Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 2010

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

Contents

Consensual review[edit]

File:Panorama_of_Rainbow_in_Hawaii_Volcanoes_National_Park.jpg[edit]

Panorama of Rainbow in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park.jpg

  • Nomination Rainbow in Hawaii Volcanoes National Park--Mbz1 21:20, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Withdrawn
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good and useful--Jebulon 21:29, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Seems too strongly stretched on right side. --Avenue 00:33, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Come on now, Avenue, it is just a very special rainbow Face-smile.svg, but to tell you the truth I have no idea why it looks the way it is.--Mbz1 03:05, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
  • It looks very nice too, except for the stretching. I've had similar problems when stitching hasn't worked well or an inappropriate projection is selected. You could restitch or try to correct the distortion manually. --Avenue (talk) 07:44, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Strongly stretched in the horizontal direction , horizon curved. -- Alvesgaspar 18:47, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
    • To be fair, some curvature might be expected on the side of a volcano. Kilauea generally slopes up towards the north, so the curvature seen here isn't too surprising for an afternoon photo shot away from the sun. --Avenue 22:35, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
      Well, it is to be fair Face-smile.svg. Anyway, Avenue, you are right. When I have a time I might fix it, or I might not, but for now I Pictogram voting delete.svg --Mbz1 01:17, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Elekhh 19:42, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Skatteskrapan from Bondegatan 2010BW.jpg[edit]

Skatteskrapan from Bondegatan 2010BW.jpg

  • Nomination Former Tax Authority building in Stockholm. --Ankara 15:54, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Withdrawn
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice and good. --Cayambe 20:30, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think it is to noisy and the bright areas are overexposed, even if i like the composition. --Niabot 21:52, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Because of the bottom crop. A bit noisy too. I would really like it otherwise. --Kirua 17:38, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Por image quality (noise) due to lack of light. -- Alvesgaspar 18:44, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination I will try again.Ankara (talk) 10:17, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Elekhh 19:41, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

File:Casa Batlló 12.JPG[edit]

Casa Batlló 12.JPG

  • Nomination Detail Casa Batlló, Barcelona --Böhringer 21:09, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too overexposed areas --Archaeodontosaurus 17:12, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I disagree. Check the histogram and the curves (highlights) on Photoshop and you'll see that few areas are blown out.-- --DKrieger 09:45, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support If you have a close look, you will see that only very small parts are blown out. IMO a pretty good image -- --DKrieger 17:48, 21 November 2010 (UTC) , sorry, I dont know what happened to my signature, thank you, Wsiegmund!
*Please sign your review. --Wsiegmund 05:55, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A nice image, superb lighting. --Aristeas 09:57, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This is a complicated façade, and the patchy lighting makes it harder to comprehend. The framing appears a bit random, and there are some minor technical issues, with blown out areas and a bit of CA. All add up to an oppose for me. --Elekhh 23:18, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- A difficult shot. Some parts are overexposed, other are too noisy due to high ISO setting. -- Alvesgaspar 18:46, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Elekhh 22:28, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

File:TortoiseshellCat.JPG[edit]

TortoiseshellCat.JPG

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Sorry, too dark.--Mbz1 02:31, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
It is black fur after all, perhaps see the full size? --Rehman 03:28, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
I did see the full size. Anyway I posted your image for the discussion for you. Let's see what other editors will say, but I cannot change my vote.--Mbz1 07:18, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks! I agree with you now, per consensus below. :) Rehman 14:08, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nicely exposed for the background, but not for the subject. The black fur isn't the problem; it's the eyes. Interesting though. --Avenue 13:31, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg Thanks for your time, everyone. I guess it is a bit underexposed. Rehman 14:08, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Signal Hill Tattoo.jpg[edit]

Signal Hill Tattoo.jpg

  • Nomination Signal Hill Tattoo in St John's, Newfoundland--Nilfanion 23:07, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice --Pudelek 16:39, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Were ladies allowed to be enlisted in the New-Foundland Regiment in 1795 ? I'm sorry it is not your fault, but the protective plastic glasses and the harsh-yellow earplugs are positively ridiculous and make like if this picture were a joke ... I'm not sure if it is a good reason to decline in QI, but I put it in CR anyway. --Jebulon 17:32, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree the protective gear is silly looking, but that actually is "part" of the composition. The subject is the modern Signal Hill Tattoo not the historical regiment - and the modern event has such things as women participants and health and safety...--Nilfanion 21:29, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support QI to me. --Avenue 13:39, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jebulon's comment was useful, it led to Nilfanion's explanation, which I accept. --Cayambe (talk) 17:05, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Please notice that I didn't decline... But i'm sorry, I cannot promote...--Jebulon 23:14, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Elekhh 05:15, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Swepac FB 465, RV70, with passing lorry.jpg[edit]

Swepac FB 465, RV70, with passing lorry.jpg

  • Nomination Swepac vibro plate at roadworks in evening.--V-wolf 18:16, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The metallic electric (?) box in background is confusing & ruins the composition IMO. Sorry.--Jebulon 17:33, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Confusing? That was a culture clash for me. It's a perfecly normal electric cabinet they have put up at the roadworks for light and charging of excavators, I thought it was more or less the same all around the globe. --V-wolf 19:46, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support there are some points which you could make better, but I think the composition is okay (I like the long exposure with the cars in background) and the quality reachs QI status imo, too. --Carschten 14:15, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think the road roller and the box in the background are too distracting for the composition to be QI. Like the cars and long exposure too. Main subject is also good. --Slaunger 18:56, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Elekhh 05:14, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Van covered by snow in Boreal California.jpg[edit]

Van covered by snow in Boreal California.jpg

  • Nomination Van covered by snow in Boreal California--Mbz1 04:28, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no details on shadows. Uninteresting composition for QI standards. --Murdockcrc 06:08, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Disagree.--Mbz1 06:20, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As do I. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 20:58, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The composition could perhaps be improved, e.g. by cropping a third of the dark trees off the top, but IMO this is good enough to be QI. --Avenue 00:56, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I uploaded an original image with no post processing at all. I was in hurry to show to slaunger I saw snow too Face-smile.svg. Another interesting detail: While taking this image I was standing up to my knees in the snow, slowly getting deeper and deeper.--Mbz1 01:35, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --QI what is certain: that I do not lend you my car!Archaeodontosaurus 08:50, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support "Boreal" is a nice name for this place... Is all the world, except Paris, under snow today ? There is (very much) snow over all France, except Paris. It is unfair !--Jebulon 23:12, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Elekhh 05:11, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

File:M-gorici-sw-9588.jpg[edit]

M-gorici-sw-9588.jpg

  • Nomination South-west tower of Goritsky monastery. PereslavlFoto 19:11, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The exposition is not very good and beware, there is a ghost on the roof !--Jebulon 22:38, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Tilded, ghost, etc. Possibly fixable, though. Rama 17:48, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
    • The tower itself is NOT directly vertical. "Ghost" is a person working on the roof, so it is a part of reality.--PereslavlFoto 08:51, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Distorted (at left), unsharp, weird leight. -- Alvesgaspar 18:41, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
    • What do you mean - distorted? Where?--PereslavlFoto 21:21, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
    • "Weird leight" means "weird light"? Where?--PereslavlFoto 21:21, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Weird light all over the building, geometric distortion(tilt) at left -- Alvesgaspar 23:33, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
        • What do you mean by "weird light", as this is a night photo?! Also, there is tilt at left side, but let us imagine some other position of the camera, without that tilt. Then the tilt will appear on the wall to the right side. The trouble is that the tower and the wall are not vertical. It is a compromise to make the wall less falling. PereslavlFoto 15:02, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
          • Pictogram voting info.svg Info -- The geometric disortion is easily fixable. -- Alvesgaspar 19:37, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
            • It costs too much to rebuild the wall and the falling tower, to fix those distortions of reality. I cannot. If you thought about recalculation in some graphical editor, any rotation spoils the photo converting straight line of pixels (taken from camera's matrix) into come curved infelicity. And what about "weird light"?--PereslavlFoto 21:59, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
              • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The modern house in the background is probably vertical, and it appears very tilted in the image. --Ikar.us 19:48, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Elekhh 05:10, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Snow on black tire swing 2010-11-30 3.jpg[edit]

Snow on black tire swing 2010-11-30 3.jpg

  • Nomination Snow on tire swing, Denmark, November 30, 2010. --Slaunger 12:29, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Good, but the tight is crop left and right, IMO. Thoughts ?--Jebulon 17:50, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Well, the local newspaper liked it, as they have just published it as the picture of today. And tires do not need to breath. Clin. --Slaunger 18:29, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Technically, this image fits the requirements of a QI. However, it does not meet the value criterium: Our main goal is to encourage quality images being contributed to Wikicommons, valuable for Wikimedia and other projects. I just don't see how a picture of tires covered in snow adds value to Wikimedia or other projects.--Murdockcrc 22:11, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support V-wolf's argument convinced me. True, there isn't snow, tire swings (or snowy tire swings, for that matter!) everywhere. The value argument was the only thing holding back my support vote for your picture, so now you got it. I'm sorry to have delayed your QI promotion. --Murdockcrc 07:57, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Well, did you notice that one swing has less snow on the sunny side of the black tire? It is educational as illustrating heat absorbance of black bodies and heat transport. Moreover, it has an appealing composition, which can make the layman interested in such basic physics subjects. --Slaunger 23:28, 2 December 2010 (UTC).
  • Then discuss.--Jebulon 23:42, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A bit tight, but QI IMO, on "value" as well as technical quality. --Avenue 07:18, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I can't understand the value argumentation. There is neither snow nor tire swings everywhere. Good and clear depiction. V-wolf 09:46, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 09:56, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Mitträckestrailer rv70.jpg[edit]

Mitträckestrailer rv70.jpg

  • Nomination Installation of median separators, Swedish national road 70.--V-wolf 16:36, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The vehicle at the left is a bit distracting. Also: there is too much of snow here IMO. Would promote if half of it at the bottom would be cropped away. Regards. --Cayambe 21:25, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting keep.svg Fixed I saved a little room for the poor plant in the lower left corner, should it be even tighter? --V-wolf 20:21, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, the plant is really unimportant here, it has nothing to do with the subject. But the image is good enough for QI now imo. --Cayambe 23:04, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline? Elekhh 21:49, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Buste femme nue Iran Suse Louvre Sb 17851.jpg[edit]

Buste femme nue Iran Suse Louvre Sb 17851.jpg

  • Nomination Naked bust of a woman, Susa, Persia, 14th century BCE, Musée du Louvre.--Jebulon 02:07, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Withdrawn
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unsharp to me --Carschten 09:57, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
  • sorry, disagree.--Jebulon 10:14, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment this reaction doesn't wonder me ;-) But fell free to get some other reviews! --Carschten 10:25, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
  • ?--Jebulon 10:39, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
  • never mind... --Carschten 12:47, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral for now. Seems sharp enough to me. I'm a bit puzzled by the white edging visible along parts of the shady side and bottom of the object - maybe a sharpening artifact? --Avenue 22:06, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The “white edging” mentioned by Avenue at the bottom of the bust looks to me like the artifacts caused by a free-form select with a path that doesn’t follow the contours of the object exactly enough. Maybe doing the free-form selection of the bust again with a new selection path and then using a smooth/soft selection margin (? I don’t know how this is called in English, the German PS edition calls it „weiche Auswahlkante“) before sharpening would fix these problems? --Aristeas 07:52, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Thanks for review. You all are right (Carschten too, in a way). I'm pretty sure this figure is sharp enough, but as noticed by Aristeas and Avenue, 1) the masking work and 2) the artificial blur, are not careful enough. I'll be back with this picture I have to rework, but for now, Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination--Jebulon (talk) 23:47, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Image:Lankatilaka temple 02.jpg[edit]

Lankatilaka temple 02.jpg

  • Nomination Lankatilaka temple, Polonnaruwa, Sri Lanka.jpg --Bgag 23:59, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too hard chromatic aberrations --Carschten 18:19, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment CA acceptable IMO. I wish a discussion regarding the (tight) crop left and right, IMO.--Jebulon 11:02, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
    So you think the picture should be decline with other reasons - and that is why so set discuss status o.O --Carschten 11:19, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
    No I don't think so, I'm not sure. I'm interested by other opinions.O.o --Jebulon 17:26, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
    ah, okay o.o :-) --Carschten 17:30, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
    My poor friend, nobody wants to give another opinion...O.O--Jebulon 23:41, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline?   --Carschten 12:48, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Rally Finland 2010 - shakedown - Patrik Sandell 1.jpg[edit]

Rally Finland 2010 - shakedown - Patrik Sandell 1.jpg

  • Nomination Photographers taking photos of Patrik Sandell at Rannakylä shakedown in Muurame. --kallerna 11:26, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good. Alofok 14:17, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't really like the composition of this one. Mattbuck 19:18, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose composition not QI . --Elekhh 05:19, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Elekhh 05:19, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Euston railway station MMB 17 390048.jpg[edit]

Euston station MMB 59 390048.jpg

  • Nomination 390048 departs Euston. Mattbuck 22:24, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Good. --Cayambe 18:17, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Too tight crop. --Elekhh 07:22, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Elekhh --Carschten 12:52, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Carschten 12:52, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

File:VespaScooterRouge.jpg[edit]

VespaScooterRouge.jpg

  • Nomination Red Vespa --Nico&Co 21:06, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great angle, and I love the colour contrast. However the over-exposed highlight on the trim is just too strong, sorry. --Avenue 13:32, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
    • The crop on the right seems too tight, too. --Avenue 21:31, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A highly reflective surface on a sunny day is expected to have this sort of lighting effect. It is an accurate representation of the subject, using correct camera settings. --Ianare 23:59, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
    • Sometimes it can be helpful to use "incorrect" camera settings, e.g. to expose for the highlights, and then adjust for this later. I'm not sure I would call ISO 800 the correct setting for this subject, anyway, but I was judging the result, not the technique. --Avenue (talk) 21:46, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Great composition and colors. Do not mind the reflection, but too noisy for my taste. Could easily have been avoided by using lower ISO and longer exposure. --Slaunger 19:04, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - noise generated by ISO800 for a 1000th of a second shot is rather a waste of a great composition. Mattbuck 01:25, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment would be nice to retake the picture with another ISO --Mbdortmund 04:04, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline? Mattbuck 01:25, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Some standard blood testing equipment on Swedish vårdcentral.jpg[edit]

Some standard blood testing equipment on Swedish vårdcentral.jpg

  • Nomination Vacuette tubes and other stuff at a Swedish health centre.--V-wolf 17:37, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The out-of-focus stuff is a bit strange and noisy, but I love this. Mattbuck 23:24, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like the crop of the box below. Let's discuss.--Jebulon 17:12, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
  • I think the crop as is is better than if it were cropped to show the entire corner. Mattbuck 04:26, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice colors, but DOF too shallow and the image is too noisy. Photographs like this should be always taken with a tripod and manual settings (ISO 100, f8.0 - something like that) --Carschten 10:03, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Carschten 10:03, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Dynapac CA 151.jpg[edit]

Dynapac CA 151.jpg

  • Nomination Road roller Dynapac CA151.--V-wolf 11:54, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Promotion
Symbol support vote.svg Support A bit bright maybe, but good. Mattbuck 23:24, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition is an issue IMO. Let's discuss it! --Kirua 23:04, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Should I crop it more? --V-wolf 13:42, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support looks good to me --Carschten 09:58, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support The background is disturbing, in a way. But otherwise, it is normal, and relevant for the subject, which is clear, sharp and well taken. Furthermore I think this is an useful picture.--Jebulon 17:15, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   ----Jebulon 17:15, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Icicles on motel's roof in Tahoe, California.jpg[edit]

Icicles on motel's roof in Tahoe, California.jpg

  • Nomination Icicles--Mbz1 03:40, 2 December 2010 (UTC). Nice ice :-) Needs a perspective correction on the left side, easy to do. --Cayambe 18:08, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
    Thank you for review. I am not sure how to fix it. It should be rotated?--Mbz1 03:07, 5 December 2010 (UTC).
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment No, e.g.: edit>transform>distort in PS. I've uploaded a 'corrected' version over the original file. If you don't like it, please revert it. I'll promote the image if you accept the 'new' version. Kindest regards, --Cayambe 16:23, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
    Your version is fine. Thank you for working on the image.--Mbz1 19:16, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Decline Ok now. --Cayambe 19:22, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I thought it was about the car. --kallerna 15:23, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
  • What was about the car?--Mbz1 17:46, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose dont like composition, sorry. --Swissalps 22:33, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
And what exactly a new user does not like in the composition Face-smile.svg? Any suggestions on improvements? --Mbz1 04:58, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Pyramids of Giza and boat pit.jpg[edit]

Pyramids of Giza and boat pit.jpg

  • Nomination All pyramids of Giza and the boat shaped museum. --kallerna 11:26, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too grey --Carschten 18:19, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I would like to hear another opinion. --kallerna 13:50, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
  • strike vote because of my new version --Carschten 14:06, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
  • My Symbol support vote.svg Support for QI. I know the wether in Kairo: the image isn't grey, it is simply dusty air. --Alchemist-hp 22:52, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
  • hast du meine neue Version gesehen oder die alte bewertet? --Carschten 14:06, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
  • It was your new version. It looks much better. --Alchemist-hp 15:30, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
  • okay, denn jetzt denke ich auch, dass das Bild nicht mehr grau ist. --Carschten 15:49, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks QI to me. Maybe we don't like the dusty (polluted?) air on the image, but the matter of fact is that a photographer has to capture the reality. If the air in Cairo is dusty, then you did a good job portraying that fact into the image. --Murdockcrc 19:17, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I remember the sky near Kairo as dusty as on this image and the light in the desert of Giza like on the photograph. --Aristeas (talk) 07:44, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Aristeas 07:45, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Dronte dodo Raphus cucullatus.jpg[edit]

Dronte dodo Raphus cucullatus.jpg

  • Nomination Raphus cucullatus (Dodo), wax and plaster model of an extinct species ca.1660. Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris.--Jebulon 00:34, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support QI and useful --Llez 06:29, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm sorry, I like this artwork a lot, but the lack of any detail in the grey patches on its back and especially the upper part of the wing is unfortunate. --Avenue 10:53, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Good point, you are right. It was a bit overexposed (through a glass, see the original file), and I tried to improve a bit, but...--Jebulon 18:50, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
      • Yes, I can see that the lighting was difficult. --Avenue 16:47, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good enough for QI to me. --Cayambe 07:29, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree with Cayambe. --Aristeas 08:02, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Cayambe 07:29, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Coast path DSC 8920.jpg[edit]

Coast path DSC 8920.jpg

  • Nomination South West Coast Path, app. between Treligga and Pendogget, Cornwall, UK --DKrieger 21:24, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support perhaps a bit noisy but I really enjoy the atmosphere!--Kirua 17:58, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice place indeed, but there is a slight tilt, the noise needs a discussion, and the tight crop below too. Let's have other opinions, please.--Jebulon 17:18, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
  • --DKrieger 18:45, 29 November 2010 (UTC) minor update
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It think it is too noisy and the crop below is indeed unfortunate. --Slaunger 19:01, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Great view but I dislike the crop and the white parts are a bit overexposured, sorry --Mbdortmund 04:06, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

GA candidate.svg Weak support per Kirua. Noise isn't too hard imo and otherwise a nice image. I think the composition is good as it is --Carschten 10:08, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above--Jebulon 17:17, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Crop. --kallerna 10:52, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice apart from crop at bottom. --Avenue 08:55, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Decline?   --Avenue 08:55, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Hamandir Sahib (Golden Temple).jpg[edit]

Hamandir Sahib (Golden Temple).jpg

  • Nomination The Harmandir Sahib or Darbar Sahib informally referred to as The Golden Temple is the holiest shrine in Sikhism. --Oleg 16:27, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good --Carschten 17:03, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose "This media file is uncategorized." Symbol support vote.svg Support now. Good big size, althought not the sharpest photo. --kallerna 06:17, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
  • does this really need discuss status? It took me maybe thirty seconds to add even just two categories... --Carschten 13:52, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Carschten, thank you for adding categories - I appreciate it! Kallerna, I apologize - this is my first submission of images and I was unaware that images must have categories (similar to articles) - I'll do so from now on. If I understand correctly, if any issues that are raised are taken care of it should allow revisiting the decision that was made based on a fact that is now taken care of. Kallerna, do you stil oppose? Thanks. --Oleg 17:41, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - very good. Felix Koenig 18:58, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Elekhh 20:42, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
    • I added a geolocalization. Please correct if wrong. Thank you.--Jebulon 17:55, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 11:33, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

File:ST1 Hedemora 01.jpg[edit]

ST1 Hedemora 01.jpg

  • Nomination Filling station ST1, Hedemora, Sweden (slightly longer exposure than the version nominated yesterday).--V-wolf 20:47, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good for me --Pudelek 21:39, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, still too dark for me. The exposure is right on the lamp, but too dark everywhere else. Photos like this need to be HDR IMO. --kallerna 09:25, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment HDR photos look like digital cartoons imho.--V-wolf 11:04, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support night time photographs arent required to be HDR, it technically good for a night time shot Gnangarra 13:39, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral because I agree totally with Kallerna and V-wolf. I'm not a fan of HDRs, the most aren't very useful. But it's a fact that everything apart from illumination is underexposed. That's why I abstain. --Carschten 13:45, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 11:31, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Chipping Sodbury MMB 02 primula vulgaris.jpg[edit]

Chipping Sodbury MMB 02 primula vulgaris.jpg

  • Nomination primula vulgaris near Chipping Sodbury. Mattbuck 12:49, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment -- Something wrong with the white balance or just the green light reflected from the leaves? -- Alvesgaspar 19:28, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
    I think the WB is fine - from what I remember that is the colour they were. Mattbuck 18:34, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
  • {{Oppose}} I like it, but too green (as Alvergaspar)--Lmbuga 23:54, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - OK, degreened it somewhat, is that better? Mattbuck 21:48, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree now. Good--Lmbuga 03:07, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote? George Chernilevsky 11:31, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

File:Trees_covered_by_snow_in_Boreal,_California.jpg[edit]

Trees covered by snow in Boreal, California.jpg

  • Nomination Trees covered by snow--