Commons:Featured picture candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This project page in other languages:
Skip to current candidates Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates


Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures.

Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 and current month.

For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election.

Formal things[edit]


Guidelines for nominators[edit]

Please read the complete guidelines before nominating.

This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:

  • Licensing – Images licensed with solely "GFDL" or "GFDL and an NC-only license" are not acceptable due the restrictions placed on re-use by these licenses.
  • Resolution – Raster images of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are strong mitigating reasons. This does not apply to vector graphics (SVGs).
    • Graphics on Commons are not only viewed on conventional computer screens. They may be used in high-resolution print versions, and the images may be cropped to focus on portions of the image. See Commons:Why we need high resolution media for more information.
  • Scans – While not official policy, Help:Scanning provides advice on the preparation of various types of images that may be useful.
  • General quality – pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality.
  • Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer. Digital manipulation for the purpose of correcting flaws in an image is generally acceptable, provided it is limited, well-done, and not intended to deceive.
    • For photographs, typical acceptable manipulations include cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and color/exposure correction. More extensive manipulations, such as removal of distracting background elements, should be clearly described in the image text, by means of the {{Retouched picture}} template. Undescribed or mis-described manipulations which cause the main subject to be misrepresented are never acceptable. For images made from more than one photo, you can use the {{Panorama}} or {{Focus stacked image}} templates.
    • For historic images, acceptable manipulations might include digitally fixing rips, removal of stains, cleanup of dirt, and, for mass-produced artworks such as engravings, removal of flaws inherent to the particular reproduction, such as over-inking. Careful color adjustments may be used to bring out the original work from the signs of ageing, though care should be taken to restore a natural appearance. The original artistic intent should be considered when deciding whether it is appropriate to make a change. Edits to historic material should be documented in detail within the file description, and an unedited version should be uploaded and cross linked for comparison.
  • Valueour main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that:
    • almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others,
    • night-shots are pretty but normally more details can be shown on pictures taken at daytime,
    • beautiful does not always mean valuable.
Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents[edit]

There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolors, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject.

Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the original painting are generally not considered featurable.

Works that may be scanned include most works created by processes that allow for mass distribution − for instance, illustrations published with novels. For these, it is generally accepted that a certain amount of extra manipulation is permissible to remove flaws inherent to one copy of the work, since the particular copy – of which hundreds, or even thousands of copies also exist – is not so important as the work itself.

Works created to serve a purpose include diagrams, scientific illustrations, and demonstrations of contemporary artistic styles. For these, the main requirement is that they serve their purpose well.

Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable:

  • Notable in its own right: Works by major artists, or works that are otherwise notable, such as the subjects of a controversy.
  • Of high artistic merit: Works which, while not particularly well known, are nonetheless wonderful examples of their particular type or school of art.
  • Of high historic merit: The historical method values very early illustrations of scenes and events over later ones. Hence, a work of poor quality depicting a contemporaneous historical event can be nonetheless important, even if the artistic merit is relatively low. Likewise, scans or photographs of important documents – which may not be at all artistic – nonetheless may be highly valuable if the documents are historically significant. The reason for the image's historical importance should be briefly stated in the nomination, for those reviewers unfamiliar with the subject.
  • Of high illustrative merit: Works that illustrate or help explain notable subjects, for instance, illustrations of books, scientific subjects, or technical processes. The amount of artistic merit required for these will vary by subject, but, for instance, an illustration that makes the working of a complicated piece of machinery very clear need not be notable as a piece of artwork as well, whereas an illustration for a book might well be expected to reach much higher artistic standards.

Digital restorations must also be well documented. An unedited version of the image should be uploaded locally, when possible, and cross-linked from the file description page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced."


On the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.

  • Focus – every important object in the picture should normally be sharp.
  • Exposure refers to the shutter diaphragm combination that renders an image with a tonal curve that ideally is able to represent in acceptable detail shadows and highlights within the image. This is called latitude. Images can be on the low side of the tonal curve (low range), the middle (middle range) or high side (upper range). Lack of shadow detail is not necessarily a negative characteristic. In fact, it can be part of the desired effect. Burned highlights in large areas are a distracting element.
  • Composition refers to the arrangement of the elements within the image. The "Rule of thirds" is one useful guideline. Horizons should almost never be placed in the middle, where they "cut" the image in half. Often, a horizon creating a top or bottom third of the space works better. The main idea is to use space to create a dynamic image.
    • Foreground and background – foreground and background objects may be distracting. You should check that something in front of the subject doesn't hide important elements and that something in background doesn't spoil the composition (for example that the streetlight doesn't "stand" on someone's head).
  • Movement control refers to the manner in which motion is represented in the image. Motion can be frozen or blurred. Neither one is better than the other. It is the intention of representation. Movement is relative within the objects of the image. For example, photographing a race car that appears frozen in relation to the background does not give us a sense of speed or motion, so technique dictates to represent the car in a frozen manner but with a blurred background, thus creating the sense of motion, this is called "panning". On the other hand, representing a basketball player in a high jump frozen in relation to everything else, due to the "unnatural" nature of the pose would be a good photograph.
  • Depth of field (DOF) refers to the area in focus in front of and beyond main subject. Depth of field is chosen according to the specific needs of every picture. Large or small DOF can either way add or subtract to the quality of the image. Low depth of field can be used to bring attention to the main subject, separating it from the general environment. High depth of field can be used to emphasize space. Short focal length lenses (wide angles) yield large DOF, and vice versa, long focal lenses (telephotos) have shallow DOF. Small apertures yield large DOF and conversely, large apertures yield shallow DOF.

On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, color, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.

  • Shape refers to the contour of the main subjects.
  • Volume refers to the three dimensional quality of the object. This is accomplished using side light. Contrary to general belief, front lighting is not the best light. It tends to flatten subject. Best light of day is early morning or late afternoon.
  • Color is important. Oversaturated colors are not good.
  • Texture refers to the quality of the surface of the subject. It is enhanced by side lighting… it is the "feel" to the touch.
  • Perspective refers to the "angle" accompanied by lines that disappear into a vanishing point that may or may not be inside the image.
  • Balance refers to the arrangement of subjects within the image that can either give equal weight or appear to be heavier on one side.
  • Proportion refers to the relation of size of objects in picture. Generally, we tend to represent small objects small in relation to others, but a good technique is to represent small objects large contrary to natural size relationship. For example, a small flower is given preponderance over a large mountain…. This is called inversion of scales.
Not all elements must be present. Some photographs can be judged on individual characteristics, that is, an image can be about color or texture, or color AND texture, etc.
  • Noise refers to unwanted corruption of color brightness and quality and can be caused by underexposure. It is not a desirable quality and can be grounds for opposition.
  • Symbolic meaning or relevance … Opinion wars can begin here … A bad picture of a very difficult subject is better than a good picture of an ordinary subject. A good picture of a difficult subject is an extraordinary photograph.
Images can be culturally biased by the photographer and/or the observer. The meaning of the image should be judged according to the cultural context of the image, not by the cultural context of the observer. An image "speaks" to people, and it has the capacity to evoke emotion such as tenderness, rage, rejection, happiness, sadness, etc. Good photographs are not limited to evoking pleasant sensations …

You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating.

Video and audio[edit]

Please nominate videos, sounds, music, etc. at Commons:Featured media candidates.

Set nominations[edit]

If a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set. A set should fall under one of the following types:

  • Faithful digital reproductions of works notable in their own right, which the original author clearly intended to be viewed as a set. Examples: pages in a pamphlet, crops (puzzle pieces) of a prohibitively large scan, a pair of pendant paintings. Not acceptable: Arbitrary selection of sample works by an artist.
  • A sequence of images showing the passage of time. They could depict frames of a moving/changing object or a static object during different times of day or different seasons. Examples: diagrams illustrating a process, steps of a dance, metamorphosis of an insect, maps/drawings/photos of the same subject over the years (frame of view should be more or less the same).
  • A group of images depicting the same subject from different viewpoints, preferably taken under the same lighting conditions when possible. Examples: Exterior and interior of a building, different facades of a building, different interior views, obverse and inverse of a banknote/coin. Not acceptable: A selection of different rooms in a skyscraper, the facade of a church plus an organ, any images of fundamentally different scopes.
  • A group of images which show all possible variations of a particular class of object. Examples: Male and female versions of an animal (preferably in the same setting), all known species of a genus. Not acceptable: A few breeds of cats (unless they share a defining characteristic and represent all possible examples of that).

Simple tutorial for new users[edit]

Tutorial: Nominate on COM:FPC
How to nominate in 8 simple steps









NOTE: You don't need to worry if you are not sure, other users will try their best to help you.

Adding a new nomination[edit]

If you believe that you have found or created an image that could be considered valuable, with appropriate image description and licensing, then do the following.

Step 1: copy the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg. Then click on the "create new nomination" button.

All single files:

For renominations, simply add /2 after the filename. For example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2

All set nomination pages should begin "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/", e.g. "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/My Nomination".

Step 2: follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save that page.

Step 3: manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list: Click here, and add the following line to the TOP of the nominations list:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg}}

Strongly recommended: Please add a gallery page and section heading from the list at Commons FP galleries. Write the code as Page name#Section heading. For example: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports

Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify them using {{subst:FPC-notice|Your image filename.jpg}} -- ~~~~.

Note: Do not add an 'Alternative' image when you create a nomination. Selecting the best image is part of the nomination process. Alternatives are for a different crop or post-processing of the original image, or a closely related image from the same photo session (limited to 1 per nomination), if they are suggested by voters.


Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for their own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed.

You may use the following templates:

  • {{Support}} (Symbol support vote.svg Support),
  • {{Oppose}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose),
  • {{Neutral}} (Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral),
  • {{Comment}} (Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment),
  • {{Info}} (Pictogram voting info.svg Info),
  • {{Question}} (Pictogram-voting question.svg Question),
  • {{Request}} (Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request).

You may indicate that the image has no chance of success with the template {{FPX|reason - ~~~~}}, where reason explains why the image is clearly unacceptable as a FP. The template can only be used when there are no support votes other than the one from the nominator.

A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above.

Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:

  • No reason
  • "I don't like it" and other empty assessments
  • "You can do better" and other criticisms of the author/nominator rather than the image

Remember also to put your signature (~~~~).

Featured picture delisting candidates[edit]

Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep It deserves to remain a featured picture
{{Delist}} Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist It does not deserve to be a featured picture anymore.

This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Do not replace the old image with the new image as a FP.
{{Delistandreplace}} Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace Replace the current FP with the proposed replacement.

If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box:

In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include:

  • Information on the origin of the image (creator, uploader);
  • A link to the original FP nomination (it will appear under "Links" on the image description page);
  • Your reasons for nominating the image and your username.

After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list.

As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the original creator, uploader(s), and nominator with a link to the delisting candidate. {{subst:FPC-notice-removal}} can be used for this purpose.

Featured picture candidate policy[edit]

General rules[edit]

  1. The voting period is 9 complete days counted from the nomination. After the end of this period the result will be determined. Votes added on day 10 and after are not counted.
  2. Nominations by anonymous contributors are welcome
  3. Contributions to discussion by anonymous contributors are welcome
  4. Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Exception: registered users can always vote in their own nominations no matter the account age and number of edits.
  5. Nominations do not count as votes. Support must be explicitly stated.
  6. Nominators and authors can withdraw their nominated pictures at any time. This is done by adding the following template: {{Withdraw}} ~~~~. Also, remember that if more than one version is nominated, you should explicitly state which version you are withdrawing.
  7. Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project.
  8. Rules of the 5th day based on vote counts on day number 5 (day of nomination + 5)
    1. Pictures are speedy declined if they have no support (apart from the nominator).
    2. Pictures are speedy promoted if they have 10 support votes or more and no oppose votes. (Note that if it takes more than five days to reach this threshold, the picture can be promoted as soon as it is reached.)
    3. Once either speedy criterion is reached, the voting period is considered closed, and no more votes may be added.
  9. Pictures tagged {{FPX}} may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied, provided there are no support votes other than that of the nominator.
  10. Pictures tagged {{FPD}} (FP-Denied) may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied.
  11. Only two active nominations by the same user (that is, nominations under review and not yet closed) are allowed. The main purpose of this measure is to contribute to a better average quality of nominations, by driving nominators/creators to choose carefully the pictures presented to the forum.

Featuring and delisting rules[edit]

A candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:

  1. Appropriate license (of course)
  2. At least seven Symbol support vote.svg Support votes (or 7 Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist votes for a delist) at the end of nine days
  3. Ratio of supporting/opposing votes at least 2/1 (a two-thirds majority); same for delist/keep votes
  4. Two different versions of the same picture cannot both be featured, but only the one with higher level of support, as determined by the closer. Whenever the closer is not sure which version has consensus to be featured, they should attempt to contact the voters to clarify their opinions if not clear from the nomination page.

The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5. There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations.

The FPCBot handles the vote counting and closing in most cases, current exceptions are candidates containing multiple versions of the image as well as FPXed and withdrawn nominations. Any experienced user may close the requests not handled by the bot. For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished. Also note that there is a manual review stage between when the bot has counted the votes and before the nomination is finally closed by the bot; this manual review can be done by any user familiar with the voting rules.

Above all, be polite[edit]

Please don't forget that the image you are judging is somebody's work. Avoid using phrases like "it looks terrible" and "I hate it". If you must oppose, please do so with consideration. Also remember that your command of English might not be the same as someone else's. Choose your words with care.

Happy judging… and remember... all rules can be broken.

See also[edit]

Table of contents[edit]

List may contain works considered Not Safe for Work (nudity).

Nominators are requested, out of courtesy, to include the {{Nsfw}} template with such images. Users may select the gadget in user preferences "Deferred display of images tagged with {{Nsfw}} on COM:FPC" to enable the template's effect of hiding the image until selected.

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Main facade (fragment) of Hospital de Santa Cruz. Toledo, Spain.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2023 at 21:48:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.


File:Jahn-Wehr Bamberg Winter 2018-20180228-RM-114615.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2023 at 19:30:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jogger crossing the icy barrier gate of a weir in Bamberg, Germany
You could remove the very thin border at the right with the building, though, that does not add anything to the composition, in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:09, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Himalayas, Ama Dablam, Nepal.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2023 at 19:17:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of Mount Ama Dablam from Chola Valley. Nepal, Himalayas.

File:Breukvlak afgewaaide dode berk. 19-03-2023 (d.j.b.) 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2023 at 17:27:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Comment: Maybe it doesn't come across well, But the photo (with the notes) tells a special story for me. I've never seen such a cool fracture of a blown tree after a storm. It looks like a work of art.--Famberhorst (talk) 04:45, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • You may think your picture is a piece of art, but compare with 1, 2, 3, 4, when the light and the composition are special. There's a huge difference in my view. Your background is distracting, and your subject seems very ordinary -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:22, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Tour des anciens ponts couverts (Strasbourg).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2023 at 08:42:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.



Hans von Altheimturm aux anciens ponts couverts (Strasbourg) edited (1).jpg

File:Skindred - 2017153155639 2017-06-02 Rock am Ring - Sven - 1D X II - 0110 - B70I6029.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2023 at 07:01:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Benji Webbe of Skindred at Rock am Ring 2017

File:Pierreclos Château (3).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Apr 2023 at 20:18:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Château de Pierreclos with its church (12th century), in the département Saône-et-Loire, region Bourgogne-Franche-Comté, France.

Panorama vom Frauenberg.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Apr 2023 at 10:17:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I like to show panoramic views from prominent vantage points. Wikimedia has not yet satisfactorily solved how to integrate optional informative labels in the formats required for this. I am now trying a set of two identical images, one with and one without labels. For that after photographing, it is also necessary to examine the geography. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 10:17, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Milseburg (talk) 10:17, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- A Perfect distant view. I find this kind of panoramas very informative. It would be good if the edges overlapped a bit, about 370 degrees. Je-str (talk) 17:16, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose these images do not qualify as a set, please read the rules. -- Ivar (talk) 17:30, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The ratio of lenght and the hight of each of these images is not acceptabe for me. -- Karelj (talk) 12:20, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Hamburg, Elbphilharmonie -- 2023 -- 6573.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Apr 2023 at 08:27:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Elbphilharmonie (southeast corner) in Hamburg, Germany
  • Hate is a strong emotion that should be handled with care. --XRay 💬 19:26, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Just a small piece of some building, I do not see here a reason for FP nomination. -- Karelj (talk) 12:24, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Some good graphic elements but does not have enough wow for FP. --GRDN711 (talk) 00:33, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Hamburg, Elbphilharmonie -- 2023 -- 6610 (bw).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Apr 2023 at 08:24:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cranes at Elbphilharmonie, Hamburg, Germany
  • Yes, the missing crane numbered 1. But there were only the cranes numbered 2 to 4. I've looked around and couldn't find the number 1. --XRay 💬 04:30, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:La Fuentona, Muriel de la Fuente, Soria, España, 2021-08-28, DD 42.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2023 at 20:14:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

La Fuentona, Muriel de la Fuente, Soria, Spain
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Spain
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info La Fuentona, Muriel de la Fuente, Soria, Spain. The natural spring is a natural monument since 1998. There are only 6 such monuments in the Community of Castile and León (the biggest in Spain by surface). c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 20:14, 25 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:14, 25 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay 💬 08:29, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment First thought: huge! Second thought: Meh. I tried to figure out why, looking some time at the picture in detail and I think, the first attraction came from the great capture of the colourful clear water and the meadow behind it. But when you look around, you detect few grey hills, that aren't very interesting, which take a lot of space in the background. This could have led to the meh. I wonder if a tighter crop would lead to more powerful impression, and I wonder if the resolution is suffient, when the hills in the backgorund would be cropped out and I wonder if it's necessary or wanted overall. Maybe others like the first impression or the contrast beetween the void hills an the nice oasis thing in the valley or think it's a FP anyway.--Der Angemeldete (talk) 18:58, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:43, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Princess Rosalina 🍵 459265 07:35, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Trifolium spadiceum - Niitvälja.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2023 at 12:24:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Brown Moor Clover

File:Keel-billed toucan (Ramphastos sulfuratus sulfuratus) on foxtail palm (Wodyetia bifurcata) Cayo.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2023 at 14:25:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Keel-billed toucan (Ramphastos sulfuratus sulfuratus) feeding on foxtail palm (Wodyetia bifurcata)

File:Sao Paulo downtown - Ladeira Porto Geral.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2023 at 22:49:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 22:49, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wow. At first sight, this looks like a boring version of "where's Waldo?" with not much going on at the individual level. It's only when you take a step back and re-adjust your perspective that it starts to shine. We've seen a few attempts to depict large-ish crowds here in the past (usually protests/demonstrations). Most of them filed miserably, usually because there was no composition to speak of. But this one ... it's almost like a landscape shot of a glacier meandering its way down a slope between two steep mountain peaks. Deserves more attention! --El Grafo (talk) 07:54, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm afraid I don't quite see the appeal in the same way you do; while chaotic and colourful are positives, the scene also feels a little too ordinary for me to think of it as an FP. I'm also a bit bothered by the cut-off head in the foreground. --Peulle (talk) 07:41, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Ostorhinchus aureus - Wilhelma 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2023 at 12:23:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ring-tailed cardinalfish; Wilhelma, Stuttgart

File:Arve Falls.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2023 at 08:48:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Arve Falls in Hartz Mountains National Park, Tasmania, Australia.

File:CH.ZG.Zug View from Guggi 01 16x9+R 8192x4608 Br058 gp denoising Br075.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2023 at 07:55:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The old town of Zug (Switzerland) at blue hour
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment The filename is not optimal, of course, but at least it is descriptive (starting with country code and canton code, it contains the name of the city and even the point of view). The extra stuff added at the end is indeed a bit irritating, but probably it’s useful for the creator (e.g. because he has a whole bunch of related files on disk and the filename helps to identify which one was uploaded). On Commons we usually respect the personal filename schemes of contributors as long as the filenames are unique, more or less descriptive, and don’t contain offensive stuff. Therefore I see no grounds to rename the file in accordance with the rather restrictive Commons file renaming policy (see Commons:File renaming). --Aristeas (talk) 14:59, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Yeah, I didn't claimed renaming the file. I just wanted to share my opinion on this odd contrast, but I fully respect the file CH.ZG.Zug View from Guggi 01,... and stuff.--Der Angemeldete (talk) 20:48, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Wiesen Pippau (Crepis biennis)-20220624-RM-123950.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Apr 2023 at 18:34:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.


File:Hubble NGC6530.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Apr 2023 at 18:11:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

NGC 6530

File:CH.GR.Arosa Tschuggen-Grand-Hotel 2220 16x9-R 16K.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Apr 2023 at 00:10:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Spa at Tschuggen Grand Hotel in Arosa, Switzerland
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well, you nominated a bunch of street photographs for deletion on the basis that people walking on the street had a right to privacy, but that was in Germany, so perhaps Switzerland has different laws. Anyway, if you're OK with this photo, I guess it's fine, and none of the people shown in the photo are naked. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:43, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Those photos are close-up "hidden camera" shots of identifiable people, taken on purpose, quite obvously. Disappointing statements of yours. --A.Savin 14:19, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Why disappointing? I'm saying if this photo that also shows several obviously identifiable people who are not walking on the street but inside a spa and viewed through glass is OK with you, that's probably enough of a reason to feel that it's fine. I get the distinction you're making, though, which is between individuals as the subject of photos or as part of a picture of a building. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:12, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:04, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Switzerland

File:Luzern asv2022-10 Kapellbrücke img1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Mar 2023 at 22:26:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kapellbrücke Lucerne
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Switzerland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Night view of the Kapellbrücke over the Reuss with the water tower in Lucerne. All by me --A.Savin 22:26, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 22:26, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Quite a striking night pic. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:59, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment The chosen aperture F/5.6 limited the depth of field. Almost everything is blurred / unsharp at full size. Please compare with similar pictures in the Category:Featured night shots, where most of them are of better quality in my opinion. This view point has potential, but the image would be more striking at blue hour. The outlines of the tower are hard to distinguish in that darkness. Also I don't see the need to include that much of black surface in the composition. At least the bottom should be cropped in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:15, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A bit too soft for me. The tower, the buildings... they're not very detailed.--Peulle (talk) 07:47, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree that there could be more fine details on the building façades, but when we consider the file size and the excellent total effect, it’s still a striking image. It does not matter here why the façades are a bit soft, but technically it’s an interesting question. I doubt that the DoF was too low because we are at 14mm where ƒ/5.6 could be sufficient and we have seen photos with excellent detail resolution at ƒ/4 and ƒ/5.6 by the same photographer with the same lens. Maybe it’s a consequence of the long exposure time (30 sec), when the ground or setup was not perfectly quiet … And maybe noise reduction has eaten some fine details, too? The crop proposed by Basile is excellent. --Aristeas (talk) 09:28, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per above. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:11, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It might not be pixel perfect, but the composition and the overall impression moves me to a support --Kritzolina (talk) 13:00, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I would guess, the blurry (not even to soft) outlines on the left really came from an exposure error, as mentioned by Aristeas. However it resulted, this should not happen to a FP. Beside from that, the composition is to overloaded to me. The reflections take a lot of space and distract from the main objects, which indeed are difficult to figure out by night.--Der Angemeldete (talk) 13:33, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 12:46, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support Yes, the soft areas could be better. But I've never tried to shoot this sort of image myself, and I have forgiven such results in long nighttime exposures before. Daniel Case (talk) 17:09, 27 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the current crop. The DoF is also function of the focus distance. If this point is too close, you may get part of the subject blurred, even with an ultra-wide angle like this one. For having taken long exposure night shots with my own camera (1, 2), I can testify that it is possible to get the buildings sharp in the darkness. Moreover, you can try again by going back to the same place. It's not as if the sky was special that day -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:23, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Calle Santa Isabel in Toledo. Spain.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Mar 2023 at 11:50:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.



Voting period ends on 29 Mar 2023 at 16:04:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The color of the water through the gap of the wooden planks of the pontoon is much lighter than around. Also the lower right corner of the photograph is plain white -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:26, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I'm not sure it is. I did a check and the gaps look lighter because of the white halo around the planks. Bottom right resulted from tilt correction and should be sorted. The image possibly has a lot of post-processing though. Charlesjsharp (talk)
  • Possibly a selective filter was applied in the sky + reflection (except in the portion located in center of the pontoon). I also find the intensity of the yellows & purples too garish -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:47, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The colors in this photo seem plausible to me; the ones in the photo you linked, less so. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:11, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • One thing is certain: this image is heavily processed. One doesn't get this kind of shot directly from the camera, even if by luck the sky was breathtakingly exceptional. Now the question is how far? And was this post-treatment too far from reality? By experience at FPC, it's often a question of tolerance until which point the sliders are still acceptable according to the subject. While some of us consider they've been moved over the maximum , other people sometimes think "yes but the scenery is worth it" (example). In that case, the aspect is "Instagram-like" to me. Unrealistic. I'm not saying it's all fake, but saturated enough for me to miss the "wow" factor, and too far in my opinion for this picture to be sorted in a gallery called "Natural" -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:07, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Well, you're perfectly entitled to follow your own tastes Face-grin.svg But personally in front of such images I feel "this is a special processing" rather than "this is a special landscape". -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:49, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mister rf (talk) 07:13, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --I second Ikan on the plausibility of the colors. I live in this part of Germany and we sometimes do have incredible lights with flamboyant colors.Dinkum (talk) 16:01, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Matthias, would you like to address the question of how much saturation you used in post-processing? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:05, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Sorry. I'm on the road and (once again) don't have access to the file. As far as I remember, the image is an exposure bracketing of three images. I stitched them together in Lightroom and chose Landscape as profile. I did not work with masks at that time. AFAIK I did not increase the saturation. The sunrise was indeed spectacular. —Matthias Süßen (talk) 20:06, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thank you, and enjoy your trip! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:51, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • If there are 3 PICTURES stitched together, that would be useful to mention this in the file description, possibly with {{Retouched}} {{HDR image}}. After all, a HDR composition is a kind of photomontage.
We don't know from which image comes the public exif data, but the hidden exif data indicates there is at least 1 mask applied.
Shadows +95%, Highlights -83%, Luminance 87% and vibrance 20%. There are many more modifications, but that's enough to create an Symbol wtf vote.svg artificial aspect in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:49, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Basile Morin (talk) 22:36, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the template HDR -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:36, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:52, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 21:40, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 06:26, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:39, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm with Basile on this one. The slammed highlights, pulled shadows and punchy colours seem like a throwback to the early days of HDR. I'm sure the scene looked beautiful in person, but there's just not enough dynamic range on an 8-bit JPEG to do it justice --Julesvernex2 (talk) 21:07, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Red seems to me to have been reduced during post-processing, which is why it looks unnatural. But it is still good.--Ermell (talk) 10:00, 23 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:50, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Basile. --Milseburg (talk) 18:29, 24 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support It may have been heavily processed, per the EXIF data, but other than the foreground vegetation looking lighter than it normally does in such images (which, in this case, frankly leaves it looking like ... exactly what we'd see with our own eyes standing there) it's perfectly OK for me. It looks "artificial" only by the standards of what we usually get out of photographs. Daniel Case (talk) 19:59, 25 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I’m not sure we would see vegetation as bright as the sky, Daniel. Our eyes can dynamically adapt to a scene and our brains can composite images, meaning we are able to perceive 20+ stops of light. On the other hand, an 8-bit JPEG can show only up to 10 stops, depending on the applied gamma curve. While I don’t think we should limit photography to what our eyes see, personally I don’t find this image aesthetically pleasing. —Julesvernex2 (talk) 07:44, 26 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Catedral de San Florián, Vaduz, Liechtenstein, 2022-10-23, DD 38-40 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Mar 2023 at 06:41:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cathedral of St. Florin, Vaduz, Liechtenstein
  • I don't understand the first part of the feedback. I believe that the columns offer a nice framing. I've seen richer churches, yes, but this is the nicest one in the country and per the comments below. --Poco a poco (talk) 16:34, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:ST90E40ZL1 MCU.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Mar 2023 at 15:04:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Microcontroller with EPROM in a windowed ceramic package.
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Others
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Mister rf - nominated by Mister rf -- Mister rf (talk) 15:04, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mister rf (talk) 15:04, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive. I'm not sure why it is presented with a tilt, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:22, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Through these photos I took, macro/extreme macro, I try to emphasize the three-dimensional qualities of that object in the frame, to reveal elements that are otherwise not perceived by the viewer. It would be much simpler to make the classic version, fewer photos are needed, even without stacking, sometimes even one is enough, because a large DoF is not needed, and therefore the elimination of some processing stages, saves time, but some information is lost IMO.
    Here’s the same microcontroller, in a “scanner” view perspective. Mister rf (talk) 23:16, 19 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I like the idea of looking at it from behind, for exactly the reasons you state. The thing I'm questioning is tilting is to the side. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:06, 20 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. (IMHO the lateral tilting adds a bit of tension/suspense/… to the image, the photo could appear a bit too clinical without it.) --Aristeas (talk) 10:22, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment impressive quality indeed, but something about it subconsciously feels wrong and unnatural about this - and given the surprisingly low amount of votes, I think others might have a similar problem. It's not the tilt, though, at least not on its own. I think it may be the brightness gradient of the artificial background not not being consistent with the frontal lighting of the subject. As boring as it is, I think I'd prefer a flat and neutral background for this kind of shot. --El Grafo (talk) 15:34, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Thanks for your input, any remarks/observations can help me improve my photography techniques. As suggested, here's a version where I've removed the background.
    Mister rf (talk) 22:23, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 21:37, 21 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Both ok for me. --Palauenc05 (talk) 11:53, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • seeing the alternative, this is now indeed an Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for me. --El Grafo (talk) 12:00, 22 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


ST90E40ZL1 (2).png

File:Brückenportal der Nydeggbrücke.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Mar 2023 at 13:19:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

46 m wide central arch of the Nydeggbrücke over the Aare with Untertor Bridge in the background in Bern (Switzerland)

File:Cepaea nemoralis Paarung-20230314-RM-110511.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Mar 2023 at 11:25:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cepaea nemoralis var. castanea concolor and grove snail (Cepaea nemoralis) mating

Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]

Thu 23 Mar → Tue 28 Mar
Fri 24 Mar → Wed 29 Mar
Sat 25 Mar → Thu 30 Mar
Sun 26 Mar → Fri 31 Mar
Mon 27 Mar → Sat 01 Apr
Tue 28 Mar → Sun 02 Apr

Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)[edit]

Sun 19 Mar → Tue 28 Mar
Mon 20 Mar → Wed 29 Mar
Tue 21 Mar → Thu 30 Mar
Wed 22 Mar → Fri 31 Mar
Thu 23 Mar → Sat 01 Apr
Fri 24 Mar → Sun 02 Apr
Sat 25 Mar → Mon 03 Apr
Sun 26 Mar → Tue 04 Apr
Mon 27 Mar → Wed 05 Apr
Tue 28 Mar → Thu 06 Apr

Closing a featured picture promotion request[edit]

The bot[edit]

Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below. However after the bot has counted the votes a manual review step is used to make sure the count is correct before the bot again picks up the work.

Manual procedure[edit]

Any experienced user may close requests.

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|gallery=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}}
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    featured or not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. If it is featured:
    • Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate gallery of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
    • Also add the picture to an appropriate gallery and section of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images.
    • Add the template {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
      • If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
      • If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessments template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
    • Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
      • The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
      • You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
    • Add == FP promotion ==
      {{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.
  5. As the last step (whether the image is featured or not; including {{FPX}}ed, {{FPD}}ed and withdrawn nominations), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/March 2023), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.

Closing a delisting request[edit]

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    '''Result:''' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg)
  2. Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
    delisted or not delisted
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted ===
  3. Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/March 2023.
  4. If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
    1. Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
    2. Edit the picture's description as follows:
      1. Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes).
      2. Remove the image from all categories beginning with "Featured [pictures]" (example: Featured night shots, Featured pictures from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, Featured pictures of Paris).
      3. Remove the "Commons quality assessment" claim (d:Property:P6731) "Wikimedia Commons featured picture" from the picture's Structured data.
    3. Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.
  5. If this is a Delist and Replace, the delisting and promotion must both be done manually. To do the promotion, follow the steps in the above section. Note that the assessment tag on the file page and the promotion tag on the nominator's talk page won't pick up the /replace subpage that these nominations use.

Manual archiving of a withdrawn nomination[edit]

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    In the occasion that the FPCbot will not mark withdrawn nominations with a "to be reviewed" template and put them in Category:Featured picture candidates awaiting closure review just like if they were on the usual list, put the following "no" template:
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], not featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. Open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/March 2023), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.