Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives April 03 2019

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Bydgoszcz_2016_IAAF_World_U20_Championships,_400m_hurdles_women_final4_22-07-2016.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination 2016 IAAF World U20 Championships in Bydgoszcz, 400m hurdles women final. By User:Pit1233 --Piotr Bart 13:39, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support I like it --Websterdead 14:56, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Below 2 megapixels, blurred faces --Jakubhal 19:10, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - At this size, it doesn't matter if anyone likes it or not; 2 MP is a hard limit. Per se ineligible. -- Ikan Kekek 06:24, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose lacks quality.--Ermell 13:08, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per others.--Peulle 19:02, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --C messier 14:03, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

File:"_Storico_Teatro_".jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Genova, Teatro Carlo FeliceDieses Bild zeigt ein Denkmal, das zum Kulturerbe Italiens gehört. Dieses Denkmal nimmt am Wettbewerb Wiki Loves Monuments Italia 2014 teil.Ich, der Urheber dieses Werkes, veröffentliche es unter der folgenden Lizenz:Dieses Bild wurde im Rahmen des Wettbewerbs Wiki Loves Monuments 2014 hochgeladen. By User:Carlo grifone --Der Angemeldete 16:25, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Eatcha 17:32, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree. Beautiful image, but the sky is overexposed and not sharp enough IMO. --Tournasol7 23:48, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Tournasol7 - Blown and severely posterized sky is too distracting. -- Ikan Kekek 06:41, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Tournasol7 Jakubhal 07:23, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --C messier 14:03, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Himalayan_Bulbul_Pycnonotus_Leucogenys.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Himalayan Bulbul (Pycnonotus Leucogenys). --Nirmal Dulal 05:31, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Insufficient quality. Sorry. A good composition and I've seen the focal length, but with respect of the QI rules it's not QI. It's not sharp enough and too noisy. You may send your photograph to discussion. --XRay 05:42, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support To me it looks o.k., please discuss. --Granada 07:45, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Piotr Bart 18:35, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - Blown leaf covers part of the bulbul's beak, sharpness marginal IMO. -- Ikan Kekek 07:28, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support - Good quality. -- Websterdead 09:08, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Strange fringes and lack of detail.--Ermell 14:10, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Ikan Kekek. --PtrQs 15:13, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 06:49, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

File:Pangong_lake_-_Ladakh.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Pangong Lake/Pangong Tso is one of the world's highest saltwater lakes with an elevation of 14,270 feet (4,350 meters) above sea level.(Pangong Tso is in disputed territory claimed by India and china)--Eatcha 03:47, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. May be oversaturated. May be better with ISO 100 and f/8. --XRay 04:50, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose disagree. Overprocessed and too noisy --MB-one 10:02, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per MB-one. -- Ikan Kekek 11:42, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose same here.--Peulle 08:01, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, nice view, but massive oversharpening kills it. Even the inevitable noise is sharpened. Needs reprocessing with more adequate settings. --Smial 17:54, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 06:48, 2 April 2019 (UTC)