Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 16 2014

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Abelmoschus_manihot_Flower_3000px.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Abelmoschus manihot Flower --Ram-Man 17:19, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose technicaly (very) well done, however the clear background is too predominant, it's a composition issue for me, sorry. --Christian Ferrer 06:55, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
    The nature of the cloudy/rainy day (back) lighting is what gives it the unique character, showing a translucent quality to the petals. Contrast with this one. I'd like another opinion. Ram-Man 13:23, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  •  Support QI for me. -- Smial 01:35, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  •  Comment Crop too tight at bottom. Jkadavoor 03:28, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sky blown, crop too tight. Alvesgaspar 11:38, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Alvesgaspar.--Jebulon 23:05, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  •  Comment Thanks for the comments. I'm fast closing this as I got the input I was seeking on whether or not this is the type of photo that might be considered QI. Ram-Man 03:27, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined Ram-Man 03:27, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

File:Niña_en_Teatro_Municipal_de_São_Paulo.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination: Niña en Teatro --The Photographer 11:45, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Review
  •  Oppose Too noisy. The non centered composition is a pity for this kind of images.--Jebulon 16:40, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
    But the main subject is the girl (filename and description) --The Photographer 10:37, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
  • CAs on the right of the girl --Christian Ferrer 18:40, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
  •  Support Not all pictures of architecture have to be perfectly centered. Sometimes it's more distracting than at other times. This is alright. The quality is excellent. Ram-Man 13:15, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  •  Support Yann 22:45, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Too small DOF and a bit too noisy for me. --Hockei 21:28, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Livioandronico2013 11:37, 15 December 2014 (UTC)