Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives February 09 2024

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Ναός_Αγίου_Νικολάου_στην_Αγία_Σοφία_0476.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination The church of Saint Nicholaos in Agia Sofia, Aetoloacarnania. --C messier 22:14, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
    Bell-tower and building wider at the top. Vertical PC needed? --Tagooty 02:51, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
     Support Good quality. --Plozessor 05:24, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
     Oppose Opposing until the PC issue is resolved --Tagooty 06:15, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Very disturbing shadows especially at the left and unnaturally perspective. I don't think that it can be improved. -- Spurzem 11:08, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Good to me. --Sebring12Hrs 10:04, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Tagooty. I have no problem if a perspective correction does not lead to absolutely vertical verticals, usually photos even look more natural if they are only corrected to "95%". Even "100%" often seems excessive. But "105%" is really too much. --Smial 12:19, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 22:45, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

File:Brihadeshwara_Temple_Gongaikonda_Sculp_1.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Shiva garlanding King Rajendra I --Rangan Datta Wiki 14:36, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Plozessor 16:19, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry but I disagree. Too much noise, lack of sharpness --Berthold Werner 18:38, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Color saturation a little too high, which unnecessarily increases the image noise. Somewhat soft, but this could be improved by removing the CA. --Smial 12:41, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 22:44, 8 February 2024 (UTC)