Commons:Propositions d'images remarquables

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Shortcut
Cette page du projet dans d’autres langues :
Les règles des Propositions d'images remarquables ont changé.
Conformément aux règles générales, une image est promue avec 7 (sept) votes "support" ou plus (et un ratio de 2/1 de # supports/opposes) et le nombre de nominations actives par utilisateur est limité à 2 (deux)
Désormais, seuls peuvent voter les membres inscrits depuis plus de 10 jours ayant procédé à au moins 50 interventions dans "Commons"


Skip to current candidates Aller directement aux propositions en cours

Cette page recense les images qui sont proposées pour être affichées dans les Images remarquables. Notez qu'il ne s'agit pas de la même chose que l'image du jour ou que les images de qualité.

Les archives des votes précédents se trouvent sur cette page.

Il existe également une liste chronologique des images remarquables.

Voir aussi les Images de qualité, les propositions d'images de qualité et les critiques photographiques.

Procédure[edit]

Conseils avant de proposer une image[edit]

partie en cours de traduction depuis la version anglaise, votre avis est le bienvenu.

Lisez entièrement le guide avant de commencer

Quelques règles informelles à retenir avant de proposer une image (les termes en italiques sont la traduction anglaise des termes).

  • Définition (display resolution) : les images de Commons peuvent être utilisées sur d'autres supports qu'un écran d'ordinateur, par exemple pour être imprimées ou vues à très haute résolution. Il est important que les images proposées aient la plus haute résolution possible. Au moins 2 millions de pixels (par ex. 2000 x 1000) semble raisonnable à présent. Les images de définition inférieure sont systématiquement rejetées sauf s'il y a une bonne raison.
  • Mise au point (focus) : tous les objets importants de l'image devraient être nets. Dans l'idéal les objets non primordiaux sont nets.
  • Avant-plan et arrière-plan (background and foreground): ils peuvent être dérangeants. Le sujet principal ne devrait pas être caché par le premier plan, ni se confondre avec l'arrière-plan.
  • Qualité générale (general quality) : Les images proposées devraient avoir une très haute qualité technique.
  • Une retouche (digital manipulations) ne doit pas tromper l'observateur. La correction de quelques défauts dans l'image est acceptée pour autant que ce soit limité, bien fait, et non pour tromper. Les retouches courantes sont le recadrage, la correction de la perspective, de netteté, des couleurs ou de l'exposition. Des manipulations plus importantes, tels quel l'élimination d'éléments dans l'arrière plan, doivent être décrites dans la description de l'image, par le biais du modèle {{RetouchedPicture}}. Les retouches non décrites ou mal décrites qui transformeraient le sujet sont inacceptables.
  • Utilité (value) : notre but principal est de présenter des images utiles et précieuses. Les images devraient ainsi être spéciales d'une façon ou d'une autre, donc, entre autres :
    • La plupart des coucher de soleil sont beaux, et la plupart ne sont pas différents des autres existant déjà.
    • Les photos de nuit sont souvent belles mais davantage de détails sont visibles de jour.
    • "Beau" ne veut pas dire "utile".

Au niveau technique, nous avons l'exposition, la composition, le mouvement et la profondeur du champ.

  • L'exposition (exposure) est l'obturation du diaphragme qui modifie la luminosité (brightness) pour rendre avec qualité les ombres et les lumières au sein de l'image. Le manque d'ombres dans le détail n'est pas nécessairement négatif, cela peut être un effet désiré.
  • La composition (composition) est l'arrangement des éléments dans l'image. La "Règle de trois" est un bon guide pour la composition, c'est un héritage des écoles de peintures. L'idée est de diviser l'image par deux lignes horizontales et deux lignes verticales, nous avons donc trois parties dans chaque sens. L'objet ne doit pas forcément être centré. Les sujets intéressants doivent êtres placés aux 4 croisements des lignes. L'horizon ne doit jamais être mis au milieu, car il couperait l'image en deux. L'idée principale ici est de rendre l'image dynamique.
  • Netteté (sharpness) renvoie à la manière dont les mouvements sont représentés dans l'image. Ils peuvent être nets ou flous. Ils ne sont pas mieux l'un que l'autre, cela dépend de l'intention du photographe. L'impression de mouvement dépend des différents objets de l'image. Par exemple, photographier une voiture de course qui apparaît nette par rapport à l'arrière plan ne donne pas une idée de la vitesse. Il faudrait en fait que la voiture soit représentée nette, mais avec un arrière plan flou, créant ainsi le mouvement. D'un autre coté, représenter le saut d'un joueur de basket net avec le reste de l'image flou, en raison de la nature peu habituelle de la photo, lui conférerait de l'intérêt.
  • La profondeur de champ (depth of field or DOF) renvoie à la zone de mise au point devant et au delà du sujet principal. La profondeur de champ est choisie en fonction des besoins spécifiques à chaque image. Une profondeur grande ou petite peut améliorer ou dégrader la qualité de l'image. Une faible profondeur de champ peut attirer l'attention sur le sujet principal, en le séparant de son environnement. Les lentilles à petite distance focale (grand angle) ont une grande profondeur de champ, et vice versa, les lentilles à grande distance focale (petite ouverture) ont une petite profondeur de champ.

Proposition[edit]

Si vous pensez avoir trouvé ou créé une image qui puisse être considérée comme parmi les meilleures de Commons, avec une description et une licence appropriée, copiez le nom de l'image dans la boîte ci-dessous (en incluant le préfixe File:), après le texte déjà présent :


Après cela, vous devrez insérer un lien vers la page que vous venez de créer en haut de Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list.

Vote[edit]

A l'exclusion de tous autres, vous pouvez utiliser les modèles suivants:

  • {{Pour}} (Symbol support vote.svg Support),
  • {{Contre}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose),

Ainsi que :

  • {{Neutre}} (Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral),
  • {{Comment}} (Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment),
  • {{Info}} (Pictogram voting info.svg Info),
  • {{Question}} (Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question).


IMPORTANT: veuillez notamment NE PAS UTILISER les modèles {{weak support}} (GA candidate.svg Weak support) ni {{weak oppose}} (BA candidate.svg Weak oppose), ils ne sont pas reconnus par le robot, et votre vote serait considéré comme non valide.

Merci d'inclure quelques mots expliquant pourquoi vous soutenez ou non la promotion de l'image, surtout si vous votez contre. N'oubliez pas de signer avec ~~~~.

Règles[edit]

Règles générales[edit]

  1. Le résultat est donné 9 jours après la proposition (voir le planning en bas de page). Les votes ajoutés le 10e jour ou après ne sont pas décomptés.
  2. Les utilisateurs non-enregistrés peuvent proposer des images, faire des commentaires, mais pas voter.
  3. La proposition elle-même ne compte pas comme un vote : il faut l'ajouter explicitement.
  4. Le proposant peut retirer une image à tout moment, en écrivant : {{Withdraw}} ~~~~
  5. Souvenez-vous que le but de Wikimedia Commons est une bibliothèque pour tous les projets Wikimedia, y compris des projets futurs ; les images n'ont pas à être utiles uniquement pour Wikipédia.
  6. Les images peuvent être retirées de la liste dès le 5e jour si elles n'ont reçu aucun vote "pour".
  7. Soyez attentifs et très sélectifs dans les choix que vous faites, car il ne peut y avoir que deux propositions actives par proposant. Toute proposition supplémentaire sera rejetée sans examen.
  8. Seulement 2 nominations actives par même utilisateur (qui est, en nomination sous "review" et non encore close) sont autorisées. Le principal but de cette mesure est de contribuer à une meilleure qualité moyenne des nominations, par un choix plus judicieux des photos présentes en nominations.

Règles de promotion[edit]

L'image candidate devient une image remarquable si elle remplit les conditions suivantes :

  1. Une licence appropriée (bien sûr !)
  2. Au moins sept votes "pour".
  3. un ratio de 2/1 de votes "pour"/"contre".
  4. Deux versions différentes de la même image ne peuvent pas être promues en même temps, mais seulement celle avec le plus grand score.

Contestations[edit]

Avec le temps, les critères d'évaluation évoluent, et il peut être décidé qu'une image qui était auparavant assez bonne pour être dans la liste ne peut plus l'être.

Pour qu'une image soit déchue, il faut qu'une majorité de 2/3 avec au moins 5 votes accepte de retirer l'image, autrement elle reste "remarquable". Pour voter, utiliser les modèles {{Keep}} (Symbol keep vote.svg Keep : mérite de rester "remarquable") ou {{Delist}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist  : ne mérite plus le label).

Pour contester une image, copiez son nom avec le préfixe dans la boîte ci-dessous à la suite du texte déjà présent :


Vous devriez inclure les informations suivantes :

  • Informations sur l'origine de l'image (créateur, importateur).
  • Un lien vers le vote d'origine.
  • La raison pour laquelle vous contestez le label, avec votre signature.

Insérez ensuite un lien en haut de Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal.

Sommaire[edit]

Pour ajouter votre proposition à la liste[edit]

Pour ajouter votre proposition à la liste, cliquez ici et ajoutez votre proposition en haut de la liste : {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:FILENAME}}

Propositions en cours[edit]

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Temporale in arrivo su Firenze sud.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2021 at 13:32:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Thunderstorm arriving on south Florence

File:Schwarzes Tor in Rottweil (1).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2021 at 20:10:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Schwarzes Tor in Rottweil, Baden-Württemberg, Germany

File:Holy Cross church in Rottweil (8).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2021 at 20:05:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pipe organ in the Holy Cross church in Rottweil, Baden-Württemberg, Germany

File:Martyrdom of St Lucia - Luca Giordano.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2021 at 14:40:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Open wing basking position of Papilio polytes (Linnaeus,1758) – Common Mormon (Male).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2021 at 11:15:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Geranium pratense Obervellach 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2021 at 04:53:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Geranium pratense

File:Bloem van een Helenium. 03-07-2021 (actm.).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2021 at 04:45:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asterales#Subfamily : Asteroideae
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Flower of a Helenium 'Flamingo' in a misty early morning. Focus stack of 17 photos. Good butterfly and insect plant.
    All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:45, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:45, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 04:57, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Especially attractive with the water drops. -- Radomianin (talk) 07:52, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Radomianin. Great! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:39, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Radomianin. Your series of flowers is so beautiful! --Aristeas (talk) 09:08, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There is a dust spot below the flower, and can you do something about the noise? --A.Savin 09:16, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • ✓ Done. Removed spot, and noise reduction . Thank you for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:50, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment one more note added with stacking issue (blurred details). --Ivar (talk) 11:00, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • ✓ Done. correction Thank you for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:50, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment sorry, but I don't see much improvement. --Ivar (talk) 18:38, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Can you describe the problem in more detail. then i can fix it better.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:36, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment details of petals are lost (noted area is blurry). --Ivar (talk) 05:27, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • ✓ Done. Correction detail petals. Thank you.
  • The noise is not gone, just a bit softened. Regards --A.Savin 12:15, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Cmglee London Embassy Gardens pool polariser.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2021 at 19:32:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the Sky Pool at Embassy Gardens, London with coloured fringes due to stress-induced birefringence of partially polarised skylight
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Cmglee, nominated by Yann -- Yann (talk) 19:32, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I immediately said Wow! when I saw this image. -- Yann (talk) 19:32, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Really makes the people look miniature. Shame that it is not of better quality. -- King of ♥ 19:59, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as creator. It was also nominated on en:Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/Polarised_London_Sky_Pool, cmɢʟee ⋅τaʟκ 20:30, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree about the quality, but the unusual angle makes the picture special. --Ermell (talk) 20:31, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose the wow factor is definitely there, but I'm not sure about the quality. I believe it would be possible to (re)take similar picture with better quality, hence weak oppose. Buidhe (talk) 22:20, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support per King of Hearts and Ermell. --Aristeas (talk) 09:07, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Buidhe. --A.Savin 09:21, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Really interesting and a possible FP. IMO too much technical problems - for example low sharpness. And IMO the minor disturbing elements should be cloned out. --XRay 💬 19:02, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree the subject it has potential, but isn't captured well enough for FP. Perhaps just one swimmer would be best, like a specimen in amber. The image as a whole seems under exposed. Cmglee, I don't know what software you use to edit your photos, but this one has no exif data at all. It really needs at least a minimal set of data, including colour space, otherwise it isn't guaranteed to render well on different devices. -- Colin (talk) 07:42, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Škofja Loka Castle (Škofjeloški grad, Slovenija).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2021 at 14:55:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Loka Castle, Slovenia
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Slovenia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Loka Castle, Slovenia. My work. -- Mile (talk) 14:55, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mile (talk) 14:55, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Though I don't think this benefits from 175MP and there isn't really pixel level detail to reward close inspection. It could be reduced 50% without any loss of information IMO, and would make for a more accessible image for re-use. It isn't the most detailed of subjects so all we get are an awful lot of beige and blue pixels. -- Colin (talk) 18:55, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment For now, i will leave it since it is for Wiki Loves Monuments Slovenia. Otherwise, some 40-50 Mpx should be enough. I could do one stuff to have both, 1st original, after it downsized to "normal" size, both would be on same page, and link at "other version" to original. --Mile (talk) 19:55, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Actually i did it, downsized to 50%. Easy to open, but who want to judge on original here. I think even jury might have problem to open it. Only problem is to show original at "other version". --Mile (talk) 20:14, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose the quality is excellent but I'm not sold on the angle/composition, especially the tree on the left and the way the building looks cut off in that direction. I think a picture from this angle has a lot of potential although obviously that shot is not high-res enough for FPC. Buidhe (talk) 22:24, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Oprire sovietica, Grinauti, Raionul Rascani, Republica Moldova Soviet Bus Stop, Grinauti, Rascani District, Republic of Moldova (50169731262).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2021 at 12:38:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Oprire sovietica

File:Krakow- Collegium Maius 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2021 at 12:29:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Collegium Maius
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Poland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jar.ciurus - uploaded by Jar.ciurus - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 12:29, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Andrei (talk) 12:29, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support IMO, a beautiful long exposure in a balanced composition. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:44, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Just a QI to me; perfectly nice but not that interesting a composition. Any number of snapshots of streets in a city like Siena might be more beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:02, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support charming, although I get Ikan's point. Buidhe (talk) 22:25, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Radomianin. Ikan’s point about Siena etc. is good, but IMHO it takes more than a snapshot to get this mood really captured, so I see this more as a request to our fellow photographers in Italy (and to all visitors): please do not only look at the famous churches and castles, search more for such scenes in the side streets of Siena, Assisi, etc. … and upload them under a free license ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 09:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like the purple tint. Brick usually doesn't look like this, even at night. With that being said, I like the atmosphere and would support if the color settings got corrected. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:21, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree the colours look odd. But in the end, this is a fairly typical street in an old part of town. What would elevate this would be a wet reflective ground and/or interesting people. On Commons, we generally avoid people, and that's a loss, because the best photographs elsewhere generally have them. -- Colin (talk) 07:36, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Go (13×13) -- 2021 -- 6741.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2021 at 12:17:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Toys
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by XRay - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 12:17, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 12:17, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Andrei (talk) 12:48, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Famberhorst (talk) 17:09, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Dietmar, ich schlage vor, den Dateinamen und die Beschreibung noch dahingehend zu ergänzen, dass es sich hier um ein 13×13-Brett handelt und nicht etwa um das Standardbrett. Andernfalls könnten Betrachter denken, dass es sich hier um ein „normales“ Go-Spiel handelt. Beste Grüße, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:15, 21 October 2021 (UTC) P.S. Wollen wir vielleicht mal ein Spiel wagen?[]
  • Danke für deinen Hinweis. Ich werde alles umbenennen und die Beschreibung anpassen. Das Ganze spiegelt meinen Kenntnisstand bezüglich Go wider. Es wäre vermessen, wenn ich mich als Anfänger bezeichnen würde. Eine Runde habe ich nach der Lektüre der Spielregeln gespielt und das war völlig daneben. (Und das übrigens noch auf der Rückseite des Bretts mit 9x9 Knotenpunkten.) Seither habe ich zumindest mit Hilfe von Videos mal einen Eindruck des Spiels bekommen. Mal schauen, wie es weiter geht. Mit Schach bin ich - als Vergleich - nie wirklich warm geworden und das, obwohl ich Strategie- und Taktikspiele (Brett- und Kartenspiele, nicht online) eigentlich mag. Ich befürchte, dass wir derzeit sehr ungleiche Partner wären, aber im Grunde bin ich nie abgeneigt, ein Spiel zu machen. --XRay 💬 05:17, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose The upper half of the board is unsharp. Daniel Case (talk) 05:27, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm less bothered that the upper half is unsharp. The warm-grey background isn't appealing. In the end, it is a simple subject captured well enough, but not really saying "wow". -- Colin (talk) 07:34, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Daniel and Colin. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:08, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin. It’s a solid QI and maybe VI but I don’t see anything outstanding here. Und ein komplett scharfes Bild eines so flächigen Objekts nach Scheimpflug wäre wirklich schöner – oder wahlweise eins mit deutlicher springender Schärfe, aber so ist das nix Halbes und nix Ganzes :) --Kreuzschnabel 09:16, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:RhB Ge 4-4 II 614 Glacier Express on Landwasser Viaduct.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2021 at 11:03:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Glacier Express on the Landwasser Viaduct

File:Dülmen, St.-Viktor-Kirche, Aufgang zum Kirchturm -- 2021 -- 6700-2 (bw).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2021 at 05:56:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ascent to the steeple of the St. Viktor Church, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 05:56, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info It's not a location of an Edgar Wallace film. ;-) -- XRay 💬 05:56, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay 💬 05:56, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive; captures the narrow space very well and makes a shudder ran down my spine ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 09:53, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:44, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Works better in grayscale than it probably would in color. Daniel Case (talk) 03:01, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry. Just a few steps glimpsed through a doorway. Such a stairway is rather common and this is not an outstanding capture. -- Colin (talk) 07:31, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Beacon Stawa Młyny, Świnoujście.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2021 at 15:35:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Beacon "Stawa Młyny" in Świnoujście
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#Poland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Maritime sign "Stawa Młyny" in Świnoujście, Poland. It serves as a beacon for ships and is also part of the official logo for the city and tourist region of Świnoujście. Created, uploaded and nominated by Radomianin -- Radomianin (talk) 15:35, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Radomianin (talk) 15:35, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support not what I'm usually drawn to, but the light is really appealing, and the composition with the sky works well — Rhododendrites talk |  03:06, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Love the composition; the low horizon and the placement of the sign (not on the ordinary rule-of-thirds line, but intentionally a bit more to the right) emphasize the wide open sea horizon into which most of the people are looking, too. The placement of the people is also very good, like staffage figures in a painting they do not distract, but underline the composition. --Aristeas (talk) 09:48, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:41, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Aristeas' points persuaded me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:06, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♥ 05:28, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Famberhorst (talk) 17:10, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 20:14, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:57, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Scilla siberica flower - Keila.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2021 at 06:18:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Scilla siberica

File:Malaspina-panorama-meters.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2021 at 22:47:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Malaspina Glacier map

File:Batalha September 2021-4.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2021 at 19:06:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Monastery of Batalha, Portugal
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Portugal
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Main façade of Monastery of Batalha, Portugal. It was built from 1386 to 1517, to celebrate the victory over the Spanish army in the battle of Aljubarrota (1385). All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:06, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:06, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice angle, motif, and resolution, but the harsh shadows from mid-day lighting don't work for me. Btw the recorded time seems wrong. --Trougnouf (talk) 13:14, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info New version uploaded without the blurred central part. Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:07, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The colors are a huge improvement but the crop is now pretty tight in front of the statue. Would it be possible to have the best of both? --Trougnouf (talk) 20:26, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • No, sorry, this is a different set of images. Better to have the statue as is than to crop too close to the building. Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:37, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support So much better than the other version! I wasn't sure about that one, but when I saw the thumbnail for this I said out loud to myself "Isn't that amazing?" It's a huge file and does not disappoint at full size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:47, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very impressive and I want to support it, but isn’t the white balance a bit too cool and (at least in the sky) a bit too much on the magenta side? I know that midday light is cool, but here that coolness seems a bit too loud for me. Wouldn’t moving the white balance a bit give the image an even more appealing feeling? --Aristeas (talk) 09:58, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Lighting is tricky and there are pro and con to harder light for this kind of subject. Hard light from an angle can bring out the 3D details of a building like this. The totally soft light from an overcast day would be different, though looking at File:10083-Batalha (48985860766).jpg, can still be very detailed. -- Colin (talk) 10:09, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:50, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support One of those "shouldn't work but it does" images. Daniel Case (talk) 03:00, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A new version was uploaded to address the concerns of Aristeas and Colin regarding light temperature. Although the impression I got when taking the photo was that the light was indeed too harsh and cold, a little adjustment was made to the white balance, which I justify with artistic liberty... -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:01, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thank you very much! IMHO the building gains much from the slightly warmer colours, it gives the stone a more appealing touch. --Aristeas (talk) 16:19, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Daniel and Aristeas (for the improved version). -- Radomianin (talk) 17:25, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Le Jules Verne, salle Quai Branly, Paris 2019.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2021 at 08:01:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:White-throated sparrow (94058)2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2021 at 22:04:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

White-throated sparrow

File:Boy wearing a mask during the COVID-19 pandemic in Egypt - Inbound8844811027769309500.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2021 at 21:59:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A boy wearing a protective mask during the COVID-19 pandemic in Egypt
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People/Portrait#Children
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I've been meaning to nominate some pictures from the most recent Wiki Loves Africa competition, and thought I'd start with this one. A boy wearing a protective mask during the COVID-19 pandemic in Egypt. It's straightforward high-contrast drama, with an expression that could be fearful or hopeful. Created and uploaded by Eman arab, nominated by — Rhododendrites talk |  21:59, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportRhododendrites talk |  21:59, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I saw this one, and I thought to nominate it too. Great portrait. Yann (talk) 22:04, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Striking, and a portrait for our times. I could easily see this taking off as a crystallization of the moment and being reproduced years later to represent the COVID plague years. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:45, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive photo for me. --Famberhorst (talk) 04:46, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♥ 04:58, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:00, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:24, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay 💬 06:32, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:15, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 08:25, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Basotxerri (talk) 14:28, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:02, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support but please consider renaming the file after the completion of this nom --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:32, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    • @Martin Falbisoner: I renamed it before nominating. :) It was just "Inbound8844811027769309500". When there's some combination of letters/numbers in the filename, I usually retain them when renaming just in case the photographer uses them for anything. — Rhododendrites talk |  12:12, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 06:50, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per nom. Clearly "hopeful" rather than "fearful" for me due to the lighting. --El Grafo (talk) 09:27, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Andrei (talk) 12:45, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support per others. Per Ikan, has iconic (ahem) potential ... Very baroque, looks like something a great painter of a past century might have chosen to depict if they could see our times, because I, too, can see both the hope and the fear of a time standing in darkness looking up to the light. Should be used a lot more around the projects. Daniel Case (talk) 16:25, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Aussichtsturm Bistumshöhe, 1901201452, ako-2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2021 at 19:58:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:29, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 06:50, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support A little unsharp down at the bottom. Daniel Case (talk) 02:12, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like this, too. It looks to me like it leans to the left as it goes up, but I think that's a bit of an optical illusion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:12, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Awesome vista and I think the DoF is pretty good considering the challenges of the shot. Buidhe (talk) 22:28, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 20:14, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Korfu (GR), Korfu, Alte Festung -- 2018 -- 1137.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2021 at 14:31:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ceiling at the entrance of the English Barracks, Palaio Frourio, Corfu, Greece
  • Both done/improved. Thank you. --XRay 💬 09:38, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The light/shadows on the ceiling really make this IMO. — Rhododendrites talk |  22:51, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Unfortunately the light bulb is not exactly centered ;-) --Llez (talk) 06:47, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 09:30, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Likely meaningless oppose at this point: Great composition but the lantern is unsharp. 02:09, 19 October 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel Case (talk • contribs)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Quality and Dof are not among the finest on Commons but the compo and result definitely is, great shot! Poco a poco (talk) 06:31, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 20:14, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:The Montreal Observation Wheel.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2021 at 12:03:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Canada
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Maksimsokolov - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 12:03, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 12:03, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Could be a bit brighter. Though I am quite surprised that f/2.8 on full frame could be so sharp corner to corner... -- King of ♥ 16:05, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice composition and obvious wow-factor but I feel like the colours are way too saturated to be honest, it looks a bit garish. Cmao20 (talk) 20:06, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Overprocessed, per Cmao20. Saturation and contrast. -- Colin (talk) 20:19, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hm, well, indeed. But IMHO this photo is too nice. Maksim, could you have a look? --Aristeas (talk) 08:32, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The colors could be toned down a bit, but they don't bother me as much as the very busy composition. Feels like it would make a good postcard, but not an FP. Daniel Case (talk) 18:25, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Verticals leaning in (background, both sides). And please turn the contrast/saturation slider a few light years to the left, yes. --Kreuzschnabel 19:18, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sorry for the delay. I have asked Maksimsokolov about this photo on his talk page and (in short) he does not want to change this photo because “it contains the mood of Montreal I felt that day”. IMHO this is a perfectly valid point of view. First, we can see on other photos (e.g. on this POTY 2020 finalist ;–) how colourful autumn actually can be in that province of Canada. Second, we know at least since the discussions about the subjective photography movement by Otto Steinert et all. that photography can be seen as expression of the artist’s mood, impressions and ideas (and not as a mere reflection of reality). The unfortunate point is that in this case the result has by chance some similarity with a postcard; this may explain why Steinert et all. had most success with rather abstract and unconventional subjects). And, of course, this is not the kind of photography we are used to here on the FPC page ;–). The style followed by most of us, including me, has more similarity with the Neue Sachlichkeit (normally insufficiently translated with “New Objectivity”; but Sachlichkeit means also simplicity, rationality, functionality, sense of realism, matter-of-factness). --Aristeas (talk) 08:50, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support due to my reasoning above. --Aristeas (talk) 08:50, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturated and excessive contrasts -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:23, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Wall Graffiti Bangalore.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2021 at 06:48:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A man walks past a wall graffiti in Bangalore, India
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Others#Frescos and murals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me -- Dey.sandip (talk) 06:48, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dey.sandip (talk) 06:48, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Interesting composition, unfortunately 1/160 s was a bit too long to freeze the walker. The difference in sharpness with the background is explicit. The cables and rubble on the ground are distracting for me. Although one can see these wires as an extension of the painting, they're also kind of ugly in themselves -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:35, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    • The wires are part of the graffiti. They are restraining the vehicle from running over the scared looking figure below -- Dey.sandip (talk) 13:39, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • "Wires", I'm talking about those on the ground. Real wires, not painted -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:44, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • I like the photo. Whether it's right for FP, I don't know. My question is whether this is COM:GRAFFITI or COM:MURAL (not all of it appears to be in the frame), given COM:FOP India. — Rhododendrites talk |  12:00, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    • This is a graffiti on a public wall by a public road. I don't much about the COM:FOP India, so whatever is decided based on that is OK with me -- Dey.sandip (talk) 13:42, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support Weak because the walker is blurred, otherwise good composition and colours. Cmao20 (talk) 20:04, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I have proposed another gallery link: IMHO this would fit better into the “Frescos and murals” section than into the “Places” gallery. (We have no “Graffiti” gallery, therefore this does not mean a decision regarding the question whether this is COM:GRAFFITI or COM:MURAL ;–).) --Aristeas (talk) 08:29, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 06:45, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Well-done, deservedly a QI and a good VI candidate, but like Rhododendrites I don't see an FP here. Daniel Case (talk) 18:14, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]

Viviparus georgianus shells, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2021 at 06:01:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Even better than most. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:18, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:01, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Sgt. Samuel Smith, African American soldier in Union uniform with wife and two daughters.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2021 at 19:13:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sgt. Samuel Smith, African American soldier in Union uniform with wife and two daughters
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1850-1900
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by unknown photographer, restored, uploaded, and nominated by Yann (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Yann (talk) 19:13, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very detailed. -- King of ♥ 21:04, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not FP for me. More space is taken up by the ornate frame than the old photograph (whereas most reproductions we see here of a painting/photograph have the frame cropped out, to focus on the subject.) The old photograph itself is not exceptional quality for the era it's made in, or otherwise extraordinary, so I don't see what makes this FP quality. Buidhe (talk) 21:17, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Buidhe has made a good case against this image. Well, I see it the other way around ;–). The detailed reproduction of the ornate frame which fits the old photograph perfectly in style and size makes this photo special. The old photograph itself is of good quality, I guess it is just (because of the thick glass) a bit out of focus. The theme is also important: the old photograph with its nostalgic frame reminds us of how long how many African Americans have served their country faithfully, but are still not fully respected and acknowledged by many of their fellow citizens. --Aristeas (talk) 06:54, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Ambrotypes (also modern ones) are never really in focus by our standards that are based on totally different technical expectations and possibilities --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:35, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Martin, thank you very much for the explanation! --Aristeas (talk) 17:55, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Aristeas --Kritzolina (talk) 08:30, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Aristeas --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:28, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support After comparison with the original, I think the restoration was well handled. Very expressive faces. Good quality in my opinion for the period, except the girl at the right a bit blurry, but that's not crippling, since the three other people are okay. Concerning the huge black and gold frame, I just find it great -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:24, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Aristeas and Falbisoner. --GRDN711 (talk) 13:33, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Aristeas and Basile -- Radomianin (talk) 17:43, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support for the historical interest. Cmao20 (talk) 20:03, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I actually like it with the frame shown. It shows this portrait is treasured. Daniel Case (talk) 21:55, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for the explanation, Martin. A very striking portrait and I like the historic frame, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:47, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:53, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:09, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportRhododendrites talk |  22:52, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question @Yann: the description says unidentified yet about a week ago you changed it to Sgt Samuel Smith of the 119th USCT. How did you figure that out? The description is wrong in other ways, it says likely one of the Maryland regiments, but the 119th was organized in Kentucky, early 1865. Seven Pandas (talk) 00:39, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • One says nothing on this and the other two say unverified identification. Seven Pandas (talk) 01:10, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • The sources available here appear a bit thin, admittedly. But they offer more than nothing. And even if the suggested description turned out to be factually false and hence the depicted persons were to remain anonymous, this nom would deserve its star nevertheless, at least imo --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:28, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    • Not if the identification is so shaky and that shaky identification is in the file name. So I have to oppose on that sole point. Seven Pandas (talk) 22:49, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose see reason immediately above. Seven Pandas (talk) 22:49, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 06:44, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Commonists 14:49, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for including the frame. When the Library of Congress writes "Frame: Berg 7-22", it refers to a specific image and number in the book Nineteenth Century Photographic Cases and Wall Frames by Paul Berg, which is a reference work for people who work with or collect images from the Daguerreotype- and Ambrotype-Era. The extensive list of cases and frames in "the Berg" is a tool to date works from the first years of photography like this (only very few Daguerreotypes or Ambrotypes have information about the date the image was taken on the back of the case or frame). So, without the frame, important information is missing. I encourage everyone to not crop pictures like this. Best --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:45, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Convento de Jesús, Setúbal, Portugal, 2021-09-09, DD 75-77 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2021 at 20:54:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cruzeiro de Setúbal and Monastery of Jesus, Setúbal, Portugal
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Portugal
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info View of the Cruzeiro de Setúbal (Wayside cross of Setúbal) and the Monastery of Jesus, Setúbal, Portugal. The wayside cross dates from the 16th century, while the monastery, founded in 1490, is one of the oldest buildings in Manueline style (Portuguese version of Gothic) and served as a monastery of Poor Clare nuns. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 20:54, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:54, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful light and colors, only slight damage from the bit of modern building on the right (but that's reality). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:37, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan, good composition, quality and light. Cmao20 (talk) 21:53, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent. --Aristeas (talk) 06:49, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Composition is awkward with features on the left and right that detract from the image. The nearby cross looms large, emphasised by the wide-angle perspective. The colourspace is wrong (ProPhotoRGB) and should be sRGB. ProPhotoRGB is too huge for 8-bit JPG leading to posterising and incorrect colour and nobody has a display that wide anyway. The scene could probably have benefited from HDR to retain some detail on the highlighted bricks. -- Colin (talk) 12:50, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • The file name would imply that HDR has in fact been used. But I guess you could argue the scene could have benefited from *more* HDR :) Cmao20 (talk) 13:25, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Ok, as now two of you complain about the building on the right, I cropped it out along with a chunck on the left (and I used sRGB to export it). Thanks for the hints. Poco a poco (talk) 18:51, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Also added an additional version with a new HDR merge, detail is better for highlights now, does it also apply to the overall result? --Poco a poco (talk) 19:11, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • I did complain slightly about the building on the right, but I think the more generous crop on the right was better, even with the bit of the modern building. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:34, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Ok, thanks for elaborating your point. I'd like to hear other opinions before I offer an alt version Poco a poco (talk) 20:13, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Looking again at it I would second Ikan’s view. The building at the right was ugly, but overall the more generous crop was more balanced. But more voices are welcome ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 07:49, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:58, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay 💬 14:33, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:51, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful oppose Love the colors and the work that went into this, but like Colin I find the composition awkward. Daniel Case (talk) 16:43, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 21:09, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Llez (talk) 06:35, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 18:27, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Commonists 14:50, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Daniel Case --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 07:58, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Castillo de Óbidos, Óbidos, Portugal, 2021-09-09, DD 33.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2021 at 20:54:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Castle of Óbidos, Óbidos, Portugal
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Portugal
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Castle of Óbidos,, Portugal. The well preserved medieval castle is the result of the fortification undertaken by Muslims in the 8th century and later expansions over the centuries. I nominate this image as FP because the subject is spectacular and the perspective seen from this angle over the hill and the wide angle is strong IMHO. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 20:54, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:54, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose High-quality, but not FP with that sky, in my opinion. I'd love it if you had a chance to reshoot in more appealing conditions. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:40, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose I was on the fence about this one but I agree with Ikan, great composition and quality but the sky is so dull. I am not insisting that all shots have to be under a bright blue sky, but this isn't a dark brooding sky either, it's just grey. Strong QI but I honestly feel like it shouldn't be FP seeing someone could easily reshoot under better light. Cmao20 (talk) 21:57, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Striking this, I'm going to think more carefully about whether I see this image as FP or not. I am beginning to see the composition as good enough to outweigh the light. Cmao20 (talk) 11:57, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It is good, but I am still not 100% convinced it is an FP. Cmao20 (talk) 20:00, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support actually, I like the lighting/sky. Buidhe (talk) 22:08, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The sky is good here, with all the clouds leading towards the center. An effective composition. -- King of ♥ 00:18, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per King of Hearts. – There is a blue FFP1 mask hanging on the rocks almost in the centre. I don’t mind it, but maybe you want to clone it out ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 06:55, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Maybe my opinion kind of doesn't matter because I've opposed on other grounds, but I would oppose cloning that out, as it shows the times. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:34, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment OK, sorry, so please forget my hint. I had pointed out that mask because I remember people opposing to FP candidates because of some minor items of waste here or there on the ground and I wanted to avoid that. --Aristeas (talk) 14:09, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • I don't have a problem with cloning out occasional litter or birds in the sky (sometimes they just look like streaks). These things are not the subject and are here one moment and blown away the next. If the subject was about tourist mess, or "the times" we live in, then of course we'd keep that stuff, but the subject is an old castle. -- Colin (talk) 15:31, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan. --Ivar (talk) 07:49, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan. Photography is about light. The light here is meh. Plus the entrance track on the right is unappealing. -- Colin (talk) 12:38, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 02:40, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 13:55, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Schlosskirche, Bad Mergentheim, Southwest view 20150727 1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2021 at 14:21:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Schlosskirche
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info IMO an amazingly detailed and beautiful photo of a church facade with rich colours and outstanding image quality. created by DXR - uploaded by DXR - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 14:21, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 14:21, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Underexposed. -- King of ♥ 14:27, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    I think I see your point in that the sky is quite a deep, dark blue. But I have checked the histogram and there is no loss of detail in the shadows (which I think you can see when you zoom in), so I would say it is maybe a tad on the dark side but not underexposed. Let's see what others think. DXR, I am pinging you in case there are any changes you'd like to make Cmao20 (talk) 21:53, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[]
    This scene has somewhat low dynamic range, so there is a range of exposures which would not cause clipping on either end. It doesn't mean that all those exposures should be subjectively considered "correct". A bright facade should be much lighter than this. -- King of ♥ 00:20, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Just a QI. I agree the sky looks oddly dark. I think "under exposed" is technically incorrect as one may well expose to avoid clipping or to reduce shadow noise and indent to adjust afterwards to produce an image that appears how one perceived it. The actual exposure isn't really that important outside of extremes. -- Colin (talk) 12:35, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • I agree with your point about exposure. What would an FP image of a church facade look like to you? I feel like it's superior to many photos already in the category, compare here or here which are both less sharp and detailed at full size and IMHO are less interesting motifs. Cmao20 (talk) 13:31, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • One of the problems with photographing tall facades is getting far enough back. This seems there isn't enough room to breath, and the sky clouds just seem to add to the feeling for me. The photos you linked are quite old and I don't think the Warsaw photo would scrape through today. The other one has more interesting features. But maybe tastes vary about what is appealing. -- Colin (talk) 14:11, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Thank you for your fair review. Cmao20 (talk) 16:16, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I comprehend Colin’s “there isn't enough room to breath”, but it could make a difference if one would brighten up the image a bit, as King of Hearts has suggested – IMHO this would give the photo also a lighter, more relaxed mood. So I would suggest to DXR to try it out. --Aristeas (talk) 18:02, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:38, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Many thanks for the nomination and reviews. I have brightened the picture by 0.4 EVs, which indeed looks a bit more appropriate on my screen. The facade can only be photographed from a courtyard, so naturally there is a limit to how far back you can move for the photo. I feel that there isn't too much distortion, but personally, I would think of this as a good QI, not necessarily a FP. --DXR (talk) 11:00, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • KoH, is this change enough for you to support? Cmao20 (talk) 19:54, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • DXR I could withdraw if you really don't see it as FP, but seeing support currently outnumbers opposition I intend to let it run for now unless you tell me otherwise. Cmao20 (talk) 21:50, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the clouds, which look like cotton balls. -- King of ♥ 22:22, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful in my eyes. --Aristeas (talk) 12:50, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Also, pretty but not a great composition to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:09, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 08:11, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Llez (talk) 06:32, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the clouds. --Yann (talk) 18:24, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco a poco (talk) 07:33, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 20:14, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]


Contestations en cours[edit]

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Temporale in arrivo su Firenze sud.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2021 at 13:32:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Thunderstorm arriving on south Florence

File:Schwarzes Tor in Rottweil (1).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2021 at 20:10:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Schwarzes Tor in Rottweil, Baden-Württemberg, Germany

File:Holy Cross church in Rottweil (8).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2021 at 20:05:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pipe organ in the Holy Cross church in Rottweil, Baden-Württemberg, Germany

File:Martyrdom of St Lucia - Luca Giordano.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2021 at 14:40:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Open wing basking position of Papilio polytes (Linnaeus,1758) – Common Mormon (Male).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2021 at 11:15:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Geranium pratense Obervellach 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2021 at 04:53:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Geranium pratense

File:Bloem van een Helenium. 03-07-2021 (actm.).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2021 at 04:45:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asterales#Subfamily : Asteroideae
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Flower of a Helenium 'Flamingo' in a misty early morning. Focus stack of 17 photos. Good butterfly and insect plant.
    All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:45, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:45, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 04:57, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Especially attractive with the water drops. -- Radomianin (talk) 07:52, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Radomianin. Great! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:39, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Radomianin. Your series of flowers is so beautiful! --Aristeas (talk) 09:08, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There is a dust spot below the flower, and can you do something about the noise? --A.Savin 09:16, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • ✓ Done. Removed spot, and noise reduction . Thank you for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:50, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment one more note added with stacking issue (blurred details). --Ivar (talk) 11:00, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • ✓ Done. correction Thank you for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:50, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment sorry, but I don't see much improvement. --Ivar (talk) 18:38, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Can you describe the problem in more detail. then i can fix it better.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:36, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment details of petals are lost (noted area is blurry). --Ivar (talk) 05:27, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • ✓ Done. Correction detail petals. Thank you.
  • The noise is not gone, just a bit softened. Regards --A.Savin 12:15, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Cmglee London Embassy Gardens pool polariser.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2021 at 19:32:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the Sky Pool at Embassy Gardens, London with coloured fringes due to stress-induced birefringence of partially polarised skylight
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Cmglee, nominated by Yann -- Yann (talk) 19:32, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I immediately said Wow! when I saw this image. -- Yann (talk) 19:32, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Really makes the people look miniature. Shame that it is not of better quality. -- King of ♥ 19:59, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as creator. It was also nominated on en:Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/Polarised_London_Sky_Pool, cmɢʟee ⋅τaʟκ 20:30, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree about the quality, but the unusual angle makes the picture special. --Ermell (talk) 20:31, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose the wow factor is definitely there, but I'm not sure about the quality. I believe it would be possible to (re)take similar picture with better quality, hence weak oppose. Buidhe (talk) 22:20, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support per King of Hearts and Ermell. --Aristeas (talk) 09:07, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Buidhe. --A.Savin 09:21, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Really interesting and a possible FP. IMO too much technical problems - for example low sharpness. And IMO the minor disturbing elements should be cloned out. --XRay 💬 19:02, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree the subject it has potential, but isn't captured well enough for FP. Perhaps just one swimmer would be best, like a specimen in amber. The image as a whole seems under exposed. Cmglee, I don't know what software you use to edit your photos, but this one has no exif data at all. It really needs at least a minimal set of data, including colour space, otherwise it isn't guaranteed to render well on different devices. -- Colin (talk) 07:42, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Škofja Loka Castle (Škofjeloški grad, Slovenija).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2021 at 14:55:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Loka Castle, Slovenia
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Slovenia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Loka Castle, Slovenia. My work. -- Mile (talk) 14:55, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mile (talk) 14:55, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Though I don't think this benefits from 175MP and there isn't really pixel level detail to reward close inspection. It could be reduced 50% without any loss of information IMO, and would make for a more accessible image for re-use. It isn't the most detailed of subjects so all we get are an awful lot of beige and blue pixels. -- Colin (talk) 18:55, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment For now, i will leave it since it is for Wiki Loves Monuments Slovenia. Otherwise, some 40-50 Mpx should be enough. I could do one stuff to have both, 1st original, after it downsized to "normal" size, both would be on same page, and link at "other version" to original. --Mile (talk) 19:55, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Actually i did it, downsized to 50%. Easy to open, but who want to judge on original here. I think even jury might have problem to open it. Only problem is to show original at "other version". --Mile (talk) 20:14, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose the quality is excellent but I'm not sold on the angle/composition, especially the tree on the left and the way the building looks cut off in that direction. I think a picture from this angle has a lot of potential although obviously that shot is not high-res enough for FPC. Buidhe (talk) 22:24, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Oprire sovietica, Grinauti, Raionul Rascani, Republica Moldova Soviet Bus Stop, Grinauti, Rascani District, Republic of Moldova (50169731262).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2021 at 12:38:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Oprire sovietica

File:Krakow- Collegium Maius 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2021 at 12:29:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Collegium Maius
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Poland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jar.ciurus - uploaded by Jar.ciurus - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 12:29, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Andrei (talk) 12:29, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support IMO, a beautiful long exposure in a balanced composition. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:44, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Just a QI to me; perfectly nice but not that interesting a composition. Any number of snapshots of streets in a city like Siena might be more beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:02, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support charming, although I get Ikan's point. Buidhe (talk) 22:25, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Radomianin. Ikan’s point about Siena etc. is good, but IMHO it takes more than a snapshot to get this mood really captured, so I see this more as a request to our fellow photographers in Italy (and to all visitors): please do not only look at the famous churches and castles, search more for such scenes in the side streets of Siena, Assisi, etc. … and upload them under a free license ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 09:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like the purple tint. Brick usually doesn't look like this, even at night. With that being said, I like the atmosphere and would support if the color settings got corrected. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:21, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree the colours look odd. But in the end, this is a fairly typical street in an old part of town. What would elevate this would be a wet reflective ground and/or interesting people. On Commons, we generally avoid people, and that's a loss, because the best photographs elsewhere generally have them. -- Colin (talk) 07:36, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Go (13×13) -- 2021 -- 6741.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2021 at 12:17:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Toys
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by XRay - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 12:17, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 12:17, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Andrei (talk) 12:48, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Famberhorst (talk) 17:09, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Dietmar, ich schlage vor, den Dateinamen und die Beschreibung noch dahingehend zu ergänzen, dass es sich hier um ein 13×13-Brett handelt und nicht etwa um das Standardbrett. Andernfalls könnten Betrachter denken, dass es sich hier um ein „normales“ Go-Spiel handelt. Beste Grüße, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:15, 21 October 2021 (UTC) P.S. Wollen wir vielleicht mal ein Spiel wagen?[]
  • Danke für deinen Hinweis. Ich werde alles umbenennen und die Beschreibung anpassen. Das Ganze spiegelt meinen Kenntnisstand bezüglich Go wider. Es wäre vermessen, wenn ich mich als Anfänger bezeichnen würde. Eine Runde habe ich nach der Lektüre der Spielregeln gespielt und das war völlig daneben. (Und das übrigens noch auf der Rückseite des Bretts mit 9x9 Knotenpunkten.) Seither habe ich zumindest mit Hilfe von Videos mal einen Eindruck des Spiels bekommen. Mal schauen, wie es weiter geht. Mit Schach bin ich - als Vergleich - nie wirklich warm geworden und das, obwohl ich Strategie- und Taktikspiele (Brett- und Kartenspiele, nicht online) eigentlich mag. Ich befürchte, dass wir derzeit sehr ungleiche Partner wären, aber im Grunde bin ich nie abgeneigt, ein Spiel zu machen. --XRay 💬 05:17, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose The upper half of the board is unsharp. Daniel Case (talk) 05:27, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm less bothered that the upper half is unsharp. The warm-grey background isn't appealing. In the end, it is a simple subject captured well enough, but not really saying "wow". -- Colin (talk) 07:34, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Daniel and Colin. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:08, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin. It’s a solid QI and maybe VI but I don’t see anything outstanding here. Und ein komplett scharfes Bild eines so flächigen Objekts nach Scheimpflug wäre wirklich schöner – oder wahlweise eins mit deutlicher springender Schärfe, aber so ist das nix Halbes und nix Ganzes :) --Kreuzschnabel 09:16, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:RhB Ge 4-4 II 614 Glacier Express on Landwasser Viaduct.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2021 at 11:03:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Glacier Express on the Landwasser Viaduct

File:Dülmen, St.-Viktor-Kirche, Aufgang zum Kirchturm -- 2021 -- 6700-2 (bw).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2021 at 05:56:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ascent to the steeple of the St. Viktor Church, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 05:56, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info It's not a location of an Edgar Wallace film. ;-) -- XRay 💬 05:56, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay 💬 05:56, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive; captures the narrow space very well and makes a shudder ran down my spine ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 09:53, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:44, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Works better in grayscale than it probably would in color. Daniel Case (talk) 03:01, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry. Just a few steps glimpsed through a doorway. Such a stairway is rather common and this is not an outstanding capture. -- Colin (talk) 07:31, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[]

File:Beacon Stawa Młyny, Świnoujście.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2021 at 15:35:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Beacon "Stawa Młyny" in Świnoujście
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#Poland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Maritime sign "Stawa Młyny" in Świnoujście, Poland. It serves as a beacon for ships and is also part of the official logo for the city and tourist region of Świnoujście. Created, uploaded and nominated by Radomianin -- Radomianin (talk) 15:35, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Radomianin (talk) 15:35, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support not what I'm usually drawn to, but the light is really appealing, and the composition with the sky works well — Rhododendrites talk |  03:06, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Love the composition; the low horizon and the placement of the sign (not on the ordinary rule-of-thirds line, but intentionally a bit more to the right) emphasize the wide open sea horizon into which most of the people are looking, too. The placement of the people is also very good, like staffage figures in a painting they do not distract, but underline the composition. --Aristeas (talk) 09:48, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[]