Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives August 27 2021

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:SC_Wiener_Neustadt_vs._FK_Austria_Wien_II_2018-08-17_(077).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Marko Pejic, footballplayer of FK Austria Wien. --Steindy 00:05, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --XRay 04:14, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, but the part of the other player is too disturbing for me. He could easily be cutted off. --Stepro 12:56, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I agree that this crop doesn't work.--Peulle 08:46, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support OK now.--Peulle 06:14, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Info New (cropped) version uploaded. --Steindy 13:08, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support thanks for the crop --Sandro Halank 14:47, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support this version. -- Ikan Kekek 22:09, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Knopik-som 03:42, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 20:32, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Mons_maisons_33_35_rue_courcot_ret.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Twin houses, Rue Désiré Courcot 33 & 35, Mons-en-Barœul, France --Velvet 06:40, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Poor perspective --SHB2000 08:14, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Question Are we sure the roofs don't slant in real life? -- Ikan Kekek 23:50, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
  • No, the roofs don't slant. But this is not a front view, therefore the perspective distortion looks rather normal to me. I nevertheless did correct a bit. --Velvet 06:23, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support as good quality. Let's have a discussion. -- Ikan Kekek 05:35, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Perspective is ok here. --Sebring12Hrs 09:04, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Heavens above, since when is the perspective wrong if it is not totally frontal? --Aristeas 15:33, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 20:33, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Estação_Ecológica_de_Tamoios_João_Paulo_Marques_DAndretta_(1).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Ouriço-Do-Mar-Verde (Lytechinus variegatus). By User:Jpdandretta --Rodrigo.Argenton 18:31, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality, but you need a category for the plant. -- Ikan Kekek 19:41, 16 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Stepro 13:11, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose IMO nothing is sharp. --Goran tek-en 18:45, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment This is an underwater animal. What do you expect? A computer rendered sharpness? In my opinion, the image quality should be rated in relation to the object being photographed. --Stepro 05:34, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment Certainly sharp enough for an underwater picture. (Only I had thought it was a plant, not an animal.) -- Ikan Kekek 06:07, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 20:35, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Adenium_seedling_2day_Uthandi_Aug21_D72_20609-21_ZP.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Adenium obesum seedling, 2-day old, 15 mm high. --Tagooty 08:34, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Looks OK to me. --Peulle 07:58, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Either to high ISO or just general digital unsharpness, needs a bit of Unsharp mask or similar. --Goran tek-en 18:42, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support 15 mm. Good enough! -- Ikan Kekek 06:10, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Good enough for me as well --Kritzolina 07:55, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Good enough for me too. --Cayambe 19:53, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 20:36, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Pfaffenthal,_parc_Odendahl_03.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Sportsground in Luxembourg City. --Cayambe 06:56, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Visible CAs in front of the sky. White balance should be adjusted and the overall bluish cast removed. --Zinnmann 14:45, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Both points acted upon. Thanks for the review. --Cayambe 16:00, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 Comment Moved to consensual review. --Cayambe 19:55, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 09:57, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality --Tagooty 15:40, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 20:39, 26 August 2021 (UTC)