other work to handle first ;
Bracketing would have been a better technique to obtain a decent size IMO -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:32, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose barely above 2 MP photo has to be nowadays very special to deserve a star. Imho this one is not. --Ivar (talk) 10:29, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Now that the technique has been shown, I hope someone with better equipment than me makes an attempt with this. --Cart (talk) 20:19, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mohammad Helal Ali امامزاده هلال ابن علی 04.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2021 at 20:25:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Iran
Info created by Mostafameraji - uploaded by Mostafameraji - nominated by Shiasun -- Shiasun (talk) 20:04, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Shiasun (talk) 20:27, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support An excellent image under difficult lighting conditions. Would make the first night-time image in the gallery Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Iran. @Mostafameraji: Will be useful to add an English translation of the Description and Caption. --Tagooty (talk) 01:47, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Travia, Saeed Toosi a prominent Qur'an reciter and alleged child sexual abuser is seen in this picture! --Gnosis (talk) 07:52, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As things stand, I'm at least slightly inclined to oppose, in spite of the great content, because of photo quality issues. In particular, the magenta chromatic aberration on the near right minar should be eliminated. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:45, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The perspective correction is not done properly, leaving the central verticals and all the horizontal tilted. The magenta/green CA is also prominent on all the books. --Cart (talk) 09:14, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Wonderful view, strong CAs in many places. (Yes, I am the 3rd one saying this, but the CAs really spoil the photo IMHO, sorry, this is why I repeat it.) --Aristeas (talk) 11:18, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed I have removed as much CA as possible (automatic and manual), you have to have a very light touch because of all the lights in green and magenta (corrections are prone to spill over), and tweaked the perspective. Made in two steps in case someone thinks these are too big adjustments for overwrites, please revert if you think so. But now I think the photo is good to go. You may need to refresh (F5) your cache. --Cart (talk) 12:17, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support this version. It isn't perfect but this view during a broadcast ceremony is of much higher interest than an ordinary view of this mosque would be, and the mosque itself is quite impressive to begin with and unusual for being open-air. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:45, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 19:26, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:30, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:47, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:10, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 21:32, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:20, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I do not feel comfortable voting for a picture of a child abuser. Saeed Toosi has the main role in this picture and all these people are listening to him, so his presence in the picture cannot be considered small and minor. I do not even need to look at Wikimedia policies, everything related to child sexual abuse is a red line. --IamMM (talk) 07:54, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support @W.carter: Thank you very much for your great effort to rescue the photo from the CAs! – I understand and respect IamMM’s reservations, but for my simple European eyes this is mainly a photo of the illuminated mosque and of the praying congregation, so (in all respect) I think it is venial to promote the photo even from an ethical point of view. --Aristeas (talk) 08:42, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Aristeas: I do not insist that others agree with this, and I also confirm that this image has no other problem to be chosen than the presence of Mr. Toosi himself. But at the same time, I still can not accept that having technical standards is a good/enough reason to consciously place a photo of a famous child sexual abuser on the main page of Commons. In response to your argument , if my Persian eyes saw a eye-catching and impressive photograph of a historic European church in which a priest accused of similar acts was lecturing, I would still strongly oppose it regardless of cultural or geographical differences.--IamMM (talk) 09:42, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The main point of FPs is not to place them on the main page of Commons, that is a side-effect for very few FPs. There are always FPs not chosen for POTD on the main page for a number of reasons. Massmurderers, other offenders and their doings seldom make it to POTD. FPs exist so that we can get good pictures for all the different parts of the WikiProjects. Neutral Wikipedias are striving to be as good encyclopedias as possible, and it would look rather strange if only articles of pleasant things had good photos, while offensive stuff had bad or no pictures at all. I have supported many images of things I don't like or agree with here, simply for the sake of the encyclopedic value of them. If you have an ethical problem with any image, I think it would be better if you voiced your concern at POTD instead. --Cart (talk) 10:03, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have added some English to the photo's description. Perhaps someone speaking Arabic can tweak it for the better. I also noted that Mr. Toosi is present in the photo. Information like that is helpful if you want to state why a photo might not be appropriate for POTD. --Cart (talk) 10:51, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(You mean someone who can read Farsi.) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:14, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That works too. There are descriptions in both Arabic and Farsi on the file page. You can see that if you open the 'edit' window. I just picked the language that was entered first. --Cart (talk) 07:52, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I see this. Silly remark by me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:55, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@IamMM: I completely understand and respect your point of view! I am so sorry, my “European eyes” was liable to be misunderstood. I did not want to assert any cultural or geographical differences regarding crime, justice, or ethics – child sexual abuse is a terrible crime, period, and should be regarded and prosecuted everywhere on the world regardless of cultural or geographical differences. What I wanted to say was just that simple people like me who are not familar with the distinctive features of Islamic prayer and especially not with the sophisticated practice of Qur’an recitation, do not even see that this photo emphasizes or features any special person -- all I see are many persons praying together in an illuminated, beautiful mosque. But I get the feeling that the more I write the more I am getting in trouble. I just wanted to review a photo, I did not want to harm anybody, I did not want to defend child sexual abuse or any other crime, and it’s probably best that I stop to write anything here before I get blocked or prosecucted. Should I leave Commons? Sorry to all of you and all the best to all of you. --Aristeas (talk) 10:10, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
~~FYI. I hope you are satisfied now. --Aristeas (talk) 10:13, 9 May 2021 (UTC)~~ Thank you, IamMM, for your clarification (answered there) and sorry to all of you for the confusion. Probably this was a series of entangled misunderstandings. Sorry again and all the best. --Aristeas (talk) 11:22, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

According to the Wikipedia article Saeed Toosi was acquitted, therefore the comments of IamMM could be considered libel. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:56, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The story of how Saeed Toosi was acquitted and the role of the Iranian leader in preventing the trial is one of the reasons for the sensitivity of the case.[1][2] Following the Iranian judiciary's refusal to hear the case, the families of the child victims went to the Turkish judiciary to pursue their complaint, and legal action is ongoing (according to MP Mahmoud Sadeghi). The English Wiki article is inaccurate in this regard.--IamMM (talk) 11:04, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Drama, drama... Seriously, as a neutral Wikipedian I might support even a picture of Marc Dutroux, if we got a featurable one (yet by now there is no photo whatsoever, alas). So I'm going to judge as a neutral Wikipedian actually should judge. The picture is not bad, but the sharpness is maybe just barely OK for QI, the composition with the barely cropped towers is average, there is vignetting, and the green lighting does not really add something to the Blue hour mood, as it probably should do. --A.Savin 11:56, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I understand IamMM's objections, but you can barely distinguish Toosi in the middle of the image. I don't really see this image as promoting him. Daniel Case (talk) 14:55, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 08:33, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Per A.Savin but the light is good and the scenery, too RolfHill (talk) 12:18, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:55, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Ivar (talk) 06:15, 17 May 2021 (UTC))[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Iran

File:Soffione - Pappo di dente di Leone, infruttescenza di Tarassaco.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2021 at 16:12:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asterales#Subfamily : Cichorioideae
Info created by PROPOLI87 - uploaded by PROPOLI87 - nominated by PROPOLI87 -- (⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 13:21, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- (⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 13:21, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose PoV should be level with plant, not looking down. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:38, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a rule. It would rather depend on the plant and the composition. --Cart (talk) 17:15, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Good but not exceptional, as such a common subject would require to be a Featured Picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:18, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above --Co mmon ists 12:17, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:24, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Too ordinary, quality issues (overexposure, missing detail) RolfHill (talk) 12:01, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Background too busy, per others. Daniel Case (talk) 20:59, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per the others. For a subject like this, I would except much more detail for a FP. --Domob (talk) 11:35, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:15, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:שקיעה סתווית מעל מבצר עתלית.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2021 at 19:22:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Settlements#Israel
Info created by Akiiva - uploaded by Akiiva - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 19:22, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 19:22, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice colors --Ezarateesteban 19:54, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Mild Support. Doesn't blow me away, but very atmospheric and pretty. Should verticals be corrected on the left and center-left? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:48, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 13:50, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Ordinary but nice composition --Co mmon ists 19:22, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sock puppet of Livioandronico2013. In this discussion, it has been decided to strike out all his votes. --Aristeas (talk) 16:52, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral Beautiful photo. but for me the boat is too much to the right.--Famberhorst (talk) 14:56, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:22, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Crop is too tight on the right. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:57, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good image, but not so good for PR, IHMO. -- Karelj (talk) 21:32, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Ordinarily, the crop would bother me, but the clouds are the real subject here. It looks like something Cart would take. Daniel Case (talk) 03:02, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I might take a shot like this, but I wouldn't nominate it for FP. The composition is too unbalanced for such an ordinary scene. --Cart (talk) 08:32, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What about the alternative - File:שקיעה_מעל_טירת_פלרן.jpg ? --Andrei (talk) 08:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, sorry. The photographer is trying to cramp too much into the compo, the anchor is one item too much. Also it is taken with slightly bad timing and too close, making the person dark and big (had he been turned slightly to the sun to catch some light, it would have been better) and his reflection in the sand is cut at the head, more or less crop would be better. Imagine this photoshopped version :-) --Cart (talk) 09:54, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose cropped too tightly on the right. We have better FPs of boats during sunset Buidhe (talk) 11:16, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Buidhe RolfHill (talk) 12:20, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support After some thought, I think the qualities suffice for an FP. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:15, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Ivar (talk) 06:13, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Settlements#Israel

Updated results:

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 16:52, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:شهر قم از نگاه دوربین عکاسی - تصاویر باکیفیت از قم - کلانشهرهای ایران- مصطفی معراجی - والپیپر 06.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2021 at 20:04:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Iran
Info created by Mostafameraji - uploaded by Mostafameraji - nominated by Shiasun -- Shiasun (talk) 20:04, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Shiasun (talk) 20:04, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Piotr Bart (talk) 20:16, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose no way. severe fringing and artefacts around both towers, also grainy. Seven Pandas (talk) 20:31, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Seven Pandas. The fringing is very evident on the higher reaches of the tower on the right. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:53, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree with the comments above RolfHill (talk) 08:34, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others; looks like the camera may have moved slightly. Daniel Case (talk) 03:06, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ivar (talk) 06:13, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:تاق‌بستان.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 May 2021 at 10:44:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taq-e_Bostan

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Iran
Info created by AliHeidari2 - uploaded by AliHeidari2 - nominated by POS78 -- POS78 (talk) 10:44, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- POS78 (talk) 10:44, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose can't support due to lack of clarity of composition. This image would have been better taken at a different time without the shadow covering part of the door. I would also prefer a more direct angle, more like this. Buidhe (talk) 16:56, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above RolfHill (talk) 11:58, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Maybe if it were just the archways, the trees and the reflections. As it is it asks us to take in a lot. Daniel Case (talk) 01:25, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment For me personally this is an instructive photo, so thank you for pointing it out. There is definitely an FP in the scenery, but this photo has not revealed it; and I have spent some time thinking about the lessons this photo teaches me. The most important point has been stated by Daniel: to limit the composition to the most photogenic items, namely trees, archways, and reflections; and it would probably be necessary to include the whole reflections of the trees (instead of the upper part of the rocks). From the point of view of a historian or archeologist, the relief and the little arch at the right are important, but for a photographer the trees and the reflections are more important because together with the two big archways they form a solid, photogenic composition. In addition, sharpness and level of details are not perfect (a better lens and f/5.6 or f/8 would have helped). The brightness, gradation, and colour balance are unlucky, too, but these points could probably be fixed completely if we had access to a raw image file. --Aristeas (talk) 08:14, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:07, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Buff-banded Rail 1 - Newington.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 May 2021 at 15:47:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Rallidae_(Coots,_Rails_and_Crakes)
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by Ivar (talk) 15:47, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 15:47, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've never liked these ~~John Harrison's~~ blurred forgrounds. They look artificial even though ~~he has explained~~ it's the lens that causes the effect. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:08, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, the extremely special and very expensive lens used here and on a lot of JJ Harrison's bird photos, allows the photographer to select a very narrow band of perfectly sharp DoF while the rest of the image (foreground and background) becomes a smooth bokeh. If the bird is photographed in flight up in the sky, this effect is hardly noticeable, but at ground level it can look somewhat surreal. It's a style choice; some like and some don't. More info about the lens here. --Cart (talk) 19:33, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Can we please avoid making personal negative comments ("I've never liked John Harrison's blurred forgrounds"). This is absolutely standard at an advanced level of wildlife photography. See this and this, this, this and this, etc, etc, etc. -- Colin (talk) 21:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ahum, this is not about getting down and dirty for a low level of shooting; Charles himself recommends it both here and here on current nominations. It's only this specific lens with its bokeh capabilities that's bugging him. We've heard it several times before (Like here for example). --Cart (talk) 23:05, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No disrespect, Charles, but there is low and there is on-the-ground low. That lizard photo was either taken on sloping ground [it was Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:37, 13 May 2021 (UTC)] or from about knee height (otherwise we'd see sky or distant shrubs/trees in the background). The links I gave show some examples of the difference achieved when you get really really low. I remember reading a discussion from JJ with Diliff many many years ago that described crawling along mud flats on one's belly for a very long distance. The lizard photo was taken from 2.4m according to the EXIF with a 470mm equivalent lens giving a field-of-view of 4.4°. This photo I don't know the distance but the 1500mm equivalent lens has a tiny field-of-view of 1.4°. The difference of low height + distance here means we have a long section of foreground compressed into a thin slice. It wouldn't I believe, look a whole lot different with a 500mm lens vs 1500mm equivalent. The effect is largely due to angle-of-view: the linked websites show many very similar images shot with fairly standard telephoto lenses.[reply]

But importantly, I don't think it is healthy to negatively single out a person by name, as though this is "John Harrison's blurred forgrounds". Reviewers here might personally associated that look with one photographer, but that says more about reviewers at FPC and their experiences and observations than it does about that photographer. And negative comments like these make advanced photographers despair and decide to contribute to websites where their skill and talents are appreciated, not questioned. -- Colin (talk) 09:12, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Following the discussion Cart links to I had a long offline discussion with JJH and totally accepted the results produced by his lens. I vote to promote many of his excellent images. I just don't like the blurred foreground look, though I have not opposed this nomination. And, I have never pretended to be an advanced photographer, Colin. I claim to be a wildlife portrait photographer, nothing more. Oh! in case you wondered, Colin's "No disrespect" means "Disrespect" these days. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:37, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Good EV Buidhe (talk) 16:49, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support if cropped more tightly Rootless Cosmopolitan (talk) 21:02, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't see any need for a crop. -- Colin (talk) 21:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support An eye-level photo of a small bird on the ground, demonstrating lovely plumage. Somehow intimate yet clearly taken at a distance. This is first class bird photography. -- Colin (talk) 21:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:54, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support very sharp bird Seven Pandas (talk) 23:12, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love these smooth gradient backgrounds -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:23, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:41, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:14, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per above RolfHill (talk) 11:57, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support High-quality bird shot. Otherwise, per Colin. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:47, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:09, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:29, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mile (talk) 19:23, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:40, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 19:52, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:47, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:04, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support, but count me with those who think it needlessly rectangular. Daniel Case (talk) 20:33, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:58, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow --Co mmon ists 13:05, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:07, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:57, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:24, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:59, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:41, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family_:_Rallidae_(Coots,_Rails_and_Crakes)

File:Kobylá nad Vidnavkou (Jungferndorf) - small chapel.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 May 2021 at 14:45:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Czech_Republic
Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 14:45, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pudelek (talk) 14:45, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose no wow Buidhe (talk) 16:47, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose harsh lighting and difficult to make out details Rootless Cosmopolitan (talk) 20:59, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not exceptional, and harsh lighting. -- Colin (talk) 21:18, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Perfectly OK QI, but no great composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:15, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above RolfHill (talk) 11:57, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose QI as noted, but not FP. But with slightly different lighting and framing, you might be able to make us see what you saw ... Daniel Case (talk) 01:29, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per the others. It is a nice scene and composition in general, just nothing truly outstanding, especially with this light. Also not exceptionally sharp. --Domob (talk) 11:34, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:42, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lac de Montriond 06.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2021 at 13:42:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Haute-Savoie
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 13:42, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 13:42, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seven Pandas (talk) 14:49, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hanooz 16:58, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 19:26, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:29, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support A good balanced photo --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:45, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:29, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:25, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 14:52, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 18:30, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:51, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is too dark for me. The light on the distant mountain is not impressive enough to compensate. Still water would help too. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:35, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:13, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 08:33, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too dark, per Charlesjsharp. -- Karelj (talk) 19:33, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support RolfHill (talk) 12:16, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good composition, and I like the peacefulness of the subdued low light. I'm surprised there was that much light at 04:08, even so close to the solstice! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:30, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:56, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:43, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/France#Haute-Savoie

File:Meridian Idaho Temple.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2021 at 20:05:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#United States
Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:05, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:05, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think summer is unfortunately not the ideal time to photograph a south-facing building. If it's too close to sunrise/sunset, then the facade will be in shadow. If it's too close to noon, then the lighting and sky will be boring. I think you tried to straddle the difference by shooting at 4 PM, but it could have been much better any other season. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:46, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Works for me. There's just enough contrast, and the bright, simple sky brings out the whiteness and shapes of the facade. Very well-composed, too. It probably wouldn't have worked without the contrast of the gardens, though. My father had a book of very good pictures of Mormon temples from I guess the early 20th century, and this photo reminds me of photos in that book. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:03, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There's something else that's a little harder to put my hands on: There's a kind of metaphorical purity to this photo. If you look up photos of LDS temples, most of them are white. I feel like this light accentuates the whiteness, and I don't have to be (and am not) LDS in order to appreciate the statement being made by the setting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:07, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Actually, that "ethereal" mood is the point :-) You describe it very well. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 23:22, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Good EV Buidhe (talk) 00:36, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support An interesting building (I don't share their ideas), high key photography, a very appealing contrast between the facade and the green vegetation. --Cayambe (talk) 06:46, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The lighting seems wrong to me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:39, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Frank and Cayambe --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:02, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's not the most perfect moment of the day and year to take this photo --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:22, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothig special for FP nomination. -- Karelj (talk) 21:34, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Definitely a QI, but I agree with King of Hearts that this light is not right. Actually, like a lot of Mormon temples, this would work a lot better with a deep blue sky behind it ... I remember seeing the Idaho Falls temple from across the Snake River on the afternoon of the eclipse with IMO just the right lighting and getting a few shots of it ... I haven't yet been able to process them but I see FP potential. Daniel Case (talk) 01:08, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above RolfHill (talk) 12:13, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 13:22, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:58, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:42, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Our Lady church in Marvejols 25.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2021 at 13:45:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#France
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 13:45, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 13:45, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 17:54, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 18:29, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:22, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:15, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 08:33, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good shot but level of detail is too low and the church interior doesn't look really extraordinary to me, probably too much of interesting benches and ceiling RolfHill (talk) 12:15, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per RolfHill. -- Karelj (talk) 21:49, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very good shot, but I think the level of detail is a bit to soft even for a Nikkon D3300. I think this image must be QI for sure. Sorry. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 16:26, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:35, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per RolfHill,sorry. --Co mmon ists 14:39, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 19:44, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:43, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mount Murchison.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2021 at 05:58:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#Alberta
Info: Mount Murchison, Banff National Park; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:58, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:58, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose It is a striking landscape and mountain, but for me, sharpness is not good enough for a landscape FP like this. --Domob (talk) 11:30, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Question Isn't it tilted, or does the wind blow from the right? Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:20, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
On closer inspection, I think it was tilted indeed; fixed. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:41, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Domob; I also find that tree in front distracting, as if it were photobombing the mountain. Daniel Case (talk) 02:11, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:00, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Haindlkar trail mark 20200622.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2021 at 11:27:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Other_objects_in_landscapespictures/Sports#Individual sports -->
Info created by Domob - uploaded by Domob - nominated by Domob -- Domob (talk) 11:27, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is not a very special or exciting scene, but I like the composition and the contrast between the mark on the tree and the calm forest background. --Domob (talk) 11:27, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Domob (talk) 11:27, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but the composition does not give me a wow feeling --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:57, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree, not very special or exciting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:17, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others. The slanted tree doesn't help and the image is a bit flat. Some guiding lines like maybe a path would help to create a composition. --Basotxerri (talk) 14:28, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thanks everyone for the feedback! --Domob (talk) 11:45, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mount Shasta as seen from Bunny Flat.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2021 at 15:43:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United_States#California
Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:43, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:43, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Question Didn't you take another shot, Frank, when the cloud had moved out of the way? Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:10, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yes, I took many shots that day. I'm extremely happy about the fact that I drove up to the volcano on a day with some clouds in the sky, which is a rare occurence here in California. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:09, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:08, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:39, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support from an artistic standpoint, I like the clouds Buidhe (talk) 03:11, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:19, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:12, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Postcard quality. Daniel Case (talk) 01:56, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 06:02, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:57, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Domob (talk) 11:32, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 13:03, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:20, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Support Very nice view and clouds. If I were to nitpick, the shadow on the left is a little distracting and the snow on the bottom right is framed a little too tightly. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:57, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:24, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:01, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:38, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:03, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/United_States#California

File:Ulmus laevis flowers - Keila.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2021 at 16:32:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Ulmaceae
Info all by Ivar (talk) 16:32, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 16:32, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:08, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not just flowers but a nice bud, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:33, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support very good and nice Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:31, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Pleasant background -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:19, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:17, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Buidhe (talk) 10:28, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:17, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 06:02, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:55, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 13:03, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:20, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:10, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:23, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:02, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 14:35, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:34, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:37, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:04, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family_:_Ulmaceae

File:Veery in CP (43277).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2021 at 19:07:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Turdidae_(Thrushes)
Info A veery (Catharus fuscescens) by the Ramble Stone Arch in NYC. It was the first veery I've seen, and it happened to briefly land just nearby. I like the sharpness and soft light of the shot, so giving it a nom. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 19:07, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 19:07, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:38, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice composition and cute. As big as or slightly bigger than a house sparrow. Nice song which I don't remember having heard. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:14, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seven Pandas (talk) 21:27, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:17, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:32, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:08, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:20, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 21:16, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 06:01, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:54, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 10:52, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 13:03, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:21, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Ordinarily I'd say the background was distracting, and I do wish that vertical twig wasn't there, but otherwise the two branches neatly complement the lines of the bird and each other. Daniel Case (talk) 15:18, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:23, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:03, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Lmbuga (talk) 00:19, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:37, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Daniel --Schnobby (talk) 15:43, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:05, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Turdidae_(Thrushes)

File:Staring Down Hurricane Florence.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 May 2021 at 04:51:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Satellite images#North America
Info The eye of Hurricane Florence near peak intensity. created by Alexander Gerst - uploaded by Sergkarman - nominated by StellarHalo -- StellarHalo (talk) 04:51, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- StellarHalo (talk) 04:51, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 06:49, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful image of a destructive process. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:39, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:23, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support great EV Buidhe (talk) 10:19, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:16, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 06:00, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Both instructive and beautiful. --Aristeas (talk) 07:53, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 13:03, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:22, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Cbrescia (talk) 05:01, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:22, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 07:16, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:03, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 12:55, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:35, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:37, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 15:39, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 21:31, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 07:39, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Satellite images#North America

File:Tulipa bakeri 'Lilac Wonder' 09-05-2021. (d.j.b).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 May 2021 at 06:45:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Liliaceae
Info created & uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 06:45, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 06:45, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:32, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:36, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment imo dark "halo" (created by stacking program) around the flower should be removed. --Ivar (talk) 08:12, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Photos re-stacked. Thanks for the review.--Famberhorst (talk) 11:19, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment one more error on bottom right corner (note added). --Ivar (talk) 13:16, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Correction. Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:13, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Background has been replaced with artificial background. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:07, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so. Artificial backgrounds have the same info all over when you pull the levels to extremes (saturation and light); they are homogenous. This is what this photo looks like when you do that and there are plenty of blotches and information in the background. To compare, I made an artificial background for the photo, and with the same enhancement settings it looks like this. There is a big difference. You can download the photo and do this test yourself in Photoshop. --Cart (talk) 15:46, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All I am doing is reading the statement on the file page. Check it out Cart. May be that is wrong, and if so I will change my vote. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:48, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I see that, thanks Charles for pointing it out, I only went by what I see in the photo and it doesn't seems to be added in a computer. I wonder if something hasn't gone lost in translation here. Famberhorst, when you write "artificial background", do you mean that you photographed the flower against a black wall or paper as opposed to a natural environment outdoors? Artificial for me is when the background is added later using color in the computer. We might be talking about two different things here. --Cart (talk) 21:06, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The pot with the flower was placed against a dark background and then photographed.--Famberhorst (talk) 04:38, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying. So only a language misunderstanding and how to use the 'retouched' template. I see that you have removed the text from the template. The template can be completely removed since it is not needed for the very small corrections you have made. It should only be used for bigger alterations in the computer. --Cart (talk) 06:33, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ermell (talk) 21:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 06:00, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:52, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support great compo, but the closest area to the camera is not perfectly in focus. --Ivar (talk) 08:43, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 13:03, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:22, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:21, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:22, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 07:34, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:04, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support you for promoting my photo.--Famberhorst (talk) 04:34, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 19:45, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Liliaceae

File:Green heron in PP (14296).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 May 2021 at 14:27:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Butorides
Info Green heron (Butorides virescens) hunting in a still corner of Prospect Park Lake. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:27, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:27, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow, cool. --A.Savin 14:43, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 15:00, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice, but can you rotate slightly to get reflection lined up please Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:50, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @Charlesjsharp: Hm. Thought it was, but it indeed was ever so slightly off. Done now — Rhododendrites ^talk | 16:04, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Perfect now. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:14, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Beautiful! --Michielverbeek (talk) 17:24, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good.--Ermell (talk) 21:11, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 22:30, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:59, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:51, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:36, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Domob (talk) 11:31, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 13:03, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:23, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Colin (talk) 13:56, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great reflection -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:23, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:21, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:23, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:52, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Good shot. But some strange shapes at the tail (~~anoted~~). --Mile (talk) 08:54, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:06, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Question Yes, looks like some poor cloning, Rhododendrites Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:50, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @PetarM and Charlesjsharp: You are correct, thanks. There was a little piece of bright detritus there. I gave removing it another shot. IMO it looks better, but let me know what you think. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:54, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, these bits are easily missed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:03, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It could be better, some editing "ball" now visible but good shot, ISO 2000. Bird is like mirrored, polarizer used ? --Mile (talk) 16:40, 16 May 2021 (UTC) p.S. I would write location. Prospect park migth be good for your neighbour, but for me not much. Country, State etc.[reply]
- Sure, but without the original note I'm not sure it's very visible. It's true that my Photoshop skills are not as good as some, though. No polarizer. I took probably 100 shots of this bird; this one had the best combination of sharpness, reflection, and light (there wasn't much, though, hence 2000 ISO). Also, I added additional info to the description. I typically use just "Prospect Park" and "Central Park" because the ones I'm talking about are the default categories (Category:Prospect Park/Category:Central Park), but it doesn't hurt to have it in the description, too. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 16:52, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you explain what you mean by "mirrored, polarizer used?" please Mile. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:18, 17 May 2021 (UTC) Charlesjsharp This. --Mile (talk) 08:30, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - I don't know how much wildlife photography you have done Mile, but a polarizer is seldom used. Firstly, it takes time to set up and the moment may have gone. Secondly, I don't believe it would achieve the desired effect on this type of picture where you want the reflection. The polarizer makes it easier to 'see through' the water, which is not what Rhododendrites would have wanted here. Some users here use FPC as a learning resource, so giving "expert" advice is unwise unless it is expert. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:29, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 18:09, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well at least you moved ISO barrier on "Commons FP's" and texture is excellent. --Mile (talk) 18:47, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:26, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:31, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:56, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:37, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Exceptional! --Tagooty (talk) 15:17, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:41, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Butorides

File:Gargoyle depicting Hodgetts, Chichester Cathedral.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2021 at 13:54:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#United_Kingdom
Info created by Martinvl - uploaded by Martinvl - nominated by Martinvl -- Martinvl (talk) 13:54, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Martinvl (talk) 13:54, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The pipe was not part of the original design, was it? Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:12, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Info @Charlesjsharp: I am unable to give a definitive answer. A few pointers that might help you decide are that the gargoyle was put in place during Hogett's lifetime (he died a year ago and this photo was taken five years ago) and that his tenure at the cathedral started in 1971. Martinvl (talk) 14:39, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Probably was then, but it doesn't work for me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:57, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment IMHO the pipe contributes to the grotesque effect (which is obviously intentional, the face is rather a caricature). I assume this is an example of British humour? (At least it would be unthinkable to honour famous people in this way here in Germany. That’s a pity, really, I would like to see one of my professors honoured in that way ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 09:25, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- The pipe is part of the design and an indication it is a true gargoyle rather than just a grotesqeue. There is another here of John Treadgold, dean of Chichester. This geograph photo shows both, and is IMO a better image, though quite small. -- Colin (talk) 10:56, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Colin: Thank you for the information! --Aristeas (talk) 07:41, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's funny and would certainly make a good QI, but there's just too much going in the background for me to support it as FP. Daniel Case (talk) 19:09, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

+1 and harsh light -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:05, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Martinvl (talk) 21:30, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vineyard cottage - Weingarten 04.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2021 at 12:15:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 12:15, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 12:15, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Oh, image looking like from my garden, off course yes... -- Karelj (talk) 13:21, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I understand the idea but it doesn't wow me. --Basotxerri (talk) 14:20, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice illustration for sheds. However, I would call it a shed and not a cottage unless it's used for living in. Buidhe (talk) 17:03, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:21, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:32, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:07, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:37, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above --Uoaei1 (talk) 15:01, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I can see what you might have been seeing but it just doesn't quite come through here. Daniel Case (talk) 19:04, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The barbed wires and pillars are quite repulsive in the background. With this harsh light, the subject doesn't really galvanize me, but there could be a potential under more favorable weather conditions with a different angle -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:52, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not unusual in any sense. --Tagooty (talk) 15:14, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Llez (talk) 15:43, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Copacabana, Bolivia.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2021 at 19:28:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Bolivia
Info created and uploaded by Christopher Crouzet - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 19:28, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 19:28, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The light does not shine well on the city. One part is too much shadowed whil the other part is too bright. --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:56, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose The light is indeed not optimal, and also for a FP of such a scene, I would much prefer a higher-resolution panorama (e.g. stitched from multiple shots). The composition is really nice, though, including the boats. --Domob (talk) 07:18, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Basotxerri (talk) 14:21, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 14:09, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:02, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:TR Izmir asv2020-02 img58 Salepçioğlu Mosque.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2021 at 20:46:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Turkey
Info Dome interior of Salepçioğlu Mosque in İzmir/Turkey --- all by A.Savin --A.Savin 20:46, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 20:46, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 08:34, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Why f/4, it wasnt handheld? Interesting there is CA on windows in cetnre and not on flanks. Corner sharpnes is not so good. --Mile (talk) 09:06, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Mile. In addition, the central bar is annoying.--Co mmon ists 10:36, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:26, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per Commonists RolfHill (talk) 12:00, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A bar walks into a mosque and ... Daniel Case (talk) 21:00, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Groan... Although I'm not sure all cultures represented here at FPC know about the English-speaking world's jokes that begins with "A guy/priest/rabbi/whatever walks into a bar..." --Cart (talk) 06:55, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know we had an article about that. Thanks! Daniel Case (talk) 14:47, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:02, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pasola.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 May 2021 at 09:05:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports
Info created & uploaded by RaiyaniM - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:05, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:05, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting but the background is just too busy RolfHill (talk) 11:59, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Indeed the background is busy, but IMO those spectators add something to the composition --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:46, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Life... -- Karelj (talk) 21:52, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Like the others, I think the background is just part of it all and I love the action --Kritzolina (talk) 10:29, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think the background is not ideal, but it's a compelling image, anyway. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:26, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:58, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:33, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:38, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 17:12, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:13, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Sports#Individual sports

File:Bo official portrait.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2021 at 14:27:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family : Canidae (Canids)
Info The official portrait of the Obama family dog, "Bo", a Portuguese water dog, on the South Lawn of the White House. Bo recently died of cancer. Created by Chuck Kennedy - uploaded by Xolani - nominated by ArionEstar -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 14:27, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 14:27, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I like to be able to see the eyes. A previous Obama image uploaded by this user was challenged on licencing. Is this one OK? Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:51, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sad to hear of Bo's passing. However, I don't think this image has a great composition, and the shadows are distracting. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 17:27, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not a great portrait to me, per Charles' point about his eyes not being that easily visible. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:38, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unappealing light, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:06, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 07:04, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 15:14, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others --El Grafo (talk) 11:21, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:46, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lion (Panthera leo) male and cub Etosha.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2021 at 14:21:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family : Felidae (Felids)
Info Can I come hunting with you please, Daddy? All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:21, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:21, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another masterpiece from Charles --Wilfredor (talk) 15:52, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Gorgeous! My wife just went by and was stunned as well. --Domob (talk) 16:43, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Awesome Buidhe (talk) 17:05, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. Outstanding facial expressions. (Crop could be tighter) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:16, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I tried a tighter crop but lost the sky. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:25, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:20, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really an extraordinary photo! I suppose this is a lion family (or part of one), as we can also see the sleeping lioness and a couple of other lions. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:41, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Full family, no other lions anywhere near that we could see (we were self-driving). Lioness and two more cubs in the background. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:28, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You could consider changing the file description accordingly and then also the filename after the voting period ends. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:49, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support But "lioness" missing in the description -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:19, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:07, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Description altered. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:16, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:13, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:44, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:52, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The look on the lion's face would not be what I'd want to see if I were anything close to prey that day ... edit added by Daniel Case. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:37, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 05:25, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 07:06, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--IamMM (talk) 11:17, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:37, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 21:29, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:04, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:38, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 17:12, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support RolfHill (talk) 18:19, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:35, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:47, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family : Felidae (Felids)

File:Bisajärvi in evening light from the southwest in Sipoonkorpi, Vantaa, Finland, 2021 May.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2021 at 21:22:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Finland
Info created & uploaded by User:Ximonic - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:22, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I saw this on QIC and really liked the light and shadow on the trees, the lake, the composition and the peaceful atmosphere. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:22, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:34, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:15, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:06, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:38, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:14, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:47, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 12:18, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 15:03, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 17:21, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 18:10, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:29, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice place. -- Karelj (talk) 12:20, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:37, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tagooty (talk) 15:11, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support If it were ever possible for one country to be summed up by a single image, and not one of a well-known landmark, it would be Finland, by this image. Daniel Case (talk) 15:16, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:33, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:05, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:37, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 15:15, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 17:12, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support RolfHill (talk) 18:18, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 05:09, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 12:35, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:23, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support OvaThunder9^💬 22:20, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:08, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Finland

File:Jinji Lake Suzhou November 2017 002.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2021 at 01:44:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#China
Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:44, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose We have lots of photos of modern buildings taken from across a river/waterway, and I don't think this is exceptional. The weather or other conditions mean there isn't much detail and the sky isn't a pleasant colour. -- Colin (talk) 10:51, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unbalanced composition with a too bright back attracting all attention of the viewer (which could have been ok, but the bottom part suffers from it) --RolfHill (talk) 11:46, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose The haze seems to blur out the background buildings in an unflattering way. Also, I wish we could see the "pants" structure of the pants building, but I realize that angle may not be possible. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 13:33, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 19:03, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I do not share the opposing criticisms above, it is well balanced and composed, a very good quality, and a pleasant atmosphere. I think it is above almost night city images that we have. Though I would have a bit more processed it with e.g. maybe a bit more of saturation to accentuate the color vs gray contrast. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:36, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Question Downsized? Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:07, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, perspective-corrected and cropped. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:17, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing so special for FP. -- Karelj (talk) 21:55, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The background on the right is not very interesting but I like the rest. --Ermell (talk) 21:22, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The opposes have a point at thumbnail, but it looks better to me at full size. Suzhou's skyline doesn't get as much photographic attention since Shanghai and Lujiazui aren't so far away, but it's still pretty good. Daniel Case (talk) 01:48, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the composition as well, and the bit of fog gives it a distinctive atmosphere. --Domob (talk) 11:33, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Colin and others,sorry --Co mmon ists 13:04, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:19, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support The composition is quite interesting I think. --Steven Sun (talk) 02:21, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:10, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:10, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mount Murchison panorama.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 May 2021 at 05:04:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#Alberta
Info: Mount Murchison, Banff National Park. Panorama version of the previous nomination with better sharpness. -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:04, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:04, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like this one much better than File:Mount Murchison.jpg. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:11, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I can't see the reason for having a tree in the middle foreground. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:19, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles, that tree is screwing up the composition. --Basotxerri (talk) 18:08, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others ... that tree is still problematic. Daniel Case (talk) 15:22, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Daniel --Co mmon ists 12:35, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 19:32, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination --The Cosmonaut (talk) 07:13, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Inspiration Point Bryce Canyon November 2018 003.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2021 at 05:07:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United States#Utah
Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:07, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:07, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment quite strong perspective distortion if compared with your own photo taken from same standing point. --Ivar (talk) 05:23, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too flat and dark in some places. -- Karelj (talk) 12:23, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Bryce Canyon is awesome in real life and this photo is good, but not a FP-level rendition of it. Sadly the perspective looks distorted, especially the lower left corner, and lighting is suboptimal. Buidhe (talk) 15:35, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others, plus I would add the sky and attendant diffuse contre-jour lighting do it no favors. Also, as this FP of King's from around the same time demonstrates, less is more here. Daniel Case (talk) 17:21, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Daniel --Co mmon ists 12:34, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 19:03, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:13, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pointe de Nantaux 06.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2021 at 12:32:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Haute-Savoie
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 12:32, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 12:32, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good and nice--Lmbuga (talk) 12:45, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Is there any way to make the crop above the peak a little more generous, though? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:39, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent image. As it is a stitched panorama, please add a suitable CAT and mention in the Summary/Description. --Tagooty (talk) 14:53, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:31, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The peak is too close to the edge at the moment. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:46, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:07, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:46, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I just want to be there :-) Basile Morin (talk) 01:11, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 07:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:03, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:07, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:51, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 17:11, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Nice but per Charles --RolfHill (talk) 18:14, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I find the empty sky somewhat boring as there is quite much of it. The strong sunlight makes the terrain look flattish, with dark but sharp shadows. It also causes less variation in the fine tones of highlighted parts, and I'd love some plasticity especially in mountains. They are typical problems for full day light landscapes. Another bother is the peak that is very close to the top edge, otherwise the composition is good. The picture is good, but these issues don't make it an exceptional for my taste. --Ximonic (talk) 21:29, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 12:33, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 21:02, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Tournasol7, you should have mentioned that File:Pointe de Nantaux 05.jpg is already an FP. After some consideration, I think it's OK for both to be FPs, but I'll bet some of the others would (have) change(d) their votes if they know (had known). Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:11, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, let's leave the decisions to the other voters. Tournasol7 (talk) 07:16, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, but the information is being provided a little late. You should probably ping everyone who's voted. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:07, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:12, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/France#Haute-Savoie

File:Abbas aabaad Nights... 04 (cropped).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2021 at 17:03:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Iran
Info created by Edrak.art - uploaded by Edrak.art - nominated by POS78 -- POS78 (talk) 17:03, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- POS78 (talk) 17:03, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Question Do you think it is polite to crop an artist's image like this? Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:33, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Terrible angle of view. -- Karelj (talk) 21:53, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose angle doesn't work for this Buidhe (talk) 22:37, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm willing to consider unusual angles, but I don't like this one, either. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:17, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others--Lmbuga (talk) 14:57, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 20:20, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:19, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ilustración de Victoria Aguirre Anchorena (mujer Argentina).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 May 2021 at 17:12:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/People#Paintings
Info created/uploaded by Rocío Mikulic - nominated by Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 17:12, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ezarateesteban 17:12, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Am I understanding this correctly that this is a digitally created portrait of the artist Victoria Aguirre Anchorena? I mean, it can't be made by her since she died in 1927, so who made this digital portrait? The description need to be clarified, the gallery probably changed if this is a computer-generated image and the categories needs to be sorted out. --Cart (talk) 17:50, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's part of contest Commons:Ilustratona made by the uploader, based on several pictures of the women, but without copying nothing of them. Ezarateesteban 17:59, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PS:The ilustration is made in a paper and next digitalized Ezarateesteban 18:03, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the explanation, I am very well aware of the process of making a portrait illustration. You need to add that to the description on the file page for clarification, and please fix the categories. Was she know for her cosmetics? Otherwise I find it a bit odd that a female painter is depicted as if she is putting on rouge instead of painting on her work. --Cart (talk) 18:24, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done Ezarateesteban 18:33, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Pepe piton (talk) 18:38, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Señoritaleona (talk) 20:47, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Scann (talk) 21:03, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Since this is digital art, the only criterion would seem to be whether the viewer considers it good art or not. And I don't. It's silly, per Cart's comment, her face is strangely shaped for no apparent artistic reason, and there's a bunch of what we could call posterization instead of a lifelike gradient or something. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:40, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as above Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:28, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
First, thanks so much to Rocio and other participants in this contest! I'm so glad it attracted some high-quality work. It's important to remember that FPC almost never sees work like this. We mostly look at photographs and photographs (or scans) of notable art (and a diagram/infographic every once in a while). We don't regularly see original illustrations like this, so if you get a negative response here that doesn't mean it's not a very good and useful illustration; it means FPC might not be the right venue (certainly COM:VIC makes sense, at least).
This image is a stylized illustration, which takes some liberties with proportions in a way that's common for illustrations (it reminds me of some things I've seen, which I cannot put a finger on right now), but which might be a little confusing if the purpose is encyclopedic illustration. I'm also not sure about the choice to have her applying make-up per cart. Regardless, it's well done and I appreciate the level of finish. I think it's something you should be proud of, and to contribute it with a free license is appreciated. I would probably come in with a support, but I worry that the first three votes (other than the nominator) came in quickly from three people who have never before participated at FPC. That's often a sign of canvassing. Since our process here is based on numbers/voting, canvassing hurts the integrity of what we're trying to do here. Hopefully I'm wrong. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:50, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is very much in naïve Latin American art style, so I don't mind the technique. Hey, even Frida Kahlo used it (even the color sceme), so I can understand why it might look familiar to Rhododendrites. It is up to the artist how a person is depicted. I have also seen other works of art, as non-realistic as this, used in articles, can't remember where now though, but they were up for discussion when I made that first Kim Jong-un image back in the Stone Age. Funny this should surface just as I made a sketch of another creepy guy, see my post here after A.Savin's comment here. But with this image, I do find the way with the putting on rouge a bit demeaning for a portrait of a female artist if this isn't something she is known for in some way. As for canvassing, it's often as simple as that a nominator posts a comment saying "Hey, a drawing by one of 'our' illustrator is up at FPC", and people just want to be supportive to their wiki community. --Cart (talk) 15:26, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Found two of the articles with murals: Harry Parr-Davies and Daniel Peredo. --Cart (talk) 21:38, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Re: canvassing. Indeed. Which is why, when I tell people in my various wiki communities I have something at FPC, I always ask them not to vote unless they're a regular participant and would've voted anyway. We're even more vulnerable to canvassing here at FPC than discussions on-wiki because we're completely numbers based. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 15:47, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment My father had a very large collection of books with comic illustrations and similar prints. I'm well aware of illustrations and have an appreciation for those I find good. By the way, I've never liked Kahlo's work, either. Neither in music nor art do I take received opinion of these times as Gospel. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:21, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Acknowledging that an art style exist and naming it is not the same as liking it. Personally I don't think this is an FP-rated example of the genre. --Cart (talk) 10:13, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. I just don't want anyone to get the wrong idea. I've supported a large number of nominations of illustrations and nominated some myself. They were pretty much all at least 100 years old, but that's just because of copyright restrictions. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:02, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per above. -- Karelj (talk) 12:59, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I could see what the artist was going for, but it's not there yet. Daniel Case (talk) 19:29, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Me gusta la técnica y no tengo ningún problema con cómo se retrata a esta mujer argentina, a diferencia de los usuarios previos --Carlillasa (talk) 23:58, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:19, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nassarius arcularia 01.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2021 at 17:48:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Shells#Family : Nassariidae
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 17:48, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 17:48, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:45, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Seven Pandas (talk) 23:08, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Without your pictures, the shells wouldn't be so well documented here -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:24, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:16, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:47, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:34, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mile (talk) 09:50, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:05, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Lmbuga (talk) 14:55, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:36, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:27, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 14:08, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 15:18, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:58, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 17:11, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:47, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 21:32, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:34, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 12:32, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 19:38, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support OvaThunder9^💬 22:19, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:20, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Shells#Family : Nassariidae

File:Gypsum - Sieroszowice mine, Lubin, Lower Silesia, Poland.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 May 2021 at 04:31:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Rocks_and_minerals#Minerals
Info all by Ivar (talk) 04:31, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 04:31, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:41, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:53, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:39, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 07:47, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mile (talk) 09:49, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:34, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:10, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:09, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Lmbuga (talk) 14:54, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:01, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:12, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:24, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I thought this was a really unusual vegetable dish when I first scrolled past it ... Daniel Case (talk) 04:48, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Buidhe (talk) 05:23, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 14:07, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support That vegetable doesn't look very tasty Daniel. --Famberhorst (talk) 15:53, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 17:11, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --RolfHill (talk) 18:11, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 21:34, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:34, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 12:31, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 18:48, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support OvaThunder9^💬 22:17, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:10, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:15, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:11, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 25 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 07:10, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Rocks_and_minerals#Minerals

File:Tree swallow in JBWR (25579).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 May 2021 at 01:32:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Hirundinidae_(Swallows)
Info Tree swallow (Tachycineta bicolor) on a nest box in Jamaica Bay Wildlife Refuge. There's another similar one where it's looking straight ahead, but straight-ahead photos can be a little tough because their lores obscure their eyes. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:32, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:32, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:14, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support but there are a couple of dust spots... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:47, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Yes, several. And maybe also clone out the dark blurred thing (branches?) on left top. --A.Savin 07:43, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:39, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I removed dust spots. How come you choose f/16, but it is still sharp. --Mile (talk) 08:55, 19 May 2021 (UTC) I removed the tree if wanted to overrite.[reply]
- Thanks for taking the time to do that. I went ahead and worked from the raw file to redo it. I usually prefer to use the minimum jpeg compression, too (presumably why the filesizes are so different?).
  As for f/16, I'm often in shutter priority mode based on how far I'm zoomed/how much the subject is moving, adjusting ISO based on light. Honestly, if I felt I had enough time, I would've made a couple adjustments here (ISO down to 200, and speed up a little to bring the aperture a bit wider), but in a couple hours of hanging around these birds this was the moment I was able to get physically closest so didn't hesitate, and I think the result is still pretty good. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:07, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
New version uploaded with branch (and dust) removed. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:09, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Lmbuga (talk) 14:55, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Perfect now. --A.Savin 19:49, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:02, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:25, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:35, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:30, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:23, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Buidhe (talk) 05:23, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 09:37, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 15:12, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:57, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 16:42, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 17:11, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 12:32, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 21:56, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support OvaThunder9^💬 22:18, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 07:10, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Hirundinidae_(Swallows)

File:Sharp Centre for Design - fragment of facade.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2021 at 09:51:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Canada
Info created by Maksim Sokolov (maxergon.com) - uploaded by Maksim Sokolov (maxergon.com) - nominated by --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:51, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Palauenc05 (talk) 09:51, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 19:38, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice graphics.--Ermell (talk) 20:33, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice--Lmbuga (talk) 02:29, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:08, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I do not see reason, why part of facade should be a FP. -- Karelj (talk) 13:04, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:04, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:48, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Looking at other images of this building, the colours here do not look right, too dark; apart from that, this photo does a disservice to an innovative building - why are some 'windows' cropped in half?. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:45, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. I'd rather see a photo that shows the whole interesting facade. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:45, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:14, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:33, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:18, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 17:12, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 12:35, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 21:34, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:12, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:18, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Canada

File:Yara Belle Plaine.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2021 at 04:53:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry#Canada
Info: a fertilizer plant in Saskatchewan on an exceptionally cold day; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 04:53, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 04:53, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great illustration for topics such as pollution in Canada Buidhe (talk) 12:01, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above -- Karelj (talk) 13:10, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 14:13, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:33, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:31, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A QI and VI it may be, but it's not really exceptional enough for FP for me. Also, it may be the heat generated by the plant, but it's not really sharp at distance. Daniel Case (talk) 14:14, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above --Uoaei1 (talk) 15:00, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Educative image but as FP, I don't support. Currently 50% of the picture is filled with boring water, and the light is flat -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:02, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile Morin --Tagooty (talk) 15:19, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:33, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Brown headed cowbird female in JBWR (25487).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 May 2021 at 16:43:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Icteridae_(Icterids)
Info Female brown-headed cowbird chattering in Queens, New York (males sing, but females also have a distinct chatter they make during mating season). They're not the most exciting birds to look at, but don't let her simple appearance distract you -- this bird is a bit of a monster (that is to say, a brood parasite). Rather than build a nest, she will lay her egg along with those of another bird, and the bird of another species will raise it as one of their own, often to the demise of their own chicks. Thus how it learns the distinct songs/chatters is a little bit of a mystery, since they're never raised by their own species. Anyway, we need FPs of chattering drab monsters, too. :) all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 16:43, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 16:43, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support the leg looks a bit oddly bluish (postprocessing?), but it's nevertheless FP to me. --Ivar (talk) 18:38, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Not postprocessing; just environment and/or optics. Either way, new version uploaded. :) — Rhododendrites ^talk | 19:58, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:09, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:13, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:05, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:48, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice, natural setting. Square crop, anyone? Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:04, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 12:30, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:49, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 13:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:09, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support OvaThunder9^💬 22:16, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 07:22, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:34, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:25, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Lmbuga (talk) 09:32, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:46, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:13, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:24, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:10, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:27, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 18:18, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:04, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Icteridae_(Icterids)

File:Common ceres forester (Euphaedra phaethusa phaethusa) male.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2021 at 13:13:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)
Info A large butterfly from a genus only found in the forests of West Africa. They live high in the canopy and come to feed on decaying fallen fruit. This is the wing underside. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:13, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:13, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great EV Buidhe (talk) 17:05, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:14, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:42, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:39, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:20, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:07, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much chroma. Try UV filter. --Mile (talk) 08:42, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean too much chromatic noise? My lens is fitted with DHG UV filter. Do you have a better suggestion? Thanks. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:02, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Charlesjsharp Interesting. Despite that. Solving in software, no other. Or 120 eur for better filter. --Mile (talk) 11:27, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Excellent. --09:12, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

posted by Aristeas Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:16, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, sorry, I forgot to sign my vote. Thank you for identifying it! --Aristeas (talk) 09:05, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:41, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:16, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--IamMM (talk) 10:05, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice, exactly sharp.. -- Karelj (talk) 12:18, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:37, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:03, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 15:16, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 17:12, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support OvaThunder9^💬 22:20, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The whitebalance in the new version is off (too warm) and the left wing is unsharp. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:49, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:05, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)

File:Eucomis montana, Ananasplant, Kuiflelie. 16-05-2021. (d.j.b).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2021 at 04:33:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Asparagaceae
Info Eucomis montana. Beautiful dark red flared old bulbs of Eucomis montana which have grown partially above the ground. Focus stack of 23 photos.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 04:33, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 04:33, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:32, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 12:29, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 17:58, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 13:57, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:05, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:04, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support OvaThunder9^💬 22:15, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:18, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 18:18, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per w:Eucomis montana, the bulbs are no larger than 8 cm, so this photo is larger-than-life and impressive. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 08:55, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Asparagaceae

File:Bloemknoppen van een vlier (Sambucus serenade). 14-04-2021 (actm.) 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 May 2021 at 16:44:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Adoxaceae
Info Flower buds in development of an elderberry Sambucus ('serenade'). Focus stack of 13 photos. --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk)All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:44, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:44, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Lmbuga (talk) 00:16, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Common image, no reason for FP nomination, IHMO. -- Karelj (talk) 12:24, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:37, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow-factor. --Tagooty (talk) 15:10, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:12, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:06, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Tagooty RolfHill (talk) 18:17, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 12:34, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. In this discussion, it has been decided to strike out all his votes. --Aristeas (talk) 15:22, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:46, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:40, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Adoxaceae

Updated results:

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 15:22, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fly (Diptera) on a plant.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2021 at 15:04:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods
Info: Fly (Unidentified Diptera) on a plant. Camera: Sony Alpha ILCE-7M3. Creator: Paul Hudson. Uploaded and nominated by Gpkp -- Gpkp (talk) 15:04, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Gpkp (talk) 15:04, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Insufficient file name and file description IMO --Llez (talk) 15:39, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Updated. Thank you @Llez: . --Gpkp (talk) 16:17, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Also not outstanding and small. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:00, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Must be identified. Might be OK for QI. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:40, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. Daniel Case (talk) 03:20, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ikan,sorry --Co mmon ists 17:52, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 18:09, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 22:42, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Seeds of Dandelion (Taraxacum).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2021 at 14:45:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
Info: Seeds of Dandelion (Taraxacum). Camera: Sony Alpha ILCE-7M3. Creator: Paul Hudson. Uploaded and nominated by Gpkp -- Gpkp (talk) 14:45, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Gpkp (talk) 14:45, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Insufficient file name and file description IMO --Llez (talk) 15:40, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Updated. Thank you @Llez: . --Gpkp (talk) 16:00, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hi Gpkp and welcome to FPC. A bit of advice when you nominate someone else's photos here: Check out the size of the photo and compare with what size the camera is capable of delivering. This file is 1920 × 1280 pixels, while the camera can deliver 6000 × 4000 pixels. Almost all of Paul Hudson's photos are rather small for the camera he is using, so it is very likely that he has downsized them all. Downsizing (or downsampling) is usually a bad idea here at FPC per the guidelines. There are some other issues with your nominations, but we'll take things one step at a time. I would however suggest you read the guidelines and rules more carefully. --Cart (talk) 17:47, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Harsh lighting; awkward crop. Daniel Case (talk) 03:19, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cart and Daniel Case. --Cayambe (talk) 09:12, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Daniel,sorry --Co mmon ists 17:54, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 18:11, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 22:41, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Evans Peak Panorama.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2021 at 07:20:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#British Columbia
Info: View from Evans Peak -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 07:20, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 07:20, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 07:34, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Lmbuga (talk) 09:30, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support OvaThunder9^💬 12:30, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:43, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:51, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 17:01, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 17:51, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 18:00, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:48, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I see some subtle dust spots near the upper right corner. There are probably more, so look for them. The sky is just a bit noisy in general, but at this resolution, that's OK. I'm going to live with this photo a little longer before voting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:07, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done: I found 3 small dust spots and fixed them. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Lmbuga (talk) 10:52, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: appreciate your support, but you've voted twice. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:10, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:19, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 18:17, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 22:27, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:56, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:17, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Canada#British Columbia

File:Our Lady of the Snow church of Aurillac 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2021 at 12:33:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#France
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 12:33, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 12:33, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good and nice--Lmbuga (talk) 12:44, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I like it, but is there any way to recover some details from the blown Virgin and Child on the altar? Right now, I'm uncertain this is at FP level. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:38, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Not the best church interior we've seen here, but good enough for FP for me (although I agree with Ikan on the altar statuary). Daniel Case (talk) 20:20, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Daniel --RolfHill (talk) 18:13, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Daniel -- Karelj (talk) 20:19, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 16:16, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:SNCF TGV Duplex Cize-Bolozon.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2021 at 05:15:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles
Info We have FP of the same viaduct from 2011 with summer colors. Created & uploaded by David Gubler - nominated by Ivar (talk) 05:15, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 05:15, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:55, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support IMO the presence of the train and its reflection in the water is the main difference between the two images, not the colors. I like this one more.--IamMM (talk) 10:14, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Question Obviously good, but do we need two vitually identical FPs? The other is better as the left foreground is clear. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:04, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice mirror image and composition. The colors of the season make it special and unique, in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:36, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Prefer the already-FP image. --A.Savin 12:06, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:37, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The autumn colours are lovely and this one is sharper too. -- Colin (talk) 13:44, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The autumn colours make this much better than the existing FP. --Tagooty (talk) 15:04, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:32, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support POS78 (talk) 17:28, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not to take anything away from the existing FP, but ... this one has a bit more going on with the sky and that rocky promontory in front, in addition to the fall color. Daniel Case (talk) 17:35, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:03, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:08, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 21:33, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Colin and Daniel. --Aristeas (talk) 07:33, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:00, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:06, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Some of the foliage could be sharper, but that's not very important in context and it's quite a beautiful photo. I also think it's completely fine to have two FPs of this viaduct. The compositions are substantially different and the fall colors make the motif appear very different. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:09, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:01, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 15:14, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 17:11, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --RolfHill (talk) 18:16, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:35, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 12:33, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 21:38, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support OvaThunder9^💬 22:19, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:11, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:15, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles

File:Zoroastrian Fire Temple, Yazd 03.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2021 at 10:40:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Reliefs
Info created and uploaded by Bgag - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 10:40, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:40, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not special, compared to the FPs in the Gallery. I would support for QI. --Tagooty (talk) 14:57, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:44, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose quality is not great for this static object. Tomer T (talk) 15:20, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good but not outstanding per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:06, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:05, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ikan --Co mmon ists 12:33, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 22:17, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 16:15, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dülmen, Rorup, NSG Roruper Holz -- 2021 -- 8187-91.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2021 at 18:37:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#North Rhine-Westphalia
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 18:37, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 18:37, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support OvaThunder9^💬 09:28, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I Like it --Lmbuga (talk) 10:46, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support OK, this is the "The Light in the Forest" picture to end all "The Light in the Forest" pictures. Daniel Case (talk) 14:55, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 16:53, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:09, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:09, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:39, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Daniel. (But it will not end these pictures … ;–) --Aristeas (talk) 10:32, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 16:03, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 18:22, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:29, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:58, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 13:29, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 17:37, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:42, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 08:47, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 21:08, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Germany#North Rhine-Westphalia

File:HG7 3585.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2021 at 20:32:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Iran
Info created by Herbert karim masihi - uploaded by Herbert karim masihi - nominated by POS78 -- POS78 (talk) 20:32, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- POS78 (talk) 20:32, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Looks oversaturated and tilted in strange ways. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:39, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It would need tilt correction counter-clockwise and most probably a perspective correction as well. --Ximonic (talk) 21:16, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Oversaturated -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:29, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose In addition to oversaturation and tilt noted above, the landscape really isn't that interesting. Daniel Case (talk) 02:15, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 21:09, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Small pincertail (Onychogomphus forcipatus) male Bulgaria.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2021 at 22:05:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Odonata#Family : Gomphidae (Clubtails)
Info 'Pincertail' refers to the large male appendage; this is used during copulation to grasp the female. No pincertail FPs. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:05, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:05, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:21, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support High EV Buidhe (talk) 22:59, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:25, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:16, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 07:46, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support OvaThunder9^💬 09:27, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Lmbuga (talk) 10:44, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 15:21, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:10, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:45, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:30, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:39, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 06:45, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:42, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:32, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 18:23, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 18:43, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:59, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 12:56, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 17:34, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 08:47, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:29, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Odonata#Family : Gomphidae (Clubtails)

File:Carved double door with two wooden reliefs of standing women, Chinatown, Singapore.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jun 2021 at 04:48:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Doors
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:48, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:48, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Overly harsh light. Daniel Case (talk) 15:37, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:00, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Erythronium ´Pagoda´-20210426-RM-122542.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 May 2021 at 21:14:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Liliaceae
Info Trout lily (Erythronium 'Pagoda').focus stack of 15 frames. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 21:14, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 21:14, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:25, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love the delicate texture and light. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:32, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:49, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mile (talk) 07:20, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 07:59, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:54, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There's no definition on the stamen. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:02, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:47, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The colors of some part of flower (in lower part) and the background are practicaly the same. -- Karelj (talk) 14:08, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think the back 2 stamens are connected to the fragile stems.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:52, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Lmbuga (talk) 16:07, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 17:10, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:11, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:32, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 12:30, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 17:48, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 13:52, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support OvaThunder9^💬 22:17, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:58, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 08:48, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 09:50, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family_:_Liliaceae

File:Iphofen St.Veit Orgel-20201018-RM-154545.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 May 2021 at 21:40:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Musical instruments
Info Pipe organ in the catholic city parish church St.Veit in Iphofen. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 21:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 21:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose QI, not much for FP here. --Mile (talk) 07:18, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Mile. -- Karelj (talk) 14:09, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:07, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Lmbuga (talk) 16:08, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above, good, not outstanding --RolfHill (talk) 18:07, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 06:44, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:47, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 11:51, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Co mmon ists 12:30, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 19:04, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 17:56, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment No vote right now, just a comment: Beautiful organ. I think I'd like the photo more if there were more light on the organ, and I'm not sure it's optimal that the brightest light is behind the organ. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:08, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Info @PetarM: @Karelj: @Peulle: @Commonists: @Ikan Kekek: Here is a new version from 5 differently exposed frames. I hope it has improved a bit.--Ermell (talk) 20:38, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - Sorry, I agree with RolfHill --Co mmon ists 17:57, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support this version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:43, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Now you bring some life into. Much different than 1st and lively colors. --Mile (talk) 07:09, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 06:08, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:30, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:33, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 08:47, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 09:52, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Musical instruments

File:آرامگاه خواجه ربیع (3).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jun 2021 at 09:27:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Iran
Info created by Mostafameraji - uploaded by Mostafameraji - nominated by Shiasun -- Shiasun (talk) 09:27, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Shiasun (talk) 09:27, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Wouldn't it be better to take the picture from the other side of the plant? Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:34, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not sharp enough, either, and chromatic aberration on the trees. I'd vote to decline this at Quality Image Candidates, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:57, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ...and tilted, too. --Basotxerri (talk) 17:58, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Tilted, distorted, worst CA I've seen on a nominee in a long time. Composition actually might have worked absent those, but trying to do it with that sky behind it sank this. Daniel Case (talk) 00:06, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Chromatic aberrations and other technical issues.

Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Lychee fruits and seed.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2021 at 06:41:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food_and_drink#Fruits_(raw)
Info all by Ivar (talk) 06:41, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 06:41, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ah, probably my favorite fruit! One with a redder skin would be tastier and fresher, but very well photographed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:50, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:06, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Again beautiful and appetizing. --Aristeas (talk) 10:35, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 11:42, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:52, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 17:26, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 17:49, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:13, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 18:23, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 18:42, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support OvalThunder9^💬 20:27, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great EV Buidhe (talk) 02:49, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:17, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ivar you are one of my favourite photographers, you have a new fan.--Co mmon ists 13:31, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 19:23, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:58, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:01, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:42, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:43, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:10, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 17:34, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 08:47, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:36, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:13, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food_and_drink#Fruits_(raw)

File:SL Bundala NP asv2020-01 img30.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2021 at 11:22:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Cercopithecidae (Old World Monkeys)
Info Toque macaque / Macaca sinica in the Bundala National Park, Sri Lanka ---- all by A.Savin -- A.Savin 11:22, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 11:22, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 17:28, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 18:23, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice photo. I can't help thinking she has to brush her hair, hahah. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:37, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support OvalThunder9^💬 20:27, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 22:13, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:18, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 13:09, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The out-of-focus part looks posterized, but nice composition --Co mmon ists 13:33, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 21:37, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:01, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:01, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:44, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:28, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:44, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:08, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 14:54, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:29, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 08:47, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:08, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:14, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals#Family : Cercopithecidae (Old World Monkeys)

File:Tree swallow in JBWR (24712).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 May 2021 at 08:24:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Hirundinidae (Swallows)
Info created & uploaded by Rhododendrites - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 08:24, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 08:24, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nowhere near FP quality, as I suspect Rhododendrites will confirm. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:59, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Well I probably wouldn't put it that way :P ... but it's not one I was considering for FPC. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 12:36, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Tomer T: Thanks for the nomination! I uploaded several photos of tree swallows sticking their heads out of nest boxes recently. The two I was toying with nominating were this one and this one. I don't know if they would pass, but I think one of them is probably worth a shot. The first has a similar shallow DoF to this nomination, but I prefer the angle, direction the bird is facing, and background. The second has a DoF that covers the subject, but a strong shadow (which I don't mind because it accentuates the face and the overall "angry bird" look :) ). — Rhododendrites ^talk | 12:36, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above --RolfHill (talk) 18:12, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 03:11, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Question What's so bad about this photo? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:07, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support good question... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:47, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Composition with shallow DoF, shadows on bird, unappealing white background. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:00, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Very good example of minimalist bird photo, something we don't see very often on this forum. Clear lines and shapes with color blocks in subdued tints. --Cart (talk) 11:54, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I guess my question would be whether those who like this image prefer it to File:Tree swallow in a nest box in JBWR (24519).jpg (which was my most likely nomination of the bunch), File:Tree swallow in a nest box in JBWR (25673).jpg, or even the similar File:Tree swallow in JBWR (24707).jpg (looking towards the camera rather than very slightly away)? Obviously promoting this one would all but preclude nominating any of the others, which is the reason I haven't supported here. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 15:53, 21 May 2021 (UTC) @Ikan Kekek, Martin Falbisoner, and W.carter: — Rhododendrites ^talk | 15:54, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, the 'ping' didn't work for some reason, so I just noticed this. To me, from an artistic POV, this nom is the best and it has 'wow factor'. The (24519) is the best encyclopedic photo. --Cart (talk) 09:40, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I do like File:Tree swallow in a nest box in JBWR (25673).jpg best. To be clear, I haven't voted for this nomination; I was just surprised it was described as "Nowhere near FP quality", a statement two other people already signed onto, and I appreciate Charles' enumerations of the shortcomings of this photo. I think we should try to mention some when it might not be blindingly obvious to others that the photo in question is so obviously not worth consideration here, but this remark isn't intended as a criticism of anyone. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:06, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Noted, I should have been more explicit, my comment wasn't helpful, but I do think it is blindingly obvious! Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:45, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To me it's not blindingly obvious as I do like the artistic choice made here. That being said, 24707 is even better. But I'd also support any of the other candidates --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:55, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Martin Falbisoner: , @Ikan Kekek: , @W.carter: , @Rhododendrites: , you commented but didn't vote. If you want this picture to have a chance, there are few days left for the vote. Tomer T (talk) 07:46, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I did vote (i.e. I supported the nom) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:57, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry Tomer T, per this I don't vote on nominations anymore since I can't trust my damaged eyes any longer. It's difficult to decide were to draw the line, so it's better not to do it. This is a particularly challenging image for me with such a large portion of light areas. To my eyes, the whole right side and half the bird is white so I have to download the image and use the color sampler to "read" the colors. --Cart (talk) 08:11, 25 May 2021 (UTC)'[reply]

I assure you, I'm well aware that I haven't voted. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:32, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 07:22, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Different in a refreshing way (cf. Cart’s comment). --Aristeas (talk) 10:17, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others, low quality. -- Karelj (talk) 20:23, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
That's not true, @Karelj: . --A.Savin 21:20, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'll go with cart on this. If this doesn't pass (it seems like quite a longshot at this point), maybe I'll give the one I mentioned above a shot afterwards. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:03, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:25, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --ToprakM ^✉ 23:42, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:15, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Οία 1121.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2021 at 20:52:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Greece
Info All by C messier -- C messier (talk) 20:52, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The moon rising above the caldera of Santorini as seen from Oia. Support -- C messier (talk) 20:52, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment For compositional balance, I wish there were a little less sky and a little more on the bottom. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:13, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment tilted. Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:41, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not sorted. Look at the reflection. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:38, 26 May 2021 (UTC) Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:06, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional support on the tilt (I can't see it, but I'll trust Charles here) being fixed. Daniel Case (talk) 16:49, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:16, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others. Strikes me as a very romantic photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:40, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support OvalThunder9^💬 20:28, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 20:39, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment although the buildings on the left seem to be straight, the light from the moon and the boats as reflected on the water is tilted. Is that considered perspective distortion? It does look a bit off kilter to me. Buidhe (talk) 07:57, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:16, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak support~~ Support I don't like the halo around the moon, but nice composition. (Δεν μου αρέσει το φωτοστέφανο γύρω από το φεγγάρι, αλλά ωραία σύνθεση) --Co mmon ists 13:30, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 22:17, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@King of Hearts, Charlesjsharp, Daniel Case, Martin Falbisoner, Ikan Kekek, OvalThunder9, Karelj, Buidhe, Llez, and Commonists: I uploaded a new version with the tilt corrected. --C messier (talk) 19:33, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:47, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:38, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:07, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:32, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Settlements#Greece

File:Bloem van een schijnpapaver (Meconopsis cambrica) 23-05-2021. (d.j.b).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2021 at 17:25:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Papaveraceae
Info Flower of a Meconopsis cambrica, Welsh poppy. Focus stack of 18 photos.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:25, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:25, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 18:41, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:31, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:22, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support OvalThunder9^💬 20:26, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 21:13, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:04, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 06:08, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 10:11, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:20, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Co mmon ists 13:34, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 16:30, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:01, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:45, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:15, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 08:47, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:39, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:08, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:09, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Papaveraceae

File:Northern rough-winged swallows in JBWR (25338).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2021 at 15:34:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Hirundinidae_(Swallows)
Info A pair of northern rough-winged swallows (Stelgidopteryx serripennis) perched on a over a marsh in Queens, NY. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 15:34, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 15:34, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 17:48, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 18:23, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:35, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support OvalThunder9^💬 20:26, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:43, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:19, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Co mmon ists 13:34, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 19:41, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --IamMM (talk) 13:42, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:01, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:12, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 08:47, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:24, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:08, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:10, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Hirundinidae_(Swallows)

File:Raven on Branch.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jun 2021 at 16:58:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Corvidae (Crows, Jays and Magpies)
Info created by Lambda - uploaded by Lambda - nominated by Lambda -- Lambda (talk) 16:58, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is my first photo that may be featured picture worthy; in fact, my first photo that I have felt was worth uploading to Commons. As I'm new to this, I'd especially appreciate any constructive criticism. -- Lambda (talk) 16:58, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Thanks for having a go here. I would try submitting images to QI and see how they get on. Compare the sharpness of your images , especially the eye and the feathers, with other bird FPs. Watch some youtube videos on photographing black birds (the most difficult) - here you need to lighten shadows. Try to get a coloured background, not a white one. Try to avoid having stuff in the foreground that is out of focus. Try to keep ISO down to 800. Most important, think carefully about the composition, so here we might expect to see more of the bird in the frame. I assume you were using a tripod as 1/640 sec with an 800m lens is no good handheld. Easier to experiment with hand holding (300/400mm lens) then you can play with the composition. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:15, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thanks for the excellent critique! I've posted this photo in a few places and this is the best critique I've gotten so far. The one major issue I had noticed was the ISO; it's grainy in the shadows, which means that I probably can't bring the shadows up too much without making the grain even more prominent. I was actually shooting handheld, the lens has image stabilization which seems to work pretty well, though I don't know how far I can push the shutter speed before the image stabilization doesn't help; this is a big lens to shoot handheld, though quite light for an 800. 800 was too much for this shot, you're right; I was finding it hard to fit the whole bird into the frame. I was able to do so in some other shots from other angles, but I didn't think any of them had come out quite as well as this one. Here's a gallery of a few of the other shots and edits. I preferred the less colorful background of this image to the brighter colors of some of the others, as I feel like the colors pull the eye away from the textures of the ravens feathers; for artistic purposes, I prefer the monochrome versions, though for Commons I think the color image is more informative. On sharpness, I've seen featured images that are sharper, and other that are less sharp, like the Jubilee and Munin photo File:Jubilee and Munin, Ravens, Tower of London 2016-04-30.jpg, though that's more interesting for other reasons, the pose. Thanks for the comments, I will definitely work on getting the ISO and shutter speed dialed in correctly, shorter lenses or shooting from further back, and trying to get the sharpness and shadows up a bit. Lambda (talk) 18:29, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hi! To clarify, QI means Commons:Quality images. Since this is your first upload, you probably haven't heard about it yet. Going straight to FPC is like jumping in at the deep end the first time you're in a pool. :-) Most new users start nominating at Commons:Quality images candidates to get proper feedback about what is expected on Commons in general. There is also Commons:Photography critiques for more tips about your photos. Welcome to Commons! --Cart (talk) 18:06, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thanks for the clarifications and pointers! I had considered going to Commons:Quality images first, but looking at some of the other featured images thought this one might have something to offer, and I might get some better feedback if not, shoot too low and I might not get enough criticism. I'm pretty happy with the criticism I'm getting so far, but yeah, I'll definitely try out the QI process and photography critiques, I hadn't found that page yet. Lambda (talk) 18:29, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Glad you liked it. However, FPC is not meant to be a place to get advice and critique, you are just getting the good treatment because you are new. ;-) The rest of us are expected to present our very best pictures, all good and ready, for a thumbs up or down, just so you know for future nominations. --Cart (talk) 19:42, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Understood; I wasn't just coming here for critique, after comparing to the other featured pictures in the same section, I considered it higher technical quality (at least in sharpness and resolution) than the Jubilee and Munin photo mentioned above, while a more interesting angle and composition than some of the profile views, so I also did think it was worthy of nomination, but because I am new, made sure to mention that to get more detailed critique if not. I'm now learning more about what's being looked for, and I've learned that the critique page exists, so I'll be sure to check there in the future if I'm just looking for critique. Lambda (talk) 20:25, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per Charles --Co mmon ists 18:56, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 21:15, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Brought shadows up and highlights down to address a few of the comments by Charlesjsharp. Sharpened slightly, and applied de-noise to reduce the high-ISO noise, which reduces the sharpness a bit. Could remove the de-noise to get some sharpness back. Lambda (talk) 19:14, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good idea, but FPs of birds nowadays have individually sharp feathers. It's a very high bar to clear. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:43, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the critique. I had nominated based on comparing with the existing images in its section in the FP gallery, and found it at least as sharp as Jubilee and Munin, which was featured despite concerns about its sharpness. That image is more entertaining, but I was thinking this one is a nice in between, of a more interesting visual perspective than the profiles of many of the other featured pictures in the gallery, while sharper and less visually cluttered than the Jubilee and Munin pic. However, I understand if in-between doesn't work well for FP; that it should either be more entertaining or visually interesting, or more sharp, to qualify. Is that how you're thinking about it? Lambda (talk) 21:37, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note, looking at this image (adding to the above): the file is very small for its size. Just 1.5 mb. There's a lot of black and white here, so it wouldn't be very large, but 1.5 MB suggests compression. Are you working with a RAW file and processing that? — Rhododendrites ^talk | 04:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was shooting in JPEG at the highest quality, not RAW. I may have been able to eke a bit more out of the shadows if I were shooting in RAW. The file size dropped substantially after applying the denoise filter, not surprisingly; I'll bet it would go back up again if I dropped that filter. I'm processing using Darktable, which does non-destructive processing on the original JPEG, so I shouldn't be losing anything on each edit, but I am starting out with JPEG so I don't have quite as much headroom on dynamic range as I would if I were shooting RAW. Lambda (talk) 05:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Lambda, the picture you're citing was featured partly because of the humorous relationship between the two ravens, which this photo doesn't have. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:22, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's what I meant when saying "that image is more entertaining." I personally think this image is more visually interesting than some of the profile headshots which are featured, but it doesn't have quite the same humor value. Lambda (talk) 05:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination With three oppose votes and no support, and not enough detail in the original to bring out the requested detail, I'm going to withdraw this. Lambda (talk) 05:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:2019-03-14 CAPITÁIN LEONIDAS - IMO 5542705.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2021 at 23:31:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water transport#Shipwrecks
Info The Capitán Leonidas, resting on the flattened top of an underwater mountain called Bajo Cotopaxi, serves as warning, both as shipwreck and lighthouse 2068/G 1552. - created - uploaded - nominated by GRDN711 (talk) 23:31, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- GRDN711 (talk) 23:31, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 06:08, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support OvalThunder9^💬 10:09, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 10:11, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:23, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 13:00, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support It looks like this [3], Leonidas also...--Co mmon ists 13:36, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 15:56, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:05, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:00, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Bijay chaurasia (talk) 18:43, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 19:34, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:23, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:45, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:09, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:11, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another great shipwreck picture. Daniel Case (talk) 15:26, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 17:33, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 08:47, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:32, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:09, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:24, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Water transport#Shipwrecks

File:F-15EX Eagle II.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2021 at 00:08:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Air transport#Military jet aircraft
Info created by Ethan Wagner - uploaded and nominated by ToprakM -- --ToprakM ^✉ 00:08, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- --ToprakM ^✉ 00:08, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Background is too flat. I wouldn't say this is one of the best photos of jet aircraft on Commons. Buidhe (talk) 03:10, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Could have more lead room but striking to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:06, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It looks good, but is not one of our finest, methinks.--Peulle (talk) 11:50, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow --Co mmon ists 12:29, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 18:00, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 13:56, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:02, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm sure it can fly in blue sky. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:42, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:08, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support OvalThunder9^💬 21:58, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 18:18, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 13:14, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:25, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Air transport#Military jet aircraft

File:Mural painting - Rua de Santa Maria - Funchal 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2021 at 10:36:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Others#Frescos and murals
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 10:36, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 10:36, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's not clear whether Portuguese freedom of panorama law covers 2-d works Buidhe (talk) 13:52, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Info It is allowed, see "Portugal" in the "Summary table" in Wikipedia. We have a large number of 2-d works from Portugal on Commons (see for example this category with all its subcategories). And all the hundreds of Azulejos! Nobody asked for deletion of all these fotos. --Llez (talk) 14:20, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:31, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 08:47, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice and QI picture, but not FP IMO, not wav--Lmbuga (talk) 16:06, 27 May 2021 (UTC)--Lmbuga (talk) 17:04, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality and wav --Lmbuga (talk) 17:04, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:32, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:41, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:10, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:35, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Is there no way to find out who the author is? RolfHill (talk) 09:02, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 09:49, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:33, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/Others#Frescos and murals

File:Cascade Mountain.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2021 at 15:57:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#Alberta
Info: Cascade Mountain; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 15:57, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 15:57, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment ~~Isn't the snow very green here, or is it an effect? (compare) --Cart (talk) 18:03, 25 May 2021 (UTC)~~[reply]

Comment Agree, it looks like it was taken through a car window. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 19:34, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done: fixed the colour cast. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 06:30, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, looks better now. --Cart (talk) 11:17, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Question the trees aren't in focus are they? Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:26, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful very weak oppose No, the closer you get to the edges, the more unsharp (ahem) they are, and there seem to be some artifacts along the ridgelines. Daniel Case (talk) 01:04, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree with Daniel RolfHill (talk) 09:03, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:04, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Oma strickt Strümpfe.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2021 at 22:26:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Clothing and textiles
Info created & uploaded by Sadarama - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 22:26, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 22:26, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Lmbuga (talk) 09:31, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seven Pandas (talk) 11:26, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support OvaThunder9^💬 12:29, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I want to support (and might do so anyway) but the dark area under the left hand (viewer's right) is noisy enough to be distracting even without full size, since it's right under the focus. Seems fixable, though. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:08, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Overly busy combination of shapes and lines that don't work with each other well. Daniel Case (talk) 14:38, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 16:56, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:24, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:37, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Daniel Case --RolfHill (talk) 08:56, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:37, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Clothing and textiles

File:Snow goose in Central Park (32949).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2021 at 21:37:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus_:_Anser
Info A snow goose (Anser caerulescens) in the Harlem Meer, New York City. Nominating mainly because it's very crisp. One of the defining characteristics of this goose is the prominent black "grin" (looks more like a sneer to me) which is very clear here (oops -- you've got something in your teeth!). all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:37, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:37, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like it Buidhe (talk) 21:54, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 06:31, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quality is good, but not timing and distractive background. At least put some contrast, Low key, changing some colors and crop above. --Mile (talk) 16:27, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Mile. Daniel Case (talk) 01:09, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing extraordinary or special here to grant FP status RolfHill (talk) 09:04, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination — Rhododendrites ^talk | 12:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Front of Pontiac Bonneville 1965, XZZ700 in Vrångebäck.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2021 at 13:29:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Automobiles
Info Lysekil is the unofficial center for old car enthusiasts on the Swedish west coast. From time to time you come across old beautiful cars and owners who let you do a mini photo session. This 1965 Pontiac and me happened to be visiting the same marina. Spots are in the now aging original paint and not dust spots. -- Cart (talk) 13:29, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain as author, but I do love how this view shows off the lines, curves and bulbous shapes of this aging beauty without showing any modern additions (registration plate, tyres, replaced glass, etc.). --Cart (talk) 13:29, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautifully portrayed.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:48, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great composition. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 17:47, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing surprising for me, sorry. --Co mmon ists 17:49, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sock puppet of Livioandronico2013. In this discussion, it has been decided to strike out all his votes. --Aristeas (talk) 10:46, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Good composition. I like such kind of photographs. --XRay 💬 18:33, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:10, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Question ~~Author is shown as Ann-Sophie Qvarnström, as is usual on your images. Yet you have said she is someone you know well. Can you explain please?~~ Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:54, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Charlesjsharp, that was written before I ditched my anonymity here on the Wiki-project. You can read my more detailed answer to your question on my en-wiki talk page. --Cart (talk) 22:35, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support I think it would work even better cropped in a bit on the left, so the front ornament is more in the corner. See note. Daniel Case (talk) 03:03, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:56, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Maybe I'm just not hip to what's great about this photo, but I'd want more generous crops on the bottom and left. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:02, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just below the bottom crop is the ugly modern registration plate and adding space to the left would start to expose an equally ugly and unharmonious background (road gravel) at the top left corner. --Cart (talk) 09:08, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your reasons, thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:46, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Basotxerri (talk) 16:54, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Captures the essentials. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:26, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Beautiful soft light and shapes. But it would have been a feat not to get the floor into the frame..--Ermell (talk) 09:07, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Frank et all. (Ermell’s point is good, of course, but IMHO the photo is still plenty good.) --Aristeas (talk) 10:31, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've increased the shadow a bit on that tiny area to make it less noticable. --Cart (talk) 11:00, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 09:57, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the compo/crop does not work for me --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:22, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per other opponents. -- Karelj (talk) 16:00, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above, awkward crop RolfHill (talk) 08:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:38, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

After removing the sock-puppet vote, the ratio of votes has changed so that this image would be promoted as a Featured Picture. However in this discussion the creator and nominator has expressed the wish that the photo should not be promoted ex post. Therefore the updated result is:

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 10:46, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Thuringia Eisenach asv2020-07 img29 Market Square.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2021 at 10:09:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info Market Square and City Palace in Eisenach, Thuringia ---- all by A.Savin --A.Savin 10:09, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 10:09, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seven Pandas (talk) 11:26, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:50, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice photo, but nothing more than qi for me,Sorry --Co mmon ists 17:50, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 21:51, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Beautiful stretch limos and tons of cobblestones. No FP for me. Sorry.--Ermell (talk) 20:29, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:59, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Commonists. Quality, but no idea for composition. --Mile (talk) 04:23, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Commonists. -- Karelj (talk) 20:51, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:56, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 08:50, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above, none of the finests on Commons --RolfHill (talk) 08:56, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:22, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dülmen, Kirchspiel, Börnste, Abstrakte Bäume -- 2021 -- 8241.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2021 at 18:28:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#North Rhine-Westphalia
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 18:28, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Info The photo is rather abstract - taken while shaking the camera, so it was intentional camera movement. The subject are a tree, leaves and the sun. Usually such photos are not nominated here. So I am sure that this can lead to discussions. --XRay 💬 18:28, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 18:28, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support As far as I'm concerned, a successful creative representation of a natural object.--Famberhorst (talk) 04:43, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice but I'm not sure--Lmbuga (talk) 10:48, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I do support this kind of photos - interesting, artistical, imaginatives, fantastic, like a painting, a rebirth of a moment, an unusual sort of pictures - why not? Be open for new views, new worlds, be bold! --Schnobby (talk) 12:35, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yep! Totally agree. :-) And getting an intentional camera movement shot to actually look good, is a lot harder than people might think. That's why we usually just get horizontal or vertical movement. Turning the greenery into a "slanting rain" like here is new. Very nice. --Cart (talk) 12:54, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to hide the fact that it took several attempts. --XRay 💬 12:59, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If it only took you "several attempts", you have a natural flair for this. I made over 30 bad ones before my attempt looked even acceptable, and still nowhere near FP quality. :-) --Cart (talk) 13:22, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Let's put it this way: I don't remember the exact number. I had already tried it in different situations and gained my experience. With these attempts, the opportunity with suitable light and a whole series of shots, it then led to this picture. --XRay 💬 14:04, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:52, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 16:53, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:06, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Sorry, but I don't see the sense of this at all, no focus, no detail, and all you can tell is that there is a tree in it. It's like randomly dropping paint on canvas and calling it "abstract art". Seven Pandas (talk) 19:37, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jackson Pollock? --Cart (talk) 21:29, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose sorry, but I struggle to find ~~encyclopedic~~ value in this. --Ivar (talk) 06:51, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ivar, as have been said many times before, see rule 7 on COM:FPC#General rules: "Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project." This would be an excellent cover for a Wikibook. And who knows, there might be a WikiPoerty in the pipeline for "future projects". There is also the article Intentional camera movement. --Cart (talk) 07:23, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I still can't see the value for possible future projects. --Ivar (talk) 08:04, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:35, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:31, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 18:17, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support OvalThunder9^💬 10:10, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ivar,sorry --Co mmon ists 13:27, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 17:36, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 19:37, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose just without words --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:21, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

However, a few words are actually common with contradicting voices. --XRay 💬 06:27, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Ivar. -- Karelj (talk) 16:51, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Nice effect, but the contrasts are bothering in my view. I don't like the blown highlights around the trunk -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:40, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ivar, too RolfHill (talk) 08:59, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per XRay and Schnobby. Impressive picture and a good example for Intentional camera movement. --Steven Sun (talk) 12:05, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 18:42, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Germany#North Rhine-Westphalia