Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/October 2009

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


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


Contents

File:BrockenSnowedTreesInSun.jpg, delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2009 at 10:38:25
Snowed trees on mount Brocken, Harz, Germany.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info White balance missing, noisy, unsharp. (Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist kallerna 10:38, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Per nominator. -- JovanCormac 07:41, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Yann (talk) 11:03, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Not sharp. Maedin\talk 12:41, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist as per others. -- H005 Sexy Mouth transparent.png 20:39, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Karel (talk) 22:07, 23 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 6 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. /JovanCormac 17:13, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

File:GeysirEruptionNear.jpg, not delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2009 at 10:36:44
Eruption of Strokkur close by.


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. /JovanCormac 17:12, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

File:GothafossWinter.jpg, not delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2009 at 10:41:38
Sunset at Goðafoss in Winter, Iceland.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info White balance missing, noisy, unsharp (Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist kallerna 10:41, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Per nominator. -- JovanCormac 07:42, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Yann (talk) 11:03, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist I agree. -- H005 Sexy Mouth transparent.png 20:40, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Hi, I uploaded a new version of this image with corrected colors. I don't know what I am supposed to do now here. The original image, which was voted on until this post is here. Anyway, I think that no one would mind, if this image, corrected or not, would be deleted from FP.--Tired time (talk) 14:46, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. /JovanCormac 17:14, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

File:IceBlockNearJoekullsarlon.jpg, not delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2009 at 10:40:18
Ice block at beach near Jökulsárlón, Iceland. See the URL below how the image was shot ...

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Unsharp, partly overburnt. (Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist kallerna 10:40, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Per nominator. -- JovanCormac 07:42, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Nonetheless the wow is there, that mitigates for the technical imperfection. -- H005 Sexy Mouth transparent.png 20:37, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep As H005. /Daniel78 (talk) 22:43, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep As H005 said the wow is still there. --Captain-tucker (talk) 02:02, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep very nice and very rare, WOW --George Chernilevsky (talk) 06:50, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep For above. Jacopo Werther (talk) 13:34, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Very bad quality, seems like the ice is cropped from another picture and put on the top of bad quality beach background--Tired time (talk) 14:09, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 delist, 5 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. /JovanCormac 17:13, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Jordens inre.jpg, delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2009 at 07:48:57
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Reason to delist: Small resolution (800x833), unsuitable file format (JPEG), replaced by SVG, underwhelming in general.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist As nominator. -- JovanCormac 07:48, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist kallerna 14:31, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Korall (talk) 20:52, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Jacopo Werther (talk) 10:28, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist I agree. -- H005 Sexy Mouth transparent.png 20:35, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Karel (talk) 22:11, 23 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 6 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. /JovanCormac 17:15, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Julia set (highres 01).jpg, not delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2009 at 07:57:25
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Reason to delist (Original nomination): Totally underwhelming, relatively low resolution fractal that pales in comparison with what anyone can create in seconds using modern fractal software (see [1] or [2] for examples).
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist As nominator. -- JovanCormac 07:57, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist kallerna 14:30, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Beautiful, good resolution, different fractal set than current FPC candidate, no reason to delist. --Tony Wills (talk) 09:17, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep I agree with Tony Wills. Jacopo Werther (talk) 10:27, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep per Tony Wills --George Chernilevsky (talk) 05:29, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep per others -- TonyBallioni (talk) 00:30, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Per nominator--Tired time (talk) 14:05, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 delist, 4 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. /JovanCormac 17:15, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Leirhnjukur.jpg, not delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2009 at 10:42:56
Hot spring at Leirhnjúkur, Iceland.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Very unsharp, noisy (Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist kallerna 10:42, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep but what a scene! Anonymous votes are not allowed. -- JovanCormac 17:58, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Obviously, per nom. Lycaon (talk) 00:29, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Per nominator. -- JovanCormac 07:43, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep -- Tseno Maximov (talk) 15:05, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep The wow is there for me, it is not something that can easily be retaken. It seems like someone captured a very special moment the best way he / she could. --Korall (talk) 20:48, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The author's name is Andreas, so I guess he's a he :) Airwolf (talk) 23:31, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep, if that's not wowish enough, I don't know, what is. Airwolf (talk) 23:31, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep, per Airwolf --George Chernilevsky (talk) 05:27, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep For Airwolf. Jacopo Werther (talk) 05:50, 25 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 delist, 5 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. /JovanCormac 17:14, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

File:Albert Memorial, London - May 2008.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2009 at 12:22:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Albert Memorial, London
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by David Iliff, nominated by Maedin
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support— Very good in detail. Maedin\talk 12:22, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Indeed. David delivers. -- JovanCormac 12:45, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - on thumbnail didn't look like anything special but in full version you can see the great quality.--Avala (talk) 15:32, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 15:58, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --NEUROtiker  16:35, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Amazing shot!! Rastrojo (DES) 19:16, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--663h (talk) 13:03, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Albertus teolog (talk) 12:55, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The high resolution and quality deserves praise, however, the composition and atmosphere of the picture are not exceptional. --S23678 (talk) 07:38, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /JovanCormac 17:18, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture

File:Gypsum var. selenite from Andamooka Ranges - Lake Torrens area, South Australia.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2009 at 06:33:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION


Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /JovanCormac 17:17, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects

File:Kanalnetz Wiesbaden 2009-09-12 04 pregamma 1 reinhard02 key 0.18 phi 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2009 at 12:46:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kanalnetz Wiesbaden
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by paddy, nominated by Yann (talk) 12:46, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as nominator Yann (talk) 12:46, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 14:06, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose thumbnail looks nice but in full version you can see a lot of quality problems especially in darker areas. --Avala (talk) 15:30, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great shot, but unfortunately the technical quality IMO is not sufficient for FP. --NEUROtiker  16:32, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The picture was very difficult to make. I could not see the spirit level, did not even see the controls of my camera without the use of my fire lighter and the three HDRI images had an extremely long duration of exposure. Also it was the first time ever to visit the sewer publicly without application to the operating company and supposedly will be until next year. Also I gained access to the point where I took the picture because the security personal was friendly enough to let me step behind a restriction. I do not know if it was wise of me to upload the maximum size of this image. Also I tried to avoid postprocessing the picture (what I have done you can figure with help of the filename and the programme qtpfsgui). Not all of these factors make the picture better maybe only rarer but maybe you take one or the other point into consideration. --Paddy (talk) 20:02, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support, because a good picture of a difficult subject is an extraordinary photograph Airwolf (talk) 11:04, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Paddy (talk) 13:27, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Technical quality is not bad at all, really only minor and unimportant flaws that do not prevent the wow! -- H005 Sexy Mouth transparent.png 15:41, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In the area around the light it is pixeley (sorry I don't know the technical terms) in the full version. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:27, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I find it OK! Rastrojo (DES) 21:08, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose DOF - Burned highlights Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 10:30, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For Airwolf. Jacopo Werther (talk) 05:56, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Albertus teolog (talk) 12:54, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support like Airwolf says.--Stanzilla (talk) 17:11, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, per Airwolf. Wpedzich (talk) 18:04, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Brackenheim (talk) 19:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - blown hilights. Great composition but the technical problems are a deal breaker for me. Cacophony (talk) 06:09, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Problems with quality. kallerna 09:31, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose After several days of deliberation, I have decided to oppose this one. While the image is very pretty and the composition is great, the technical problems are there and are significant, the grainy structure surrounding the blown highlights being especially unpleasant. The shot, given the particular situation (extremely low light) was challenging indeed, but that doesn't make the scenery a difficult subject in general: With strong lighting gear, it should be no problem to retake the picture with a shorter exposure time and a more balanced dynamic range, eliminating the sharpness problems, the image noise and the overexposure around the lamp. -- JovanCormac 06:21, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I share Jovan's thoughts --S23678 (talk) 07:43, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /JovanCormac 17:19, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

File:La nascita di Venere (Botticelli).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2009 at 22:33:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Birth of Venus.


Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /JovanCormac 17:16, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic_media

File:Pyrite from Ampliación a Victoria Mine, Navajún, La Rioja, Spain 2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2009 at 06:25:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Noodle snacks - nominated by JovanCormac
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Since we seem to be getting nowhere with fast-track promotion, we'll probably have to do it manually after all. This is a beautiful, amazingly sharp photo of a pyrite.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As nominator. -- JovanCormac 06:25, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, but false color for the pyrite crystals. Pyrite is more gold colored! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:00, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
    • So what is it? And why is the grey background still grey? Noodle snacks (talk) 07:15, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Wrong. I know you're a chemist, but I have a small mineral collection and one of my pyrite crystals looks exactly like the one in the picture. See also this photo, this one and this one for other photos of pyrite that isn't gold colored. -- JovanCormac 07:37, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Please read this: pyrite: color: pale brass yellow, dull gold. All my FeS2 pyrite samples (8x various) are gold colored. I can't believe the color from the nominated picture. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 13:57, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Please excuse my ignorance, but what is the scale of this (not sure whether image is cropped, or scaled so can't work it out from lens etc). Thanks :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 10:14, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Can't tell you as I didn't take the picture, but the pyrite I have (which looks similar) is about 10 cm tall. -- JovanCormac 11:27, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
      • That is about the size of this one too. Worth about $AUD400. Noodle snacks (talk) 11:59, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Even if colours are real or not, I like the picture. --DPC (talk) 10:18, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 11:53, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mindat has plenty of silver pyrite specimens too. Noodle snacks (talk) 07:53, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It's right, that pyrite can have different colours and this one is pale gold coloured. But imo there is not enough contrast between the object and the backround. I think the arrangement could be much better with a black backround and indirect light. -- Ra'ike T C 17:21, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fools gold doesn't always have to be gold... TonyBallioni (talk) 18:50, 23 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /JovanCormac 17:17, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects

File:BMP-1 Zlot Darłowo 2009.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2009 at 21:36:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

BMP-1 in mud


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /JovanCormac 09:32, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects/Vehicles

File:Jamison Valley, Blue Mountains, Australia - Nov 2008.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2009 at 17:09:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Diliff - nominated by JovanCormac
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info One more shot by the master. I think the picture speaks for itself in its calm beauty.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As nominator. -- JovanCormac 17:09, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support We should have a rubber-stamp rule for this combination ;-). --NEUROtiker  17:43, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is stunning. AlexAH (talk) 18:06, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral, is the white balance not slightly off? --Aqwis (talk) 19:40, 21 September 2009 (UTC
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (can't see a problem with white balance btw) -- H005 Sexy Mouth transparent.png 20:31, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WOW! Per AlexAH --George Chernilevsky (talk) 06:45, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose IMO the composition could be much better (there should be more stuff on bottom). kallerna 10:19, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tseno Maximov (talk) 14:52, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As Kallerna and also background foggy, not sharp. --Karel (talk) 18:27, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mbdortmund (talk) 20:34, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Albertus teolog (talk) 12:49, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:40, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MJJR (talk) 21:44, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A bit more color saturation would have been more pleasant. --S23678 (talk) 08:00, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --663h (talk) 12:20, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. Don't see a white balance problem and I think the composition is fine. Maedin\talk 06:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /JovanCormac 09:35, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Panoramas

File:Mortimer Bay 1900.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2009 at 11:09:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Noodle snacks - uploaded by Noodle snacks - nominated by Noodle snacks -- Noodle snacks (talk) 11:09, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Noodle snacks (talk) 11:09, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Geocode and proper category migh help improve the value of the image. Is it dusk or dawn?--Korall (talk) 16:38, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Dusk, that stuff was coming, sorry. It will be there in about 5 minutes. Noodle snacks (talk) 21:18, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Amazingly beautiful. Location or whether it's dusk or dawn doesn't matter at all here IMO. It is obvious we don't Featured this one for its value, but for its beauty. -- JovanCormac 19:16, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Brackenheim (talk) 19:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful! --NEUROtiker  19:22, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 19:25, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Vprisivko (talk) 21:37, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 22:10, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - looks good –Juliancolton | Talk 22:18, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sure.   ■ MMXXtalk  05:28, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose "This media file is uncategorized." kallerna 09:26, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wow! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:15, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support fantastic! -- Ra'ike T C 17:58, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 17:59, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cause of beauty of course, but i still think its important to put media files in categories.--Korall
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Not enough to oppose, but to me, there's a lack of details for a FP. I'll give a second thought later. --S23678 (talk) 08:25, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --663h (talk) 12:16, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /JovanCormac 09:31, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Natural_phenomena

File:Salzburg panorama.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2009 at 17:04:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Diliff - nominated by JovanCormac
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info After delisting this and this, it's time we feature a picture that does this beautiful city justice. This is Salzburg as I know it.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As nominator. -- JovanCormac 17:04, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't know Salzburg yet, but it seems it's worth a trip :-). --NEUROtiker  17:41, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
    • I really recommend it! IMO Salzburg is more beautiful than even Vienna. Also, your mother tongue being German, you probably don't live too far from it - what are you waiting for? Face-smile.svg -- JovanCormac
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, dull light and low resolution for a panorama of four pictures, sorry. --Aqwis (talk) 19:44, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
    • This attitude of judging images on what they could be instead of what they are seems a bit silly to me. Why don't you also oppose it because it wasn't taken with a 50 megapixel medium format camera? :-P This was taken 5 years ago with a 6 megapixel camera. Yes it is lower resolution than it could be, but until a better image comes along that is everything this is plus extra resolution, judge it on its merits. Diliff (talk) 22:07, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
      • I agree 100% here. Aquis' comment is pure nonsense. Resolution is average for a FP, and image quality is next to perfect, easily besting 90% of all Featured panoramas. Did you know that there were actually people opposed to or neutral to delisting this picture of Salzburg, which has 1/3 of the candidate's resolution and terrible image quality compared to it? I try not to think too much about those "injustices", because if I do they always make me mad... -- JovanCormac 06:33, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
        • Per Maedin's comment about overlap I have retracted that part of my oppose. --Aqwis (talk) 12:12, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
          • Aqwis, IMO you were right, when you complained about the resolution of the panorama. A single image of 6 megapixels camera gives resolution of 3000 x 2000. Here we have four images panorama with a resolution, which is lower than a resolution of a single image. A strange overlap, isn't it :) Of course the resolution is within the rules of FPC, yet your oppose reason was still a legitimate one. On the other hand claiming that image should be promoted because there's no better one now availabale on the subject is a silly reason for promoting an image. The reaction of the user on the oppose votes, including retaliating to me in absolutely different place, seems inappropriate. I do not agree that this image is "easily besting 90% of all Featured panoramas". diliff is taking breathtaking panoramas, one of the best, maybe the best panoramas on Commons, but the nominated image is simply not one of them, and it is not the end of the world :).--Mbz1 (talk) 13:59, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - nice image but not stunning.--Avala (talk) 22:19, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Agwis. Sorry.--Mbz1 (talk) 02:46, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the lighting is fine, and of course the resolution is, too. Besides, we have no idea how much overlap there may have been in those 4 images. Maedin\talk 06:45, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 08:44, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special, normal quality image. --Karel (talk) 18:23, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't see the special thing that would qualify this as an exceptional picture, sorry --S23678 (talk) 07:48, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /JovanCormac 09:34, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

File:William Holman Hunt - The Scapegoat.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2009 at 02:37:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Scapegoat
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by William Holman Hunt (1827—1910) - uploaded and nominated by Dmitry Rozhkov -- Dmitry Rozhkov (talk) 02:37, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dmitry Rozhkov (talk) 02:37, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great.--Mbz1 (talk) 02:48, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting picture. -- JovanCormac 06:14, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 08:36, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! --Einstein2 (talk) 10:58, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, on a thumbnail it looks like a photo. Airwolf (talk) 11:54, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, great quality. --Aqwis (talk) 12:10, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very interesting indeed. Tiptoety talk 21:46, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Korall (talk) 16:18, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 10:03, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --663h (talk) 12:19, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /JovanCormac 09:33, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic_media

File:Volubilis - ruins jm.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2009 at 12:43:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Volubilis, Marocco
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Ludmiła Pilecka - uploaded by Lestath - nominated by Albertus teolog -- Albertus teolog (talk) 12:43, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Albertus teolog (talk) 12:43, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sharpness isn't perfect, and it looks like the color balance is off, too (yellow!). -- JovanCormac 19:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I guess we need a discussion about sharpness standards, as some people put the bar very high recently. -- MJJR (talk) 21:37, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very interesting object. I didn't know that storks (?) build nests in Morocco. Unfortunately technical quality is not up to FP standards IMO. --NEUROtiker  19:20, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quality, composition. --S23678 (talk) 08:27, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 22:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

file:SubothVenise.png, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2009 at 09:44:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"Very Hungry God" from Suboth Gupta. Palazzo Grassi, Venice may 2007
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Didier Descouens - uploaded by archaeodontosaurus - nominated by archaeodontosaurus -- Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:44, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:44, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose composition, the gondolier should be imho more on the right side of the image. His head "collides" with the sculpture. --Andreas 06 (talk) 10:41, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, too dark, tilted to the right, cluttered composition. --Yerpo (talk) 13:28, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The subject should be presented through a more developped composition. --S23678 (talk) 08:32, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 22:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Pisa tower05.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2009 at 15:23:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Top of the Leaning Tower in Pisa
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Bartek Ptaszyński - uploaded by Bartek Ptaszyński - nominated by Bartek Ptaszyński -- BartekPtaszyński (talk) 15:23, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- BartekPtaszyński (talk) 15:23, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Is the picture tilted to the right-hand side or is it just my impression? Translation for the nominator: Zdjęcie przechylone na prawo czy tylko mi się wydaje? Airwolf (talk) 15:30, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
    • You know it's a Leading Town, so it should be titled to the right-hand side. BartekPtaszyński (talk) 15:36, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Powiedz to po polsku, co? Bo nie wiem, co masz na myśli, pisząc Leading Town. Airwolf (talk) 15:50, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
        • Sorry miałem na myśli Leaning Tower;). Chodzi mi o to, że jeśli jest to krzywa wieża to chyba normalne,że jest przechylona w prawo, zwłaszcza jeśli próbuje zrobić zdjęcie w pełni oddające "właściwości" wieży. Przynajmniej tak mi się wydaje. Pozdrawiam BartekPtaszyński (talk) 16:57, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
          • Tak, gdyby to było zdjęcie całej wieży, wtedy można by powiedzieć, że pokazujesz, jak jest przechylona. Ale na tym zdjęciu przechył ma się nijak do rzeczywistego przechyłu. Airwolf (talk) 17:02, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Severe JPEG artifacts, visible in the blue sky surrounding the top of the tower. -- JovanCormac 06:05, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quality issues, and construction equipment --S23678 (talk) 08:34, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 11:35, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Gandhi spinning.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2009 at 11:08:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by an unknown photographer - uploaded by Yann - nominated by JovanCormac
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info An engaging portrait showing Gandhi in one of his iconic poses: Using a spinning wheel to make yarn. Despite the image's relatively low quality (which is easily explained by the lack of good photographic equipment available during the 1920s in the Indian countryside), this is probably the best portrait of Gandhi we have, and an important historical and political document.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As nominator. -- JovanCormac 11:08, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Of course. ;o) Yann (talk) 11:17, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but I don't know why should I support. Poor quality. Maybe VI? kallerna 14:39, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The quality is a huge counter-argument for me. --NEUROtiker  21:03, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support IMO some credit should be given for the old and unique images.--Mbz1 (talk) 01:29, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor quality -- Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 08:23, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I am also thinking VI but not FP, the quality is really bad. /Daniel78 (talk) 19:26, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It surprises me that so many people oppose this based on quality when it's such a historic image. When File:Waldenburg1945edit.jpg was promoted (which was taken 20 years after the candidate), it didn't seem to matter either as its quality is far worse yet. -- JovanCormac 20:47, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
    • I don't agree. IMO the level of detail and the resolution of that picture is much better than of this one. The picture of Ghandi looks like a scan of a print. Even in the 1920s I guess photography has been more sophisticated. --NEUROtiker  21:25, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MartinD (talk) 10:18, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Econt (talk) 02:00, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quality. --Karel (talk) 19:39, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 22:48, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Blake Canterbury Pilgrims engraving.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2009 at 10:55:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

William Blake's The Canterbury Pilgrims, c. 1810-23. High illustrative value, a great example of Blake's engraving technique, and an exceptionally high quality scan


Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /–blurpeace (talk) 03:33, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic media

File:Cane cutters in Jamaica.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2009 at 02:15:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cane cutters in Jamaica (1880s)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by unknown author (1880s) - uploaded and nominated by Dmitry Rozhkov -- Dmitry Rozhkov (talk) 02:15, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dmitry Rozhkov (talk) 02:15, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Interesting scene, but quality is not very good: blown highlights. Yann (talk) 09:24, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, much better. Yann (talk) 00:08, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That picture is almost 130 years old. Plenty good enough given the age. -- JovanCormac 09:28, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose On second thought, the original image at [3] really does have significantly better quality. In fact, I'd rather see the original, un"restored" version Featured than the candidate. Maybe desaturation was a little overzealous? -- JovanCormac 09:32, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Symbol support vote.svg Support Much better now. -- JovanCormac 12:38, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Contrast/brightness have been returned to original now. --Dmitry Rozhkov (talk) 12:19, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --NEUROtiker  21:07, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support If it really is from the 1880:s the quality is totally amazing.--Korall (talk) 00:45, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent! --Captain-tucker (talk) 01:27, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support   ■ MMXXtalk  02:37, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very nice quality -- Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 08:26, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --George Chernilevsky (talk) 05:12, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry but the image has very poor quality (maybe not for its time but A image shouldn't be nominated just becauses its 130 years old) The Article Creator (talk) 20:58, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /–blurpeace (talk) 03:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Historical

File:Colonial Williamsburg ladies.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2009 at 20:10:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info

Women reenacting in Colonial Williamsburg in Virginia ,USA. created by User:Harvey Barrison - uploaded by Harvey Barrison - nominated by User:anon -- 122.170.16.121 20:10, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 122.170.16.121 20:10, 23 September 2009 (UTC) Please log in to vote --Tony Wills (talk) 00:26, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Obvious quality problems (cap of the rightmost woman, face of the woman next to her). -- JovanCormac 05:47, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Atmosphere and composition are OK, however blown highlights, not overly sharp, and some noise due to higher ISO. --Relic38 (talk) 10:47, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Albertus teolog (talk) 12:59, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Barun Nice capture of an retrograde atmosphere.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 10:41, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --663h (talk) 12:17, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose I agree with Relic38. Also tilt CCW and unhappy crop at bottom. But retrograde atmosphere really good. --George Chernilevsky (talk) 05:08, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not bad image, but for FP something missing. No WOW. --Karel (talk) 19:46, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For the reasons already mentioned above. -- Petritap (talk) 13:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Mbz1 (talk) 02:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Golden spot.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2009 at 18:21:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sun is reflected in misty river
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Anvikh - uploaded by Anvikh - nominated by UAnvikh -- Anvikh (talk) 18:21, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Anvikh (talk) 18:21, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This image is a great idea, however it could benefit from HDR to avoid the darkness and keep the reflection from being blown. --Relic38 (talk) 10:54, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The dynamic range of the light conditions there are too wide for a single-exposure shot, making dark areas too dark and light areas too light. -- H005 Sexy Mouth transparent.png 16:25, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, nice image. --Vprisivko (talk) 21:40, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Llorenzi (talk) 17:01, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but can't see any real "wow" here. The composition is a bit awkward, too. Otherwise very nice. -- Petritap (talk) 12:56, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Mbz1 (talk) 02:18, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

File:KhubilaiOnTheHunt.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2009 at 09:59:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kubilai Khan on the Hunt, paint and ink on silk, by Liu Guandao, 1280 format        = landscape
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Kubilai Khan on a hunting expedition, paint and ink on silk, by Liu Guandao, 1280 - uploaded by Yaan - nominated by Tseno Maximov
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tseno Maximov (talk) 09:59, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 23:07, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

File:San Francisco with approaching fog.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2009 at 02:54:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHSan Francisco with approaching fog
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by mbz1 - uploaded by mbz1 - nominated by mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 02:54, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Fog loves San Francisco and sometimes hugs the city as you see at the image :) --Mbz1 (talk) 02:54, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
If something seems blurry, please note it is not really blurry, but rather some individualal patches of fog.--Mbz1 (talk) 02:57, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 02:54, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow. Great picture! -- JovanCormac 06:14, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent --George Chernilevsky (talk) 06:44, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 08:36, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MartinD (talk) 09:06, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:23, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Einstein2 (talk) 10:56, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 12:09, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Relic38 (talk) 12:24, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support kallerna 14:31, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice, Mila. Maedin\talk 18:16, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --663h (talk) 13:01, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support   ■ MMXXtalk  02:41, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jacopo Werther (talk) 13:03, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice. --Dschwen (talk) 20:18, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:39, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Brackenheim (talk) 19:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Vertical are not vertical. Looks more pronounced on the right side of the image. Would support if corrected. --S23678 (talk) 08:11, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /–blurpeace (talk) 03:30, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Panoramas

File:St Peter Salzburg panoramic view of interior small.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2009 at 23:36:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panorama der Stiftskirche St.Peter in Salzburg
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by MatthiasKabel - uploaded by MatthiasKabel - nominated by NormanB (talk) 23:36, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WOW! -- NormanB (talk) 23:36, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Yep, I had considered nominating that one as well. There is also a full size version with a mind-boggling 400+ Megapixels, but the file is corrupt because it was cut off after the first 100 MB. The image is not without its weaknesses, though, namely a weird grainy structure probably caused by the distorting projection, easily visible on and around the christmas trees. -- JovanCormac 06:17, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support really nice --George Chernilevsky (talk) 06:53, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 08:38, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- An incredible amount of detail! MartinD (talk) 09:11, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Odd projection, bad crop on bottom. kallerna 10:18, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:44, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Einstein2 (talk) 10:59, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support, great picture, bad crop. Airwolf (talk) 11:52, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The projection seem too extreme to me, would be better with individual images. /Daniel78 (talk) 20:46, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Brilliant Rastrojo (DES) 21:12, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support fine. Some informations how it was maked would be nice. --Kolossos (talk) 21:17, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Can't really expect much better than this. Great detail, correct exposure, overall great image of a church interior. - Keta (talk) 10:41, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jacopo Werther (talk) 13:04, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Brackenheim (talk) 19:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Crop below is too tight, but nevertheless a great image! -- MJJR (talk) 21:20, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I was about to oppose because of the distortion at the top from the projection used. But the magnificence of this panorama can really be enjoyed with the panoramic viewer. This image is not ment to be seen in "flat mode" --S23678 (talk) 08:08, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --663h (talk) 12:20, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /–blurpeace (talk) 03:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Interiors

File:Thomas Bresson - Sympetrum striolatum-16 (by).JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2009 at 10:50:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sympetrum striolatum


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 23:06, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Thomas Bresson - Sympetrum striolatum-3 (by).JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2009 at 10:49:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sympetrum striolatum


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 23:07, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

File:PZL-101 Gawron Góraszka 2008.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2009 at 14:57:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

PZL-101 Gawron
FPX is for images that clearly have no chance, not marginal cases. This has achieved FP status elsewhere and is of high quality, it clearly has a chance. --Tony Wills (talk) 21:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I will keep that in mind before using FPX in the future. --MAURILBERT (discuter) 00:04, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg My mistake :-) Albertus teolog (talk) 15:26, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks fine to me. --Tony Wills (talk) 21:16, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Boeing 737-400 Centralwings 2.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2009 at 13:21:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Boeing 737-400
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Łukasz Golowanow, Maciej Hypś, Konflikty.pl - uploaded by Airwolf - nominated by Albertus teolog -- Albertus teolog (talk) 13:21, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Albertus teolog (talk) 13:21, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Very nice shot of this subject, but I can't decide one way or the other. More thought required. --Relic38 (talk) 12:28, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I've cropped the image just a little bit so that there is not too much free space in the picture. Airwolf (talk) 12:44, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Living in the vicinity of a major airport (Amsterdam Schiphol), I fail to see what is so special about a Boeing 737. I can see several dozens of them each day when I bother to look up.;) MartinD (talk) 18:36, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request I would like to know - i.e. hear opinions from other contributors - whether such a reason for opposing is valid; in my opinion it is contradictory with the essential basis of Commons in general, and FPC in particular, which is: to gather media and select the best of those. One could easily say that there is nothing special in pictures of bugs (there are how many? 200 billion of them in the world?) or buildings (5 million people see the Statue of Liberty every day) or most cars (there's a Skoda Superb parking in front of my house every day). However, when a photo of a bug, building, or car is of satisfactory quality, it gets promoted. By the way, how many times have you seen a Centralwings airplane at Schiphol? Airwolf (talk) 19:04, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Please voice your opinion here, and take part in the discussion. -- JovanCormac 06:07, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pablo000 (talk) 19:28, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, too banal --Vprisivko (talk) 20:21, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak Support OK, the crop has helped. As for the specialness of a subject, I leave that out of my voting or I don't vote on that subject (for me that includes most non-photographic images). "One person's trash is another person's treasure". For that reason I don't trashoppose subjects just because I cannot see the specialness of it. That's my . --Relic38 (talk) 01:51, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose boring, it's just a plane and not even an interesting point of view. I have tons of those pictures in my archive. --Björn König (talk) 14:04, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Mbz1 (talk) 21:52, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Dead tree and Pacific.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2009 at 00:38:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dead tree and Pacific
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by mbz1 - uploaded by mbz1 - nominated by mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 00:38, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 00:38, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Okay, here's the deal. Some time ago Richard nominated an image and asked you to figure out what was that image of. IMO it is an interesting idea. Yesterday while I was taken picture of ... few people asked me what it was. It was interesting that they did not know what is that relatively common thing at the sky. So IMO it will be interesting to know, if you know what it is. Right now neither image's description, nor category indicates what I took the image of. Of course I will add that info later after the game is over Face-smile.svg. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 00:38, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
    • When was that original nomination? I don't remember it. -- JovanCormac 06:00, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
      • It was few months ago, when Richard nominated a skin of an animal. If I find the nomination I will provide the link.--Mbz1 (talk) 11:46, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
      • As for your challenge, I would say the phenomenon visible in the picture (the small colored speck of light) is a parhelion, also called a "sun dog" (another picture of it is here). -- JovanCormac 06:12, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
        • It was fast, and thank you for responding to the challenge! Sun Dog it is.--Mbz1 (talk) 11:46, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Mbz1 (talk) 21:44, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Galileo Galilei 3.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2009 at 14:38:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Justus Sustermans (1597-1681) - uploaded and nominated by Dmitry Rozhkov-- Dmitry Rozhkov (talk) 14:38, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dmitry Rozhkov (talk) 14:38, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 21:40, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour (talk) 09:50, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's very valuable for the encyclopedia but not FP, no wow--Tired time (talk) 09:05, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Mbz1 (talk) 21:49, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

File:John Churchill, 1st Duke of Marlborough by John Closterman.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2009 at 15:29:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by John Closterman - uploaded by Dcoetzee - nominated by Tseno Maximov
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tseno Maximov (talk) 15:29, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great scan. What about the NPG lawsuit, though? -- JovanCormac 16:05, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question It looks very very dark - does the original painting really look this way? -- H005 Sexy Mouth transparent.png 16:21, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
    • It's called low key lighting. --Ernie (talk) 16:49, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
      • That's a photographic style, not of artwork of the 18th century. -- H005 Sexy Mouth transparent.png 17:10, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Actually, it's called chiaroscuro. Low-key lighting is a photographic technique designed to recreate the chiaroscuro effect in a photograph. -- JovanCormac 20:35, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose However you call it, I believe this image hides too many details of the original painting. -- H005 Sexy Mouth transparent.png 22:16, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Much too dark. See the other scan mentioned above. Yann (talk) 17:22, 25 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Mbz1 (talk) 21:47, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Tum kolegiata 2-2.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2009 at 12:41:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Collegiate church in Tum
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Albertus teolog - uploaded by Berthold Werner - nominated by Albertus teolog -- Albertus teolog (talk) 12:41, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Albertus teolog (talk) 12:41, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sky is noisy for a daylight shot, and sharpness is less than we have come to expect from this type of picture. Also, there is a slight chromatic aberration around the cross that tops the left bell tower. -- JovanCormac 13:53, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Mbz1 (talk) 21:45, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Angela Merkel (2008).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2009 at 08:09:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by א - nominated by JovanCormac
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Today might be Mrs. Merkel's final day as chancellor of Germany (of course she will technically stay in office until the new Bundestag is formed). Looking through our Merkel pictures, I was surprised to find this sympathetic portrait of her. The quality is very good (almost studio level) and the picture shows Merkel in a pose quite typical of her. I wish we had more high quality free photos of world leaders, but clearly they're hard to come by...
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As nominator. -- JovanCormac 08:09, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour (talk) 09:45, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MartinD (talk) 09:50, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --George Chernilevsky (talk) 10:30, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 10:35, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support kallerna 10:37, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Dmitry Rozhkov (talk) 11:27, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --663h (talk) 12:21, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Very nice, but I don't love the crop. --NEUROtiker  12:45, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In spite of the crop it's a good portrait, and rare to get something of this quality about a current politician of her stature. Durova (talk) 15:34, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Rastrojo (DES) 18:11, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Agree with both NEUROtiker and Durova, despite bad crop it is a good portrait and we don't have many people portrait here.   ■ MMXXtalk  04:32, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Albertus teolog (talk) 13:28, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Babyaministraor (talk) 20:39, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 02:22, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kosiarz-PL 11:59, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Herby talk thyme 07:02, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mbz1 (talk) 02:22, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: People

File:Aston Martin DB6 r.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2009 at 19:31:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Aston Martin DB6. Created by Brian Snelson - uploaded by TYp392 - nominated by Anon
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tseno Maximov (talk) 22:13, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There is absolutely nothing special about this picture. It has good quality, but it is simply a car, a nice looking classic car, but just a car nonetheless. This would make a good VI, but its not what is needed at FP. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:03, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Mbz1 (talk) 01:39, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Chinese honor guard in column 070322-F-0193C-014.JPEG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2009 at 07:25:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Chinese Honour Guard


Confirmed results:
Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mbz1 (talk) 02:32, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: People

File:Female argynnis paphia in Lill-Jansskogen.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2009 at 16:25:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Everything by Korall -- Korall (talk) 16:25, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I know the composition is not extraordinary but Im quite happy with the detail of the wings.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Korall (talk) 16:25, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Quite a narrow depth of field which caused the eyes and some parts of the wings to be out of focus. Well, sharp eyes may not be too important in this case. --Ernie (talk) 16:41, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is very hard to get every single part of a butterfly in focus. Please comepare with File:Kleiner Fuchs, Aglais urticae.JPG for example that was featured this year but in my opinion have worse focus problems with the wings. I sharpened the eyes and hope the reslult is ok. --Korall (talk) 20:04, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
    • I agree. If the Aglais urticae file is of FP quality then yours is too. --Ernie (talk) 21:47, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice --George Chernilevsky (talk) 05:10, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Sharpness/DOF is the only issue here for me. Shooting at f/8 may have been enough to overcome it. --Relic38 (talk) 11:28, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Maybe that or unsharp mask plus downsampling to a quarter of the size. I guess im just naive to think this image can be in the same leauge as the already featured pictures of argynnis butterflies like this or this or this or even this. --Korall (talk) 17:25, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

  • You make a good case argument, however I probably would oppose most, if not, all of those. For me, your image is the best of the five, but I just can't decide one way or the other right now. --Relic38 (talk) 19:26, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Do you think its a good iea to withdraw this one and start nominating butterfly pictures for delisting?--Korall (talk) 00:54, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Background a little too spotty.It could be cleaned and the noise (senn in 100% view). Darius Bauzys (talk) 14:51, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 08:33, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Petritap (talk) 13:04, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /--Mbz1 (talk) 01:37, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Hard disk head crash.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2009 at 22:10:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

a hard disc head crash.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and - nominated by -- Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:10, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:10, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info the focus point is set to the hard disc head.
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hope you didn't lose anything important. What model was the drive? Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 07:00, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment the hard disc model isn't important. It can be all. I don't lost any datas. My info: it was a hard disk from a raid system. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 09:25, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Econt (talk) 01:51, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mbdortmund (talk) 13:35, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very clear and interesting photo and hasn't got as much support as it probably deserves. Diliff (talk) 14:47, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice image & per Diliff --Herby talk thyme 06:42, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Whoops, forgot to support it. Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 08:52, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karel (talk) 19:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I find the crop a bit tight, why not show the whole disk platter? --Tony Wills (talk) 22:04, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
    • please read the image title: a hard disc crash. It should be only to show the hard disc head and the scratches. Nothing others. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 06:35, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
The disk platter is an important part of that equation. The more I look at it, the more awkward the crop looks :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 07:23, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Niabot (talk) 17:59, 4 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Mbz1 (talk) 01:35, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects

File:Helen Clark 2.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2009 at 19:09:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Portrait of Helen Clark, Former Prime Minister of New Zealand. created by Jughead78 - uploaded by jughead78 - nominated by : Anon
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Much as I would like to support a photo of our former prime minister, I don't think a very soft, air-brushed publicity photo really shows the character of her face. --Tony Wills (talk) 21:54, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - nice portrait, and we don't get too many portraits anyway.--Avala (talk) 22:17, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose To me, there just isn't any "wow factor" at all in this (rather ordinary-looking) portrait. Petritap (talk) 12:31, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The stark color contrast and "plain" face indicate that there was far too much postprocessing done here. -- JovanCormac 07:35, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Mbz1 (talk) 01:41, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Kepler mission Delta II liftoff.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2009 at 12:09:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Delta II Lift-off
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by NASA - uploaded by Badseed - nominated by Sarcastic ShockwaveLover -- Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 12:09, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm a romantic, I know, but something about the the way the smoke and flame curl around the rocket makes it look...almost heavenly.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 12:09, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Considering its destination, it should look heavenly, don't you think? Airwolf (talk) 12:37, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 14:38, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 18:18, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --NEUROtiker  18:56, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 15:20, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tseno Maximov (talk) 22:19, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Tiptoety talk 22:53, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --663h (talk) 12:31, 2 October 2009 (UTC)-
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 14:30, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fire and night - always beautiful. -- JovanCormac 07:22, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • {{oppose}} Overexposed light from the fire looses detail ;-) Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 01:27, 4 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mbz1 (talk) 02:30, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Astronomy

File:Sandboarding in Dubai.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2009 at 15:48:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sandboarding in Dubai
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Steven J. Weber - uploaded by Stefan Kühn - nominated by Airwolf -- Airwolf (talk) 15:48, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Airwolf (talk) 15:48, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Pure coolness, though it looks as if the color balance was slightly tilted towards red. -- JovanCormac 16:04, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 17:52, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Didn't know you can do this on sand dunes. MartinD (talk) 18:34, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! Jacopo Werther (talk) 20:01, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour (talk) 09:47, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support   ■ MMXXtalk  04:39, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Darius Bauzys (talk) 07:00, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Albertus teolog (talk) 13:27, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karel (talk) 19:52, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mbz1 (talk) 02:22, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Sports

File:Clifton Beach 2.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2009 at 04:05:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Noodle snacks - uploaded by Noodle snacks - nominated by Noodle snacks -- Noodle snacks (talk) 04:05, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Noodle snacks (talk) 04:05, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Is this image unaltered? I've never seen blue fog before... -- JovanCormac 06:33, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Not fog, water with a long exposure. It is a graduated blend between two exposures but that is about it. The colour appears to be a combination of a reflection of the sky and the considerable white foam from the swell (it is a surf beach). Noodle snacks (talk) 07:12, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Ok, Symbol support vote.svg Support. That should be noted in the image description though as to someone who doesn't know the place it sure looks like fog. -- JovanCormac 07:32, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Tilt (horizon). But mostly, this is more of a personal taste, I feel the composition would have been so much better if there was a greater contrast between the sky and the water (with colors or clouds). --S23678 (talk) 09:03, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I also wondered, if it was water or fog. IMO, if one is not sure about that, it means that the image is overprocessed. Besides I do not like blue color between the rocks. Sorry.--Mbz1 (talk) 09:58, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Not a case of processing, just a long exposure (30 seconds) and waves breaking. Noodle snacks (talk) 10:35, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
      • I wonder, if it is possible to see the original image? I mean the waves are breaking only ashore, around the rocks, but all the water looks the same, and it does look as a blue fog. If I am to see the original, I might change my vote. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:12, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
        • For what it's worth I was there on the day and the colours seem accurate based off my images. Flying Freddy (talk) 16:21, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
          • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question You were at this exact spot on the very same day Noodle snacks took that picture? -- JovanCormac 20:01, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not much EV but great artistic shot. --Muhammad (talk) 12:40, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Babyaministraor (talk) 20:41, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good, but not that good. kallerna 16:39, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 14:35, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Hdr parliament.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2009 at 21:45:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Graeme Maclean - uploaded by Flickr upload bot - nominated by Tseno Maximov
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tseno Maximov (talk) 21:45, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unfortunate technical problems here, including noise, HDR frame misalignments, and the clock tower is tilted. --Relic38 (talk) 01:55, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Relic38. Looks amazing as a thumbnail, but full size disappoints. -- JovanCormac 06:11, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose To the quality problems mentionned above, I'll add CA --S23678 (talk) 08:50, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The Ship also moved, but I still like the picture.--Curnen (talk) 20:49, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Overdone Tonemapping in my opinion. Flying Freddy (talk) 02:48, 1 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 14:35, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Hell Scroll Nara.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2009 at 17:09:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hell Scroll
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Bamse - uploaded by Bamse - nominated by Bamse -- bamse (talk) 17:09, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This image shows the full scroll which is a National Treasure of Japan. Sections of the scroll can be found in Category:Hell Scroll (Nara National Museum).
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- bamse (talk) 17:09, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 17:43, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Would it be possible to "straighten" the image so that the scroll is rectangular instead of sloping on the right? -- JovanCormac 21:18, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting info.svg Info The image is a stitch of the individual sections. I could upload tiff files of the sections if somebody wants to try a better stitch.bamse (talk) 06:15, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting info.svg Info Uploaded the tiff files and requested a better stitch at the wikipedia graphics lab. bamse (talk) 20:34, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For the size and the historical value Yann (talk) 11:33, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 14:36, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Alan Shepard in Space Suit before Mercury Launch - GPN-2000-001023.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2009 at 15:06:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

First American to fly into space
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by NASA - uploaded by BotMultichillT - nominated by Diaa abdelmoneim -- Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 15:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The image is of Alan B. Shepard Jr., the first American to fly into space. The image is of very high quality and has a great composition. -- Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 15:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tseno Maximov (talk) 17:01, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad quality for a photo taken in 1961 on earth (this wasn't taken in space). This looks like it dates from 1861 instead! Even the pictures taken on the moon eight years later had both color and better quality. Also, the crop is far from ideal. -- JovanCormac 18:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Jovan. kallerna 20:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg --Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 20:52, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

  • Consider valued image instead? No way to go back in time and get this shot again, and it has historic importance. ++Lar: t/c 14:20, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Kaka feeding 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2009 at 11:54:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kaka getting Huhu for dinner
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by User:Tony Wills -- Tony Wills (talk) 11:54, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Kaka parrots spend a lot of time digging into tree trunks looking for their prize food - Huhu Beetle larvae. No doubt a delicious high energy fast food for them :-). Low light levels inside the forest in the late afternoon made it difficult to focus and freeze the action, but in this sequence of flash photos I managed to capture the moment of triumph :-).
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tony Wills (talk) 11:54, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is so unfortunate that the focus of the camera shifted to the background of the scene in the last shot... --MAURILBERT (discuter) 15:20, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Yes the technical quality isn't perfect ;-). The bird was moving quite fast, I also moved the camera, slow shutter speed - surprising anything is in focus :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 20:58, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The first two are OK, the last two are out of focus. Yann (talk) 08:51, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Focus + hard to discern the bird from the background (could be my eyesight, of course). -- Petritap (talk) 11:10, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
It probably has the idea that it is camouflaged :-) --Tony Wills (talk) 11:43, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg Ok, no one seems to be thinking that capturing the moment overcomes slight technical deficiencies ;-) --Tony Wills (talk) 11:43, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

File:A small cup of coffee.JPG, delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2009 at 06:54:05
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Reason to delist (Original nomination): Clearly not special: Resolution borderline (just below the guidelines), dust spots (center, above the cup), scratches (left of the spoon handle), dirty, dull background (table). Can be retaken anytime, ergo no mitigation for those shortcomings.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist As nominator. -- JovanCormac 06:54, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist kallerna 14:36, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist per JC. --Relic38 (talk) 19:28, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Karel (talk) 22:10, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist -- Korall (talk) 20:49, 24 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. /Daniel78 (talk) 21:43, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

File:La Boqueria.JPG, delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2009 at 06:48:49
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Reason to delist (Original nomination): Resolution (1280x960) far below the guidelines, sharpness borderline. A picture like this can be taken anytime at any market, ergo no mitigation for those shortcomings.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist As nominator. -- JovanCormac 06:48, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist kallerna 14:36, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist per JC. --Relic38 (talk) 19:31, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Korall (talk) 11:20, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist per Nominator --George Chernilevsky (talk) 05:31, 25 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. /Daniel78 (talk) 21:42, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Lens Nikkor 50mm.jpg, delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2009 at 17:27:45
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info An 1,2 MP image with visible noise of an object that any photographer with a DSLR camera should have at least one of.(Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist -- Korall (talk) 17:27, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Per nominator. -- JovanCormac 06:44, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist kallerna 14:36, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist per nominator. --Relic38 (talk) 19:32, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Karel (talk) 22:09, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep --Kosiarz-PL 12:05, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 5 delist, 1 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. /Daniel78 (talk) 21:42, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

File:View from the Window at Le Gras, Joseph Nicéphore Niépce, uncompressed UMN source.png, delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2009 at 21:02:51
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This delisting nomination is designed (together with the FP nomination above) to switch from the uncompressed candidate version to this one as a Featured Picture. The other one is Featured on 4 Wikipedias already and is in the more suitable JPEG format. That way we will have one version that is Featured on many sites, and the uncompressed version as an alternative.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Please support, for a little less bureaucracy!
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist As nominator. -- JovanCormac 21:02, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Agreed. Yann (talk) 22:38, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Per nominator --George Chernilevsky (talk) 05:25, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Korall (talk) 07:14, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist kallerna 09:33, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep delisting the best quality picture over a compressed picture is absolute madness. GerardM (talk) 09:30, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Repeating my reply from above: Besides the fact that quality obviously isn't an issue with such a photo, it has been discussed over and over again that PNGs should not be used for photographs. Only recently, a picture of a goat was opposed for the sole reason of being PNG rather than JPEG. -- JovanCormac 10:32, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Kosiarz-PL 12:03, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep --RBID (talk) 13:09, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist -- TonyBallioni (talk) 19:53, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 delist, 2 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. /Daniel78 (talk) 21:43, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Extermination of Evil Shōki.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2009 at 19:30:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Extermination of Evil Shōki


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Daniel78 (talk) 21:39, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic media

File:Bengalia sp.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2009 at 12:20:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info c/u/n by Muhammad Mahdi Karim -- Muhammad (talk) 12:20, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Muhammad (talk) 12:20, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great shot! --NEUROtiker  12:41, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 14:48, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's smallish, but the colors of that fly are very pretty and sharpness is good. The feet show detail that I don't believe I have seen before in a Commons image of a fly. -- JovanCormac 15:37, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The normal reasons + needs ID's. Sorry :(. kallerna 20:34, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Its already identified till genus and confirmed by two entomologists. Id further than this is almost never possible from a picture unless shots of some other features such as dissected genitalia are also taken. FWIW, we have tons of FPs with the genus id and you have even supported them. Wonder why the change of heart. --Muhammad (talk) 00:08, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
Pictogram voting info.svg Info Species IDs aren't an FP requirement anyway. --Tony Wills (talk) 09:10, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good. -- Darius Bauzys (talk) 06:56, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Sharp, reasonable DOF, however the flash brightened the background quite a bit. I just can't decide, sorry. --Relic38 (talk) 12:05, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mbdortmund (talk) 12:42, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose--Babyaministraor (talk) 20:36, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
    • You oppose this yet support the terribly cropped leopard picture above? -- JovanCormac 06:24, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Oh, and of course: Please provide a reason for opposing as a courtesy to the nominator. -- JovanCormac 06:25, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Something like "The normal reasons" is apparently sufficient ;-) --Tony Wills (talk) 09:10, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
I smell puppet. --Muhammad (talk) 17:20, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Daniel78 (talk) 21:37, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Arthropods

File:Effects of Hurricane Charley from FEMA Photo Library 7.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2009 at 13:45:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aerial image of destroyed homes in Punta Gorda, Florida, following Hurricane Charley in summer of 2004
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by FEMA - uploaded by Juliancolton - nominated by Juliancolton -- –Juliancolton | Talk 13:45, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think this is a high-quality illustration of the damage from a tropical cyclone. It's a bit small, but given the circumstances, it is among the best we can get on the subject. -- –Juliancolton | Talk 13:45, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 14:10, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Llorenzi (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Resolution is on the small side, but the picture is very sharp, especially given that it was taken from an aircraft. -- JovanCormac 17:37, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 17:49, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but camera location missed. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:58, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Babyaministraor (talk) 20:25, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aqwis (talk) 22:16, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per JC. --Relic38 (talk) 01:54, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour (talk) 04:51, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --663h (talk) 10:37, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Böhringer (talk) 10:44, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support kallerna 16:36, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Herby talk thyme 07:01, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Daniel78 (talk) 21:34, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Natural phenomena

File:Teddies in Space.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2009 at 20:45:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Teddies in space
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Cambridge University Spaceflight - uploaded & nominated by Originalwana (talk) 20:45, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info These bears were lifted to 30,085 metres above sea level on a latex high altitude balloon filled with He. The aim of the experiment was to determine which materials provided the best insulation against the -53 ° C temperatures experienced during the journey. Each of the bears wore a different space suit designed by 11-13 year olds from SPARKS science club at Parkside Community College and Coleridge Community College UK.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As nominator Originalwana (talk) 20:45, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Blurry. Yann (talk) 23:33, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Blurry and bad crop. -- JovanCormac 07:04, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Bad quality, but a lot of wow. Airwolf (talk) 07:53, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As already said: Blur and bad crop. --Björn König (talk) 13:50, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I see very strong mitigating reasons. Diti the penguin 16:52, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too out of focus to be mitigated by the extreme rarity of the event. The crop is unfortunate as well. Definitely a valuable image. --Relic38 (talk) 17:12, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support there are strong mitigating factors. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:25, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Babyaministraor (talk) 20:34, 28 September 2009 (UTC)mitigating reasons.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Difficult to redo photograph - strong mitigating reasons overcome technical imperfections --Tony Wills (talk) 09:05, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose OOF. kallerna 16:37, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Jovan --Herby talk thyme 07:02, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I wouldn't want to place a several thousand dollar camera under a helium balloon to overcome the mentioned quality problems - would you ?  ;) --Curnen (talk) 20:44, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Even with a 50$ camera you can set the focus right, you know. ;o) Yann (talk) 22:16, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Yes, but if this photo was really taken at 7,3 mm, you can imagine how close the teddies were. And I have not seen any 50$ camera, that can focus on a point that close. --Curnen (talk) 15:50, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 01:35, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Thomas Bresson - Chalcolestes viridis-20 (by).JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2009 at 10:47:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Chalcolestes viridis


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 01:36, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Thomas Bresson - Tachina fera-4 (by).JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2009 at 10:46:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tachina fera


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 01:37, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Typhoon saomai 060807.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2009 at 11:19:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Typhoon party
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by NASA - uploaded by Good kitty - nominated by Sarcastic ShockwaveLover -- Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 11:19, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Anything I could say about this picture couldn't sum up the sheer breathtaking beauty of it. So I'll let the image do the talking.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 11:19, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's beautiful, alright, yet could be even more so if the typhoon weren't cropped so tightly. -- JovanCormac 15:30, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - It's great, certainly, but it's not particularly special or high quality. There is very little land in the picture, making it difficult to determine where you're looking at. None of the storms are well-developed, either; compare File:Ivan and Joan 18 oct 1997 0503Z N14.jpg, two much more mature and symmetrical typhoons. Also, the crop isn't especially impressive. –Juliancolton | Talk 13:53, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Babyaministraor (talk) 20:37, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 01:36, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Barn Pano(9467)-Relic38.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2009 at 16:17:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Old Barn, Ontario, Canada
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, and nominated by Relic38 -- Relic38 (talk) 16:17, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Note that the silo was actually tilted, not the image. In fact it had cables around it to keep it from collapsing. Unfortunately, nothing could prevent the bulldozers from knocking it down. --Relic38 (talk) 16:22, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Relic38 (talk) 16:17, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Airwolf (talk) 16:23, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Crop is too tight IMO, especially on the right side. Also I find the buildings in the background too distracting. Apart from that it's a very nice shot of a fascinating building! --NEUROtiker  19:15, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I change my vote now that the main reason for oppose has been fixed, but I can't bring myself to support. --NEUROtiker  13:21, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I would have loved to support this one (the "leaning tower" is cool), but unfortunately, nothing in this picture is really sharp. -- JovanCormac 19:21, 25 September 2009 (UTC) I change my vote to Symbol support vote.svg Support, since the new version uploaded by Relic38 is indeed an improvement. -- JovanCormac 10:01, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I guess we need a discussion about sharpness standards, as some people put the bar very high recently. -- MJJR (talk) 21:39, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
      • No problem, I'm ready to have this discussion any time.
        About this particular picture: The foreground (grass) is so blurry you can barely make out its structure, which looks quite odd at full resolution. The main subject (barn), while in focus, lacks crispness. The shingles on the tower are quite blurry around the edges, as are the two weathertops on the roof. The background, obviously, isn't sharp either. Overall, the image is missing a part that's really crisp which would serve as the focus of attention for the viewer, and because of that it shouldn't be featured IMO. -- JovanCormac 09:02, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Both the crop and the sharpness is fine with me.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:24, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think sharpness is fine but I agree with NEUROtiker, only thing that bother me is the tight crop.   ■ MMXXtalk  05:37, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
    • I have lots more space on the right side (two more frames), but it's just trees. I'll see about adding some more to the right side. --Relic38 (talk) 11:58, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, I think the sharpness is more than good enough for an 18 megapixel image. --Aqwis (talk) 09:54, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info ✓ Done New version uploaded with a wider crop and a minor adjustment to sharpen a little. I would appreciate it if everyone could check again. Thanks in advance. --Relic38 (talk) 04:33, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good, very aesthetic --George Chernilevsky (talk) 13:01, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /JovanCormac 10:03, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture

File:Calliteara pudibunda caterpillar.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2009 at 15:22:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Pale Tussock caterpillar
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, nominated by Darius Baužys -- Darius Bauzys (talk) 15:22, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Darius Bauzys (talk) 15:31, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support cute --Mbz1 (talk) 17:55, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ra'ike T C 17:56, 26 September 2009 (UTC) I could count its hair. If I didn't miscount, that must be 2365 pieces ;-))
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment imo it is underexposed and needs the levels boosted. Noodle snacks (talk) 22:03, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is slightly underexposed, but nothing dramatic. Is it just me or is there a lot of JPEG artifacts around the single hairs and the edges of the black segments? --Relic38 (talk) 02:58, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 08:32, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour (talk) 09:49, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent --George Chernilevsky (talk) 10:26, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 10:39, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quality isn't good enough to FP IMO. kallerna 10:43, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Can you elaborate? I am not a professional photographer, and I want to know the mistakes made. Thank you. -- Darius Bauzys (talk) 11:33, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
      • IMO the biggest problem is posterisation. kallerna 12:18, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /JovanCormac 10:04, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Arthropods

File:Chaplin2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2009 at 23:02:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Charlie Chaplin, early years
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by unknown photographer (1900-1910s) - uploaded, cleaned and nominated by Dmitry Rozhkov Dmitry Rozhkov (talk) 23:02, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dmitry Rozhkov (talk) 23:02, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting, I've never seen him like this before. Side note: Please use the "Information" template on the description page, without it that page tends to get messy. -- JovanCormac 06:30, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I added the {{information}} template. English description would be useful. Yann (talk) 09:58, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Clear FP for me --George Chernilevsky (talk) 10:29, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 10:42, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support   ■ MMXXtalk  04:36, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Petritap (talk) 19:20, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /JovanCormac 10:06, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Historical

File:Connie Mack3.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2009 at 05:42:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION


Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /JovanCormac 10:08, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: People

File:Fort Baker and Angel Island.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2009 at 01:24:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fort Baker, Angel Island and everpresent fog :)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by mbz1 - uploaded by mbz1 - nominated by mbz1 -- Mbz1 (talk) 01:24, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mbz1 (talk) 01:24, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Your photography is really great lately. Quality-wise, there are no problems here. However, unlike your other recent nominations, this one is just not extraordinary enough IMO. -- JovanCormac 05:45, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
I of course realize that everybody's opinion is different, and I respect yours, but to me the nominated image seems much more extraordinary than let's say, for example, an image of two rocks with forest in between Face-smile.svg--Mbz1 (talk) 09:47, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
The image you are referring to is really, really atmospheric, though; as are many of your own nominations. For me, this just isn't one of them. -- JovanCormac 10:11, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Should "atmospheric" be added to FPC criterias? Just kidding :) As I said I do respect your opinion, but I have a very different one. The nominated image not only depicts in great details historic Fort Baker, but it also has a great mood - the fog over the Bay. Of course it is my own opinion about my own image that could be biased Face-smile.svg. This image is very dear and very extraordinary to me for one more reason that is not connected to the image itself. I mean one amazing support vote it got on English Wikipedia FP nomination Face-smile.svg--Mbz1 (talk) 10:17, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it, and definitely meets the technical requirements. --Relic38 (talk) 10:43, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Airwolf (talk) 15:19, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karel (talk) 18:32, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Am I having a deja vue, or didn't we just feature a very similar picture? --Dschwen (talk) 20:02, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
I am afraid you're having a deja vue Face-smile.svg or maybe you're mistaking it with the nomination of the same image on English Wikipedia. I nominated one of the similar pictures here on Commons few weeks ago, but it was never featured.--Mbz1 (talk) 20:16, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jacopo Werther (talk) 17:14, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Jovan Cormac. While the image has great detail and very nice colours it doesn't appeal to me as a whole in the way I would expect it from a featured picture. Sorry, I can't really put it in words. --NEUROtiker  19:09, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
I do not think "weak" or "strong" make any difference in counting the votes, so may I please ask you next time, when opposing my image do not loose time for "weak" or "strong"? Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:18, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
It's not about differences in the vote count, it's just a part of expressing your opinion. Airwolf (talk) 19:20, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Maybe so, but the thing is that in English Wikipedia "weak" and "strong" do make difference in the counts of the votes, while here they apparently do not. That's why IMO adding "weak" / "strong" could create a confusion, if a nomination is closed manually, for example, (sometimes it does). IMO the opinion could be expressed in the comment in some other ways, of course if there's something to express at all. Face-smile.svg.--Mbz1 (talk) 19:47, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
It's just like Airwolf said. A plain "oppose" sometimes seems too harsh to me, when there's just small things that keep me from voting support. --NEUROtiker  20:06, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Dear NEUROtiker, I am sorry, if my comment sounded too harsh for you. I did not mean it. The thing is that to me "oppose" is "oppose" no matter weak or strong, and as I mentioned adding "weak" or "strong" might create some confusion. You said "small things that keep me from voting support". I hope you do agree there's a rather big difference between voting oppose (even weak one) or not voting support (not voting at all I mean). IMO the nominated image did not deserve to be opposed, but it is my opinion, and you could have your own, an absolutely different one. I respect it no matter what. Best regards.--Mbz1 (talk) 20:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree with Mila, I always prefer just put a "comment" instead of "weak oppose", I think if I don't have any strong reason to oppose, my vote should not get counted as a vote. but about the image, It's a nice panorama, but the crop is very tight at bottom and right.   ■ MMXXtalk  05:21, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
I know it is. I had no other choice because of the cliff.--Mbz1 (talk) 09:51, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Where was that helicopter you had in Hawaii? Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 12:15, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
After my amazing Mauna Loa image taken from a helicopter was opposed for no scale and no horizont I've decided never again to nominate another image taken from a helicopter... except maybe just one more :)--Mbz1 (talk) 13:38, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per NEUROtiker. kallerna 09:29, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kallerna --S23678 (talk) 08:19, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Relic38 --Herby talk thyme 15:08, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 13:04, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /JovanCormac 10:02, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Panoramas

File:Leopard.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2009 at 23:25:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Leopard in zoo.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Vladsegrt - uploaded by Vladsegrt - nominated by Vladsegrt -- Vladsegrt (talk) 23:25, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Vladsegrt (talk) 23:25, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, Terrible crop and sharpness problems. No chance of promotion. -- JovanCormac 07:03, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Babyaministraor (talk) 20:31, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad crop. Yann (talk) 00:08, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with JovanCormac. Also it is Cheetah, NOT a Leopard --George Chernilevsky (talk) 09:24, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad crop, sharpness. - Darius Baužys talk 10:53, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. kallerna 16:37, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per technical issues outlined above, and the lack of an accurate/descriptive title. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:50, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No reason. Noodle snacks (talk) 23:46, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Hmm, let me see can I find a new good enough oppose reason: Yes: distracting paws (see annotation). --Slaunger (talk) 20:52, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /JovanCormac 10:08, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Meulaboh Hovercraft 050110-N-7586B-120.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2009 at 16:19:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hovercraft in Meulaboh
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Photographer's Mate 1st Class Bart A. Bauer - uploaded by Davenbelle - nominated by Airwolf -- Airwolf (talk) 16:19, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This proves that the wow factor can be sad. Airwolf (talk) 16:19, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Airwolf (talk) 16:19, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 17:51, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- I agree with Airwolf. MartinD (talk) 18:32, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Valuable document. -- JovanCormac 21:17, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 21:38, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Relic38 (talk) 02:38, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ComputerHotline (talk) 08:32, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Powerful image --S23678 (talk) 08:38, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much going on. kallerna 10:41, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Llorenzi (talk) 16:54, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Kallerna ;-) --Tony Wills (talk) 12:31, 3 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /JovanCormac 10:05, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Natural_phenomena

File:Shrimp fisherman.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2009 at 23:18:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:18, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:18, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 04:41, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 09:55, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --663h (talk) 12:15, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Pleasing composition but I find my eye wandering out of the top of frame, although this may not be the best place to add a vignette to fix that. Can I ask why you used f/8? Were you after those trees in focus or a case of f8 and be there? - Flying Freddy (talk) 14:39, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Because f/8 is generally the sharpest aperture you can have on most lenses, and the standards of landscape photography are that everything must be in focus. Diti the penguin

15:00, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

    • I'm assuming you're not a sock of Tomas? In which case I was more after his intentions than a lesson on standards of landscape photography. It seems to me that if your justification was correct he'd be shooting at around f/11 if scared of diffraction or whatever he could push the f-stop to whilst keeping the subject sharp if not. Furthermore your comment indicates you believe pretty much all work by pictorial photographers is "wrong", there are styles apart from Adams and Weston style techniques. I was interested more if there was a compositional rather than technical reason though. Flying Freddy (talk) 16:14, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Flying Freddy: many comments possible... Canon 50D, due to chip design and according to some "experts" with apertures smaller than f8 produce blurry images... f8 is generally the optimum aperture in most lenses... in this case, focusing on the fisherman, from where I was, and considering the hyperfocal distance, everything was bound to come out sharp... and yes, I desired that in order to place the subject within the physical context where he works, etc... In short, I wanted a sharp picture because this is a picture of a fisherman, a fishing method and a fishing environment... basically an informative picture. As far as f8, that is generally my prefered aperture, I seldom use smaller apertures, and depending on the desired effect, lens, etc., I open up from there...--Tomascastelazo (talk) 16:37, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for the explanation. Would you be tempted to clone out the small dark branch on the lower RHS?
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Technically not brilliant, but strong composition is much more interesting than uninterestingly composed technical perfection. Flying Freddy (talk) 16:52, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Herby talk thyme 07:03, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportJuliancolton | Talk 14:23, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 14:38, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /JovanCormac 10:07, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: People

File:Stephan's Quintet Hubble 2009.full.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2009 at 21:25:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION


Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /JovanCormac 10:05, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Astronomy

File:View from the Window at Le Gras, Joseph Nicéphore Niépce.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2009 at 20:59:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Joseph Nicéphore Niépce - uploaded by Ed g2s - nominated by JovanCormac
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The first ever photograph. This nomination is designed (together with the delisting nomination below) to switch from the uncompressed version to this one as a Featured Picture. It's Featured on 4 Wikipedias already and is in the more suitable JPEG format. That way we will have one version that is Featured on many sites, and the uncompressed version as an alternative.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Please support, for a little less bureaucracy!
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As nominator. -- JovanCormac 20:59, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • To be honest, I don't really care, but I see your point, therefore I Symbol support vote.svg support this candidate. Airwolf (talk) 21:22, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yann (talk) 22:37, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --NormanB (talk) 22:40, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and thanks for the nomination!--Mbz1 (talk) 02:40, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --George Chernilevsky (talk) 05:06, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Luc Viatour (talk) 11:15, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jean-Pol GRANDMONT (talk) 19:21, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Lookatthis (talk) 23:16, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For the first photographer.   ■ MMXXtalk  05:25, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- low quality, blown hilights. (kidding) Cacophony (talk) 05:56, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support important historical document in its best quality --Dmitry Rozhkov (talk) 14:28, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose moving from an uncompressed format to a compressed format is the absolute worst reason to defeature a picture. GerardM (talk) 09:26, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
    • This is a photograph (albeit an old one). It has been discussed a million times that PNGs are unsuited for photographs. Only recently, a photo - I believe it showed a goat - was opposed for being PNG rather than JPEG. -- JovanCormac 10:04, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /JovanCormac 10:02, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Historical

File:Opuntia Cactus Heart.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Oct 2009 at 01:35:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A picture of a heart-shaped prickly pear cactus, demonstrating the imperfect beauty of nature.
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because Overexposure makes this impossible. 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:Gniezno Drzwi - modlitwa.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2009 at 13:23:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gniezno Doors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Albertus teolog -- Albertus teolog (talk) 13:23, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Albertus teolog (talk) 13:23, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad crop (cuts through a second scene), sharpness problems. -- JovanCormac 14:05, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Babyaministraor (talk) 20:27, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad crop, no wow--Tired time (talk) 09:11, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Harsh lightning. Actually surprised to see that it has been promoted to QI. --Slaunger (talk) 20:55, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 18:03, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Tenodera sinensis 3 Luc Viatour.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Oct 2009 at 11:13:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tenodera sinensis Mantis
The result will be more "classic" but if it does not win the votes I would propose another version;) --Luc Viatour (talk) 13:38, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to see that other version. This is a little to artsy for my taste. -- JovanCormac 18:11, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
they are below it in "other version" ;) --Luc Viatour (talk) 20:31, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
What about this one? --NEUROtiker  22:14, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Oh, I missed that. IMO File:Tenodera sinensis 5 Luc Viatour.jpg has the best composition. -- JovanCormac 07:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
That's why it's my favorite ;) --Luc Viatour (talk) 15:07, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Daniel78 (talk) 20:21, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Arthropods

File:Stuttgart-Schlossplatz-at-night.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2009 at 12:49:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The northern fountain and the New Castle in Stuttgart, Germany.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, nominated by Curnen (talk) 12:49, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Curnen (talk) 12:49, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient quality: Grainy sky, blurry, artifacts presumably due to postprocessing. --NEUROtiker  14:47, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I have a 60 cm x 40cm print of it on my wall, which looks fantastic. However, I now reduced the filesize to hopefully minimize this problem. --Curnen (talk) 16:14, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad crop on left and bottom. -- JovanCormac 17:08, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Please give me a hint, what you don't like. I would like to improve ! --Curnen (talk) 06:44, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
      • Well, the left part of the fountain's basin is cut off, as is part of the bottom, which gives the picture a cramped composition. Also, the shot shows a substantial tilt (probably ~2 degrees) clockwise, especially visible when looking at the fountain, which appears to be leaning towards the right. The light and the water in the picture are beautiful, but sadly, they don't quite make up for the shortcomings in other areas. -- JovanCormac 07:32, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Not of the highest quality. Tiptoety talk 22:51, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question You oppose because you don't like the image or just because I resized it ? If it would be because of the resizing, I would be grateful, if somebody of the hardcore-voters would explain me the right balance between size and noise. Because to me for example grainy and blurry are two opposites and it seems, that NEUROtiker found both in the image. If I use more noise reduction, the image becomes even more blurry, so I either need to accept a grainy sky (which is only visible, if you zoom in like mad and is not noticeable even in a large print) or I need to do a resizing. Or is there a third option I haven't thought about ? --Curnen (talk) 06:44, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
    • The sky is the main problem concerning the grain. And in the high resolution version the whole picture seems a bit unsharp. In addition there are a lot of artifacts, mostly vertical lines throughout the picture as well as aliasing visible on the white windows and doors. They are more prominent in the original picture but still visible in the scaled down version. --NEUROtiker  19:41, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noisy, bad crop. kallerna 08:54, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Stuttgart-Schlossplatz-at-night-denoised.jpg

  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Better ? --Curnen (talk) 09:33, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looks like a computer generated picture. --Mr. Mario (talk) 04:44, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentWell, a DSLR is a computer, so what shall I replay to that ? ;-) --Curnen (talk) 15:41, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Welcome to Commons :P. Sorry, but I'm going to have to oppose as well. There appears to be some sort of distortion and artifacting along the roofline, the building suffers from chromatic abberation, and looks very washed out. As a whole, it is rather noisy, and perhaps underexposed in places. The crop of the fountain ruins what would otherwise have been a nice compostion. Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 12:03, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

File:OklahomaSooners-TulsaGoldenHurricane-2009-RyanReynolds-Tackle.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2009 at 15:21:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

College football player tackling opposing player
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by John Silks - uploaded by NMajdan - nominated by NMajdan -- nmajdan (talk) 15:21, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- nmajdan (talk) 15:21, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sorry to be fussy about technicalities but the resolution of this otherwise great photo is below the requirement for FPs. -- Petritap (talk) 17:40, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Resolution. kallerna 19:28, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request Please delist.nmajdan (talk) 21:02, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
? just add {{withdraw}} --~~~~ if you no longer want to nominate it. --Tony Wills (talk) 11:10, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --nmajdan (talk) 22:56, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Ani Tshamkhung Female Monastery Lhasa Tibet Luca Galuzzi 2006.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Oct 2009 at 17:04:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Female Monastery in Tibet
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Lucag - nominated by Airwolf -- Airwolf (talk) 17:04, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Airwolf (talk) 17:04, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting composition is spoilt by the water droplets; quality is borderline as well. -- JovanCormac 17:22, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is not my intention to try to convince you to change your vote, but in my opinion the water adds a lot to the composition. This is, however, just my personal taste. Airwolf (talk) 17:24, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
      • It would add to the composition if it wasn't cropped so tightly. The way it is it just serves as a distraction IMO. -- JovanCormac 07:18, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distracting background. As for the water droplets, I agree with JovanCormac. -- Petritap (talk) 10:48, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 08:08, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

File:B cuneata gnangarra 23.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2009 at 13:34:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The endangered Banksia cuneata in late bud giving rise to its common name of matchstick banksia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Gnangarra - uploaded by Gnangarra - nominated by -- Gnangarra 13:34, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The endangered Banksia cuneata in late bud giving rise to its common name of matchstick banksia
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Gnangarra 13:34, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Underexposed, blurry. -- JovanCormac 14:06, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I made an adjustment to the Brightness/Contrast. Probably too shallow DOF for FP, but maybe QI? --Relic38 (talk) 17:36, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Babyaministraor (talk) 20:26, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Focus. --Karel (talk) 18:38, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose DOF -- Petritap (talk) 19:48, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think it is a nice illustration of the matchstick common name. The composition, subject colors and subject are interesting, but not much is in focus and somehow the grey background does not work well for me - not sure what the best background color would have been though. Sorry. --Slaunger (talk) 21:02, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 08:13, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Chinese POWs south of Koto-ri in Korea HM-SN-98-06779.JPEG, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2009 at 23:39:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Chinese POWs
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Sgt. F. C. Kerr (USMC) - uploaded by BrokenSphere - nominated by Airwolf (talk) 23:39, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Airwolf (talk) 23:39, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting, but the quality is average, even for an old picture. Also some cleaning needed: a line in the sky and a spot on the soldier's boot on the lower right. Yann (talk) 00:05, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Funnily enough, it looks like a studio shot (the mountains in the background look painted). -- JovanCormac 06:18, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For JovanCormac. Jacopo Werther (talk) 07:44, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tseno Maximov (talk) 22:23, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition. --Karel (talk) 18:40, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As per Yann. -- Petritap (talk) 10:30, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 08:14, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Tree lion 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2009 at 10:32:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture at enwp, looks good enough to be FP here too.
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because Resolution below guidelines, blurry 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.

-- JovanCormac 11:41, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

File:AT-4 live-fire.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2009 at 12:36:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

AT-4 live fire
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Sgt. Bryson K. Jones - uploaded by Spellcast- nominated by Airwolf -- Airwolf (talk) 12:36, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (and: holy cow!) -- Airwolf (talk) 12:36, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Albertus teolog (talk) 12:43, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Strong oppose. This picture is a fraud. One of the cartridges flying through the air still has a bullet in it (see image annotation), so it can't have been ejected from a gun as the picture suggests. My guess is that someone picked up a bunch of spent rounds (including the intact one) and threw them in the air while another soldier took a picture to make it look like an "action shot". The cartridges are confusing anyway since the only weapon shown is an RPG and it clearly uses other types of ammunition. Chromatic aberration and image noise are quite bad as well. -- JovanCormac 13:02, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hey, you're right. That's exactly what I was trying to check, but somehow I oversighted this one bullet. On the other hand, in whatever way the picture was taken, that bullet there is strange, because do take note, that it's not like all that junk is being thrown out of a machine gun firing simultaneously with the launcher. The assumption is that it was launching the AT-4 that pushed the empty cartridges in the air. Airwolf (talk) 13:17, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I dont have an issue with an individual bullet because of the fire rates of the M-60(600 rounds per minute) one would expect that misfire would occassionally occur and that the gun would discharge then like any other and the scatter looks normal see this one for comparison Gnangarra 13:40, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The unspent cartridge (misfire) can happen in a 'chain gun', but I cannot say how the cartridge would be ejected if it would be on a different trajectory than the spent ones. In any case, no gun ejects cartridges in such a haphazard manner. There would be a stream formed by the cartridges, with the chain bits in a less defined line around the cartridges. I believe they were trying to make it look like the gun was above them somewhere. --Relic38 (talk) 13:35, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment As I said, it's not about there being a machine gun firing somewhere around them at this very moment. It's that there was a machine gun which left those cartridges which are now thrown in the air by the whoosh of the AT-4. Airwolf (talk) 13:41, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment That would be a lot of whoosh to do that, especially since there is absolutely no trace of a rocket trail coming from the AT-4. --Relic38 (talk) 17:48, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
        • That, and the bullets and debris would be blown away from the blast, not towards it. They've obviously just thrown the stuff into frame. Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 11:18, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the bullets are a distraction to the image rather then an enhancement as they have no context to the subject, given that the photograph was during an exercise a cleaner composition would be possible. Gnangarra 13:40, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as others + noisy. Yann (talk) 17:13, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I fully agree with Jovan, Gnangarra and other opposers. -- MJJR (talk) 18:52, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree with Jovan. --Xavigivax (talk) 08:38, 30 September 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 15:49, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Mary Magdalen Donatello OPA Florence.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2009 at 18:46:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Maddalena by Donatello
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Marie-Lan Nguyen, nominated by Maedin
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Maddalena by the Italian artist Donatello is a wood sculpture of the Biblical and historical figure of Mary Magdalene. Here, she appears penitent, tormented, and frail from fasting. This figure was housed in the Basilica di Santa Maria del Fiore, otherwise known as Florence Cathedral, in Florence. It's now based next door in the Museo dell'Opera del Duomo (a museum associated with the Duomo). Donatello sculpted this in 1455 or so, over 500 years ago.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I have been to the Museo and saw the Maddalena. She's even more heart-stoppingly agonising in person. I was captivated by her the moment I saw her. Unfortunately, the poor camera that I had at the time didn't do her justice. But I have found this one, the only decent shot of her on Commons. Although the Maddalena sculpture is head-to-toe, the area where she is displayed does not make photography easy (a small space and many distracting things around her), and she is often backlit by strong sunlight. Consider also that flash photography is oft-frowned upon or prohibited in museums. I think this close-up is an excellent representation of Donatello's most expressive work. Maedin\talk 18:46, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm sure it's a lovely sculpture, Maedin, but I got the fright of my life when I opened up FPC this morning and was greeted by that face. Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 20:39, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Oops, sorry! At least it woke you up. . . you didn't even need the coffee, right? Face-smile.svg Maedin\talk 20:44, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful oppose Very interesting statue, but the crop on the hands should be better if it is to be featured. -- JovanCormac 11:35, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
  • I knew someone would care about that, :( Maedin\talk 12:09, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Equally regretful oppose - it is a wonderful image but per Jovan I'm afraid & the hands are out of focus. --Herby talk thyme 13:41, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Herby and Jovan. But it clearly would sail through VI, as it's a hard shot to get and it's not likely we'd get better easily. ++Lar: t/c 14:18, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per all above. Mondalor (talk) 15:03, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I saw this sculpture many years ago. It is breathtaking and very touching. I'd like to support this image, but I think Jovan is right... -- MJJR (talk) 21:10, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 00:26, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

File:M Gerards Kruispoort R01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2009 at 18:58:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bruges: the Kruispoort (Holy Cross Gate), engraving from 1562 by Marcus Gerards
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Marcus Gerards (1562) - scanned by MJJR - uploaded by MJJR - nominated by MJJR -- MJJR (talk) 18:58, 29 September 2009 (UTC). -- Detail of the first reliable town map of late medieval Bruges (1562). It is one of the finest examples of 16th century town mapping in Europe and a major source for the history of Bruges.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- MJJR (talk) 18:58, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tseno Maximov (talk) 22:16, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose While the quality is certainly there, the thin lines and lack of color make the picture look rather ordinary when compared to, say File:Quad Flandria.jpg. -- JovanCormac 07:26, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The thin lines are characteristic for an etching. About the lack of colour: of this particular map only one (very badly preserved) copy is hand coloured, all the other original prints are not coloured. On Commons you can find coloured details of the map of Marcus Gerards, but those are modern reproductions and not originals. -- MJJR (talk) 15:18, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- strong encyclopaedic value, it is good that all kinds of material find their way to the featured pictured. GerardM (talk) 10:31, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Encyclopaedic value doesn't mean it should be a FP. While I realize its documentary value, I fail to see any "wow factor" here. -- Petritap (talk) 10:38, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Using the historical evaluation criteria of FP suggests that wow factor isn't required per se (and it's a matter of taste, I'm a bit wowed by it). ++Lar: t/c 14:32, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 11:14, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Olivia Wilde by Tao Ruspoli.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2009 at 16:26:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Picture of American Actress Olivia Wilde.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Olivia Wilde photographed by her husband Tao Ruspoli. created by: Tao Raspoli - uploaded by Tao Ruspoli - nominated by 122.169.91.1 -- 122.169.91.1 16:26, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 16:30, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful oppose It's nice to see such an artistic portrait here on Commons, but while the photo looks beautiful as a thumbnail, at full size it does have sharpness issues (hand), and it looks like the color balance is off as well (shifted towards red, shown by the fact that the red pigments in her skin are unnaturally emphasized). On a side note, regardless of whether you really are en:Tao Ruspoli or not, expect to get doubted and your pictures marked as copyright violations. Happens whenever a new user signs up and claims to be a celebrity. I don't like that it's that way, but there's nothing I can do about it. So if you really are the aristocrat and filmmaker you are claiming to be, please do not be insulted when that happens. -- JovanCormac 17:04, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tseno Maximov (talk) 22:17, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jacopo Werther (talk) 22:49, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support /Daniel78 (talk) 22:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, beautiful portray. --Vprisivko (talk) 11:28, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Artistic photo, but not encyclopaedic. D kuba (talk) 13:24, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good composition. --DsMurattalk 14:15, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, and remember: Commons is not Wikipedia, we do not store only encyclopedic images. Airwolf (talk) 18:14, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Kanonkas // talk // e-mail // 19:16, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Petritap (talk) 13:01, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Poor lighting and color (too dark and red). Not an especially compelling composition. Sharpness could be better as well. Kaldari (talk) 19:07, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As Kaldari.--Karel (talk) 20:31, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as Kaldari. Yann (talk) 18:05, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support sharpness is good for a 7.8MP picture. Pleasant looking and notable subject, and the choice of white balance / lighting is acceptable to set the mood in the picture. --Dschwen (talk) 20:44, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special. kallerna 10:05, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
    • Well, that's your copy/paste template. It means nothing, is not a reason, is impolite, and unhelpful. --Dschwen (talk) 13:19, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
    • I'm sorry but I agree with Dschwen. Jacopo Werther (talk) 18:45, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

{{FPC-results-reviewed}}

  • No. I contest this. Kallernas vote is decisive here. And I'm not willing to accept his behaviour anymore. --Dschwen (talk) 12:11, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
  • I entirely agree with Dschwen. Kallerna's reason is unreasonable for opposing. Jacopo Werther (talk) 12:29, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
    • In the nominating guidelines, it says that "Pictures should be in some way special" in order to be featured. "Nothing special" seems to be addressing that (rather vague) requirement. Kaldari (talk) 18:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
      • Uh huh... So a beautiful free high quality portrait of a reasonably well known actress is "nothing special"? Coooome oooooon! --Dschwen (talk) 19:18, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
        • It's a personal oppinion. It's might be quite hard to draw the border in between where a reason is valid or not if we should evaluate that for all votes. For example one could also argue that D_Kubas vote should be invalid as the guidelines never say anything about encyclopaedic value, in fact it indicates that it is not needed: "This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project.". To me it's fine saying "nothing special" even though a more constructive comment would be more helpful of course. Also if we only have reasons for invalidating oppose votes it would kind of make it easier for images to get promoted as there are no way to invalidate support votes, not sure that is what we really want. Maybe our rules about voting is just not clear enough. /Daniel78 (talk) 20:01, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
          • I would not be annoyed by this that much if it weren't a pattern in Kallerna's voting. Look for yourself. This is counter-productive and impolite, and nothing but a slap in the face of the contributors. Without as much as a shred of a reason these opposes are worthless at best. --Dschwen (talk) 21:08, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

FWIW, I completely agree with Dschwen. The oppose votes only criticized the artistic choices made by the photographer, not the quality or merit of the resulting still. And nothing special? I disagree, I'm sure this was a special moment between Mr. and Mrs. Ruspoli. There aren't many intimate photographs of such quality on the commons. ˉanetode╦╩ 22:01, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Sunflower with ladybug.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2009 at 12:34:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Close-up of a sunflower with ladybug (Coccinella septempunctata) on it.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, and nominated by Tfioreze -- Tiago Fioreze (talk) 12:34, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Close-up of a sunflower with ladybug (Coccinella septempunctata) on it.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tiago Fioreze (talk) 12:34, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Something's wrong with the photo (look on fullsize). kallerna 15:02, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm looking at it and I don't see anything wrong. Could you be more specific on what you spotted it? --Tiago Fioreze (talk) 15:11, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
      • The edge of the flower looks strange for example. Looks a bit as if the blue background is not the original background. --NEUROtiker  20:58, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice colors. Yann (talk) 15:45, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Weird artifacts at border of flower and sky. --Dschwen (talk) 20:37, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
    • P.S.: I'm not too fond of the colors. The yellow looks a bit sickly green. How much postprocessing went into this image? --Dschwen (talk) 22:28, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, per Dschwen. --MAURILBERT (discuter) 03:08, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for all the comments! I've uploaded a new version (you may have to purge your cache), in which I removed the previous adjustments. I would appreciate your feedback in this new version. Thanks! --Tiago Fioreze (talk) 07:59, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
    • This did nothing about the artifacts around the edge of the flower. --Dschwen (talk) 13:21, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Color balance is still not perfect, also there is a weird distortion around the petals in the resized version. -- JovanCormac 09:59, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg Enough for me with the "inquisition" :) Tiago Fioreze (talk) 15:16, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

File:APowerlineTower.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2009 at 11:49:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Power Pylon
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Böhringer - nominated by Sarcastic ShockwaveLover -- Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 11:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 11:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A work of art. -- JovanCormac 13:12, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Indeed! --NormanB (talk) 16:00, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for the nomination --Böhringer (talk) 21:55, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sharpness could be better, but... Yann (talk) 22:00, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Mbz1 (talk) 00:02, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support   ■ MMXXtalk  02:54, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Darius Baužys talk 05:41, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Tiptoety talk 06:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 06:36, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Yann. kallerna 08:51, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • i'm sorry to Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, but the picture just doesn't appeal to me in any way - it has little educational value, even less artistic value, and absolutely no wow factor. Being in a very ironical mood today, I might also refer to a different nomination and add: extremely ordinary, even commoplace object - because it is Face-smile.svg. The latter is not an issue for me, however, but the first three are. As for technical quality, I know nothing about it. Airwolf (talk) 08:08, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Albertus teolog (talk) 15:00, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WOW -- Ra'ike T C 20:20, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WOW --AM (talk) 09:18, 10 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mbz1 (talk) 01:46, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Objects

File:Early light heron fishing.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2009 at 10:34:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Grey heron fishing in the sea in the early dawn light, UK

Per kallerna. -- JovanCormac 11:55, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I cannot agree that it is just "just another dawnphoto". As a matter of fact the image is not only beautiful, but it also has a great EV. Did you notice the other heron much farther down? It is amazing to see that the water does not get any deeper for such a great distance, and not in a lake, but in English Channel! Small noise in the right hand corner could always be removed or cut off.--Mbz1 (talk) 13:44, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tseno Maximov (talk) 22:25, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The heron is too small, and there is nothing apart from that. Beautiful anyway. Yann (talk) 22:08, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The heron is too small, but picture too nice, per MBz1 -- George Chernilevsky talk 10:07, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Mbz1 and George. Diti the penguin 14:26, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Mbz1 - though I can't see the other heron...--Nilfanion (talk) 15:47, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
I added the annotation for the second heron. I hope you see it now :)--Mbz1 (talk) 18:58, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great mood shot. Complaints about noise are a bit irrelevant - low light level: a long exposure would just give that milky water look (which while nice, is a different sort of shot) and would blur any movement from the birds, waiting for more light will miss the moment and be less interesting. --Tony Wills (talk) 01:20, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karel (talk) 18:43, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Missing wow. A sunset/rise has to have that extra bit to be special. Lycaon (talk) 21:24, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Mbz1 and Tony Wills ++Lar: t/c 14:25, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --663h (talk) 11:52, 8 October 2009 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mbz1 (talk) 01:51, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Natural phenomena

File:Petroica boodang Meehan Range 1 crop.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2009 at 23:41:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.