Commons:Quality images candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Shortcut
COM:QIC
Skip to nominations
Other languages:
Bahasa Indonesia • ‎Bahasa Melayu • ‎Canadian English • ‎Cymraeg • ‎Deutsch • ‎English • ‎Nederlands • ‎Türkçe • ‎català • ‎dansk • ‎español • ‎français • ‎galego • ‎latviešu • ‎polski • ‎português • ‎shqip • ‎svenska • ‎čeština • ‎македонски • ‎русский • ‎українська • ‎العربية • ‎मैथिली • ‎ไทย • ‎中文 • ‎日本語
Quality images logo.svg

These are the candidates for becoming quality images. Please note that this is not the same thing as featured pictures. Additionally, if you just want some feedback on your pictures you can get that at Commons:Photography critiques.

Purpose[edit]

The purpose of quality images is to encourage the people that are the foundation of Commons, the individual users who provide the unique images that expand this collection. While featured pictures identifies the absolute best of all the images loaded into Commons, Quality images sets out to identify and encourage users’ efforts in providing quality images to Commons. Additionally, quality images should be a place to refer other users to when explaining methods for improving an image.


Guidelines[edit]

All nominated images should be the work of Commons users.

For nominators[edit]

Below are the general guidelines for Quality images; more detailed criteria are available at Image guidelines.

Image page requirements[edit]
  1. Copyright status. Quality image candidates have to be uploaded to Commons under a suitable license. The full license requirements are at Commons:Copyright tags.
  2. Images should comply with all Commons policies and practices, including Commons:Photographs of identifiable people.
  3. Quality images shall have a meaningful file name, be properly categorized and have an accurate description on the file page in one or more languages. It is preferred, but not mandatory, to include an English description.
  4. No advertisements or signatures in image. Copyright and authorship information of quality images should be located on the image page and may be in the image metadata, but should not interfere with image contents.
Creator[edit]

Pictures must have been created by a Wikimedian in order to be eligible for QI status. This means that pictures from, for example, Flickr are ineligible. (Note that Featured Pictures do not have this requirement.) Photographical reproductions of two-dimensional works of art, made by Wikimedians, are eligible (and should be licensed PD-old according to the Commons guidelines). If an image is promoted despite not being the creation of a Wikimedian, the QI status should be removed as soon as the mistake is detected.

Technical requirements[edit]

More detailed criteria are available at Commons:Image guidelines.

Resolution[edit]

Bitmapped images (JPEG, PNG, GIF, TIFF) should normally have at least 2 megapixels; reviewers may demand more for subjects that can be photographed easily. This is because images on Commons may be printed, viewed on monitors with very high resolution, or used in future media. This rule excludes vector graphics (SVG) or computer-generated images that have been constructed with freely-licensed or open software programs as noted in the image's description.

Image quality[edit]

Digital images can suffer various problems originating in image capture and processing, such as preventable noise, problems with JPEG compression, lack of information in shadow or highlight areas, or problems with capture of colors. All these issues should be handled correctly.

Composition and lighting[edit]

The arrangement of the subject within the image should contribute to the image. Foreground and background objects should not be distracting. Lighting and focus also contribute to the overall result; the subject should be sharp, uncluttered, and well-exposed.

Value[edit]

Our main goal is to encourage quality images being contributed to Wikicommons, valuable for Wikimedia and other projects.

How to nominate[edit]

Simply add a line of this form at the top of Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list Nominations section:

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description  --~~~~ |}}

The description shouldn't be more than a few words, and please leave a blank line between your new entry and any existing entries.

If you are nominating an image by another Wikimedian, include their username in the description as below:

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description (by [[User:USERNAME|USERNAME]]) --~~~~ |}}

Note: there is a Gadget, QInominator, which makes nominations quicker. It adds a small "Nominate this image for QI" link at the top of every file page. Clicking the link adds the image to a list of potential candidates. When this list is completed, edit Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list. At the top of the edit window a green bar will be displayed. Clicking the bar inserts all potential candidates into the edit window.

Number of nominations[edit]

No more than five images per day can be added by a single nominator.

Note: If possible, for every picture you nominate, please review at least one of the other candidates.

Evaluating images[edit]

Any registered user whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits, other than the author and the nominator, can review a nomination. For an easier evaluation you can activate the gadget QICvote

When evaluating images the reviewer should consider the same guidelines as the nominator.

How to review[edit]

How to update the status

Carefully review the image. Open it in full resolution, and check if the quality criteria are met.

  • If you decide to promote the nomination, change the relevant line from
File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description --~~~~ | }}

to

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Promotion|Very short description --Nominators signature |Why you liked it. --~~~~}}

In other words, change the template from /Nomination to /Promotion and add your signature, possibly with some short comment.

  • If you decide to decline the nomination, change the relevant line from
File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description --~~~~ | }}

to

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Decline|Very short description --Nominators signature |Why you didn't like it. --~~~~}}

In other words, change the template from /Nomination to /Decline and add your signature, possibly with a statement of the criteria under which the image failed (you can use titles of section from the guidelines). If there are many problems, please note only 2 or 3 of the most severe, or add multiple problems. When declining a nomination please do explain the reasons on the nominator’s talk page – as a rule, be nice and encouraging! In the message you should give a more detailed explanation of your decision.

Note: Please evaluate the oldest images first.

Grace period and promotion[edit]

If there are no objections within a period of 2 days (exactly 48 hours) from the first review, the image becomes promoted or fails according to the review it received. If you have objection, just change its status to Discuss and it will be moved to the Consensual review section.

How to execute decision[edit]

QICbot automatically handles this 2 days after a decision has been made, and promoted images are cached in Commons:Quality Images/Recently promoted awaiting categorization before their automatic insertion in to appropriate Quality images pages.

If you believe that you have identified an exceptional image that is worthy of Featured picture status then consider also nominating the image at Commons:Featured picture candidates.

Manual instructions (open only in cases of emergency)

If promoted,

  1. Add the image to appropriate group or groups of Quality images page. The image also needs to be added to the associated sub pages, only 3–4 of the newest images should be displayed on the main page.
  2. Add {{QualityImage}} template to the bottom of image description page.
  3. Move the line with the image nomination and review to Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives May 2021.
  4. Add the template {{File:imagename.jpg}} to the user’s talk page.

If declined,

  1. move the line with the image nomination and review to Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives May 2021.
  • Images awaiting review show the nomination outlined in blue.
  • Images the reviewer has accepted show the nomination outlined in green
  • Images the reviewer has rejected show the nomination outlined in red

Unassessed images (nomination outlined in blue)[edit]

Nominated images which have not generated assessments either to promote nor to decline, or a consensus (equal opposition as support in consensual review) after 8 days on this page should be removed from this page without promotion, archived in Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives May 09 2021 and Category:Unassessed QI candidates added to the image.

Consensual review process[edit]

Consensual review is a catch all place used in the case the procedure described above is insufficient and needs discussion for more opinions to emerge.

How to ask for consensual review[edit]

To ask for consensual review, just change the /Promotion, /Decline to /Discuss and add your comments immediately following the review. An automatic bot will move it to the consensual review section within one day.

Please only send things to consensual review that have been reviewed as promoted/declined. If, as a reviewer, you cannot make a decision, add your comments but leave the candidate on this page.

Consensual review rules[edit]

See Commons:Quality images candidates#Rules

Page refresh: purge this page's cache

Nominations[edit]

Due to the Mediawiki parser code ~~~~ signatures will only work on this page if you have JavaScript enabled. If you do not have JavaScript enabled please manually sign with:

--[[User:yourname|yourname]] 14:54, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Please open a new date section if you are nominating an image after 0:00 o'clock (UTC)
  • Please insert a blank line between your new entry and any existing entries
  • Please help in reviewing "old" nominations here below first; many are still unassessed
  • If you see terms with which you are unfamiliar, please see explanations at Photography terms


May 09, 2021[edit]

May 08, 2021[edit]

May 07, 2021[edit]

May 06, 2021[edit]

May 05, 2021[edit]

May 04, 2021[edit]

May 03, 2021[edit]

May 02, 2021[edit]

May 01, 2021[edit]

April 30, 2021[edit]

April 29, 2021[edit]

April 28, 2021[edit]

April 27, 2021[edit]

April 26, 2021[edit]

April 23, 2021[edit]

April 22, 2021[edit]

Consensual review[edit]

Rules

These rules are in accordance with the procedures normally followed in this section. If you don’t agree with them please feel free to propose changes.

  • To ask for consensual review, just change the /Promotion, /Decline to /Discuss and add your comments immediately following the review. An automatic bot will move it to the consensual review section within one day. Alternatively move the image line from the main queue to Consensual Review/Images and follow the instructions in the edit window.
  • You can move an image here if you contest the decision of the reviewer or have doubts about its eligibility (in which case an 'oppose' is assumed). In any case, please explain your reasons. Our QICBot will move it for you. When the bot moves it, you might have to revisit the nomination and expand your review into the Consensual Review format and add "votes".
  • The decision is taken by majority of opinions, including the one of the first reviewer and excluding the nominator's. After a minimum period of 48 hours since the last entry, the decision will be registered at the end of the text using the template {{QICresult}} and then executed, according to the Guidelines.
Using {{support}} or {{oppose}} will make it easier to count your vote.
Votes by anonymous contributors aren't counted
  • In case of draw, or if no additional opinions are given other than the first reviewer's, the nomination can be closed as inconclusive after 8 days, counted from its entry.
  • Turn any existing comments into bullet points—add Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose and Symbol support vote.svg Support if necessary.
  • Add a comment explaining why you've moved the image here - be careful to stay inside the braces.
  • Preview and save with a sensible edit summary like "+Image:Example.jpg".


Consensual Review[edit]

File:Vandykeexpresso-MDP.1.jpg[edit]

Vandykeexpresso-MDP.1.jpg

  • Nomination Coffee shop Van Dyke expresso, San Lorenzo and Olavarría, Mar del Plata, Argentina --Ezarate 21:31, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Discussion Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --C messier 21:14, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
    why C messier? --Ezarate 22:06, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
    • Sorry, I thought had writen it. It has lens flares and overexposed surfaces. --C messier 12:13, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose To my eyes, too many parts are blown, there's a weird phantom ball of light to the left of a lamppost, and some parts of the photo look very unnatural, such as some of the trees. -- Ikan Kekek 08:55, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per C messier and Ikan Kekek. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 16:48, 8 May 2021 (UTC)

File:2020_Kaplica_na_Cierniaku_4.jpg[edit]

2020 Kaplica na Cierniaku 4.jpg

  • Nomination Chapel on Cierniak 3 --Jacek Halicki 13:15, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Palauenc05 17:29, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but the highlights (facade) is overburned. --Nefronus 22:12, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Seems acceptable to me. -- Ikan Kekek 09:40, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. Even with sunshine on the white exterior, there is detail. --GRDN711 02:23, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support clearly QI --Lmbuga 23:11, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support --Commonists 11:04, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Running total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Navneetsharmaiit 13:24, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

File:St_Symphorian_church_in_Tersannes_13.jpg[edit]

St Symphorian church in Tersannes 13.jpg

  • Nomination Saint Symphorian church in Tersannes, Haute-Vienne, France. --Tournasol7 05:30, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sorry: perspective distorted, building incomplete. --F. Riedelio 07:36, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sorry, but I desagree, discuss please. --Tournasol7 21:28, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

*Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The top-left portion looks really distorted + the appearance of the clouds adds to that perception. Perhaps this was the cropped left part of a landscape-oriented photo? --Nefronus 05:07, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The image isn't looking natural due to the perspective distortion as others have pointed out. I don't have any problem with the building being incomplete. If perspective is corrected I can probably change my vote. --Navneetsharmaiit 09:05, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
    • ✓ New version uploaded, Tournasol7 20:18, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Does the steeple really lean like that? -- Ikan Kekek 21:03, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It seems that yes. All lines are verticals (windows, walls, doors) without steeple. Tournasol7 05:47, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK, then good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 08:10, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's ok for me. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 10:42, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK. --A.Savin 13:39, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Navneetsharmaiit 17:12, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lmbuga (talk) 23:55, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The new version is certainly better, I change my vote to support. Nefronus 05:51, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Nefronus If you change your mind delete your old vote, thanks--Commonists 11:13, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
Running total: 7 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Navneetsharmaiit 17:12, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Timetable (day 8 after nomination)[edit]

  • Sat 01 May → Sun 09 May
  • Sun 02 May → Mon 10 May
  • Mon 03 May → Tue 11 May
  • Tue 04 May → Wed 12 May
  • Wed 05 May → Thu 13 May
  • Thu 06 May → Fri 14 May
  • Fri 07 May → Sat 15 May
  • Sat 08 May → Sun 16 May
  • Sun 09 May → Mon 17 May