PromotionSupport Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 04:30, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Houtribsluizen. View of the lock complex.(north side.) --Agnes Monkelbaan 04:25, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
PromotionSupport Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 04:30, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Town hall of Abondance, Haute-Savoie, France. --Tournasol7 04:22, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
PromotionSupport Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:27, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Rouleau de Bostan in commune of Samoens, Haute-Savoie, France. --Tournasol7 04:22, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
PromotionSupport Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 04:31, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
NominationCampanula barbata near Col de Coux in commune of Samoens, Haute-Savoie, France. --Tournasol7 04:22, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
PromotionSupport Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 04:35, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Town hall of Thorens-Glieres, Haute-Savoie, France. --Tournasol7 04:22, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. --XRay 04:24, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Landscape in La Roche-sur-Foron, Haute-Savoie, France. --Tournasol7 04:22, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
PromotionSupport Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:28, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Commercial buildings on Jalan Tun H.S. Lee --Chainwit. 02:54, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Decline Oppose Sorry. Details missing (full of artifacts). Perspective correction necessary. Red car on the left disturbing. Categorization should be improved. Please do not use strong JPEG compression. --XRay 03:55, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Western view of the rectory, part of the cistercian monastery Viktring, Klagenfurt, Carinthia, Austria -- Johann Jaritz 02:26, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
PromotionSupport Good quality. --Agnes Monkelbaan 04:18, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Bay window at the rectory (streetfront), cistercian monastery Viktring, Klagenfurt, Carinthia, Austria -- Johann Jaritz 02:26, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
PromotionSupport Good quality. --Agnes Monkelbaan 04:20, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Eastern view of the cistercian monastery Viktring, Klagenfurt, Carinthia, Austria -- Johann Jaritz 02:26, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
PromotionSupport Good quality. --Agnes Monkelbaan 04:19, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Bay window at the rectory (streetfront), cistercian monastery Viktring, Klagenfurt, Carinthia, Austria -- Johann Jaritz 02:26, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. --XRay 04:24, 7 June 2022 (UTC) Support Good quality. --Tournasol7 04:24, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Southeastern corner of the arcade yard at the cistercian monastery Viktring, Klagenfurt, Carinthia, Austria -- Johann Jaritz 02:26, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. --XRay 03:51, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Hyundai Staria in Leonberg.--Alexander-93 15:41, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Good quality. --Peulle 16:21, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Mercedes-Benz Citan Tourer in Leonberg.--Alexander-93 15:41, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. --Ermell 16:56, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination The Sulak Canyon in Dagestan. --Alexander Novikov 14:21, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. --Steindy 17:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination The Sulak Canyon in Dagestan. --Alexander Novikov 14:21, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. --Steindy 17:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination The Sulak Canyon in Dagestan. --Alexander Novikov 14:21, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. --Steindy 17:31, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination The Sulak Canyon in Dagestan. --Alexander Novikov 14:21, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. --Steindy 17:31, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination The Sulak Canyon in Dagestan. --Alexander Novikov 14:21, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Decline Oppose Sorry! Only in the foreground sharp. --Steindy 17:33, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Cat statue with cat's eyes in Theresienstein, Hof, Germany. --PantheraLeo1359531 13:46, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Good quality. However, I don't think Category:Cats in Hof (Saale) is supposed to be for statues. I'd also like you to identify the sculptor in your file description if you know or can find out who that is. Finally, and least importantly, you could could consider some categories for the trees. I probably wouldn't have mentioned that if I hadn't seen the berries. -- Ikan Kekek 14:44, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Impressionen aus dem Naturerlebnisraum "Wätj Lönj" in Risum-Lindholm --Nightflyer 12:48, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. --Steindy 15:41, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
PromotionSupport Good quality.--Famberhorst 05:14, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Villa Bellesief, Monschau, Germany --Llez 04:56, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. WB may be a touch too warm. Please have a look. --XRay 05:23, 6 June 2022 (UTC) Done Thanks --Llez 10:46, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Daido Life Osaka Head Office Building, Osaka --Chainwit. 19:28, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. --Mike Peel 06:50, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Diamond lizardfish (Synodus synodus), Teno-Rasca marine strip, Tenerife, Spain --Poco a poco 18:44, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Good quality --Llez 05:12, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Planehead filefish (Stephanolepis hispidus), Teno-Rasca marine strip, Tenerife, Spain --Poco a poco 18:44, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Good quality --Llez 05:12, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Parking area near the station of Venezia Mestre, Italy. --Mænsard vokser 14:21, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. --Ermell 09:03, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Oriental Building in KL, designed by Arthur Oakley Coltman --Chainwit. 12:49, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. --Ermell 09:03, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Mercedes-AMG A 35 in Böblingen.--Alexander-93 09:00, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. --Mike Peel 06:51, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Peyto Lake panoramic view --Snowmanstudios 05:58, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. --Ermell 09:02, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Звонница Софийского собора Великий Новгород --Ulaisaeva 05:49, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Decline Unfortunate cut above and at the right -- Spurzem 05:43, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Звонница Софийского собора Великий Новгород --Ulaisaeva 05:48, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Decline Unnaturally distorted -- Spurzem 05:40, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Mazda2 CX-9 in Böblingen.--Alexander-93 13:50, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. --Mike Peel 06:57, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Mazda2 Homura in Böblingen.--Alexander-93 13:50, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. --Mike Peel 06:57, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Skoda Fabia IV in Stuttgart.--Alexander-93 12:19, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. --Mike Peel 06:57, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination: graffiti WHERE ARE YOUR DREAMS? in en:Oullins, France, in a pedestrian passage under the railway. --Touam 19:53, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Review needed
Nomination: The species is unknownm but presumably it is Candida Albicans. By User:Ivanpsy442 --IamMM 17:06, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Review needed
Nomination: Muelle, rompiente de ola en Negritos, Perú. --Cbrescia 15:03, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Review needed
Nomination: The Austrian teamchef Marecl Koller (left) and the TV-moderator Rainer Pariasek (right) after der beer shower. --Steindy 11:25, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Review needed
Nomination: The Austrian teamchef Marecl Koller (left) and the TV-moderator Rainer Pariasek (right) after der beer shower. --Steindy 11:25, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Review needed
Nomination: David Alaba with the beer mug. --Steindy 11:25, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Review needed
Nomination: David Alaba with the beer mug. --Steindy 11:25, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Review needed
Nomination: Nations Theatre, Moscow in Russia --Reda Kerbouche 07:07, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Review needed
Nomination: Khortytsia island -- George Chernilevsky 22:30, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Review the dark areas aren't enough sharp IMHO and are too big --Ezarate 23:11, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Nomination: Eclectus roratus in Maroparque --Mike Peel 19:48, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
Review I think the bird is sharp enough, but what's that distracting blurry card (or whatever)? -- Ikan Kekek 21:44, 30 May 2022 (UTC) @Ikan Kekek: It's a background label identifying the bird, not much I can do about it, sorry. Thanks. Mike Peel 06:56, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Common tit (Hypolycaena erylus teatus) --Charlesjsharp 13:45, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Oppose Good sharpness. Unfortunately, the leaf partially obscures the butterfly. --Steindy 16:02, 4 June 2022 (UTC) This is QI of a rare and tiny butterfly, not FPC. Charlesjsharp 19:24, 4 June 2022 (UTC) Support Good quality. The leaf does not obsure any significant features of the butterfly. --Tagooty 01:29, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Weak Support. There should be somewhat less sharpening and less noise reduction. Otherwise good enough. --Smial 14:27, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Decline Oppose Criminal act. Man should be arrested, not photographed. --Charlesjsharp 09:00, 4 June 2022 (UTC) Comment Indegenous tribal communities, like the Mishmis, have engaged in substainable hunting practices for hundreds of years. British colonisers and their native "royal" lackeys otoh, have successfully driven hundreds of species to extinction in very short periods of time. In any case, images are to be judged on quality, not on european morality, especially when it is the indegenous tribal groups at the forefront of conservation. UnpetitproleX 09:38, 4 June 2022 (UTC) Oppose Per Charlesjsharp: What a weird justification. Also the burning of witches has been practiced for centuries. Would you justify that as well because of tradition? Do you really want to make us believe that the image shows "substainable hunting practice"? --Palauenc05 14:30, 4 June 2022 (UTC) Oppose Disgusting image! -- Spurzem 15:21, 4 June 2022 (UTC) Comment 1. All above reasonings fall in the realm of Wikipedia:IDONTLIKEIT; can we oppose other images saying "this town/city is just horrible" or "sorry no images of madame 'parasite in chief in her idiot hat'" or "this image shows a meat dish, ew"? 2. The image comes from this work. You can read it for more context both about the image and the practices—both hunting and conservation—of the tribes. 3. I don't have any particular issue with this image not becoming a QI, but the reasoning has to be within Commons rules and guideines. --UnpetitproleX 15:26, 4 June 2022 (UTC) Comment Recently promoted QIs showing dead animals in the "food" category: 1, 2, 3, 4; are vegans allowed to oppose saying these are “disgusting images”?--UnpetitproleX 15:51, 4 June 2022 (UTC) Support Good quality, period. Acknowledging that a photo is good quality does not mean you approve or disapprove of the subject matter, and I periodically find it shocking that some people here are so unimaginative that they don't understand that photos can be used to advocate against what's shown. This is "Quality image candidates," not "Approved subject matter candidates". We can have somewhat different attitudes about featured pictures but should still tread carefully even there. -- Ikan Kekek 15:39, 4 June 2022 (UTC) Comment. Apart from the abnormality of the picture I would like to know where the good quality is hiding. -- Spurzem 17:23, 4 June 2022 (UTC) Neutral Per Ikan Kekek and UnpetiproleX I support this image on Commons. It is a valuable depiction. The opposition based on personal dislikes is not justified. Many countries permit killing of wild animals, birds and fish under the guise of "sports". Incidentally, this image is from 2008 and by 2021 the tribals have reportedly found synthetic alternatives. I do not support the image for QI as I find the quality is not upto the mark. --Tagooty 04:04, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Oppose This is certainly a photograph of documentary value. My disapproval is based on the poor lighting with direct flash. Since it is not a snapshot, because the person photographed is obviously posing, there might have been time to find a location where a photo with natural light would have been possible. --Smial 14:23, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
That's acceptable. For the other opposes I'll probably move the discussion to the talk page, since it has bearing on QI rules. -- UnpetitproleX 17:22, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
If I remember correctly, I already said with other words that the picture is not only disgusting, but photographically bad. This applies to both the composition of the image and the lighting. -- Spurzem 17:51, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Votes and judgements based on quality (or other image guidelines) are welcome, accompanying comments about the subjects are OK, even if unnecessary. I'd suggest striking your original oppose vote—since it only gives "Disgusting image!" as the reasoning—and adding a new oppose vote that states the above quality issues you mention in as many words. Thanks. -- UnpetitproleX 20:54, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Oppose per Smial on technical quality. As for the rest, it seems worth highlighting that the photographer published this photo in an article about protecting hornbills. Its purpose in the paper appears to have been to document real practices that conservationists should understand, not to celebrate/glorify hunting. It's not up to current QI standards, and the QI standards are really what matters here (at FPC there's a little more room for subjective evaluation of the subject, I think). It could use a better description, though. Rhododendrites 02:49, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Comment I hate the idea that the selection of motifs doesn't play any role for the quality of an image. As Charlesjsharp put it, killing these animals is a criminal act, whether indigenous or not. In my opinion, we should be very careful with publishing pictures of criminal acts. The gap between glorification and deterrence is very narrow. Neither the file description, nor the nomination clarifies that issue. For me, this is a matter of responsibility, rather than dislike, as assumed above. The explanation given above that only the British are reponsible for the extinction of "hundreds of species" and that we Europeans should not be allowed to judge on the basis of "European morality" is unacceptable. Judging only the technical quality of an image, without considering its content is not sufficient IMO. --Palauenc05 08:47, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Question So no photographs of Nazi crimes or war could ever be considered quality images? Unbelievable. -- Ikan Kekek 14:52, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Comment Cheap demagogy by Sharp and others, as usual. If they were just a bit objective in evaluation according QI guidelines, at first, they would say "species is not identified". That's already a reason why this photo cannot be promoted at this point. At second, if the species is identified, one has to look into its WP article for the conservation status. It may well be that the species is not threatened, so in this case hunting it (especially if you are a local and do it legal with all permissions you need) is nearly as "unethical" as slaughtering a pig somewhere in England. I wonder if we shall not promote any "disgusting" photo related to hunting or animal husbandry. --A.Savin 12:49, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
It is illegal to kill hornbills in India. Charlesjsharp 14:05, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Headgear of Nyishi tribe of Arunachal Pradesh with hornbill beaks
The species is wreathed hornbill (Rhyticeros undulatus), it was listed under "least concern" in 2008 when this photograph was taken. It is hunted for its meat, beak and feathers, and is considered a delicacy by tribes of Arunachal Pradesh. In 2018, it was moved to "vulnerable," with habitat loss and hunting listed as threats. UnpetitproleX 15:08, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Comment Photos of pig slaughters have indeed been voted down in the past, because God forbid we should show how a slaughter really looks. -- Ikan Kekek 14:52, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Comment, hornbills have significant links with cultural traditions of several indigenous people of Arunachal Pradesh like the Nyishi people, who use hornbill beaks in their headgear (see image beside) and sustainable hunting is part of their history and culture for food, religious beliefs or indigenous medicines. Controlled hunting during specific festivals and seasons are also allowed by the state government for these people. The culture of different indigenous people of the world including of Arunachal Pradesh is diverse and IMHO, it would be very superficial and naive to judge them wearing Eurocentric or Western spectacles. Wikimedia Commons is a global website and we should respect global diversity of knowledge, culture and heritage. Having said that, I think that this image has high documentation value and might be a fair candidate for VI within right scope, but technically, it is not good enough to be a QI. -- Bodhisattwa 05:38, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Kia Sportage PHEV in Sindelfingen.--Alexander-93 17:43, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Good quality. --Velvet 06:45, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Oppose I disagree. Cluttered background. --Smial 10:45, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Support Perfectly natural background for a real-life parking lot.--Peulle 16:49, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Weak Oppose Seems a bit borderline to me compared to Alexander's other photos. I'm actually less worried about the background than I am about the reflections, plus it doesn't seem quite as sharp as the others (particularly, e.g., the rear wheel). Thanks. Mike Peel 18:13, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Support If the background bothers you, then you can only take such photos under professional conditions in the studio. do we really want that? Are we really increasing our requirements to this extent? --Steindy 23:18, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
@Steindy: There are situations and environments where no quality image is possible. Finding a specific car in front of a suitable background and with the right lighting is sometimes difficult. Best regards -- Spurzem 19:19, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination The Nave inside St John the Baptist Church Tuebrook, Tuebrook, Liveprool, England --Mdbeckwith 12:56, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Promotion Support Feels a bit too bright, but overall fine --Poco a poco 13:48, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Oppose I disagree. Tone mapping by far overdone. --Smial 11:02, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Comment The highlights look odd to me. Is that what you're talking about, Smial? I guess you mean to oppose. -- Ikan Kekek 16:52, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Comment The darkening of the highlights, i.e. with the coloured windows, is borderline, but actually still tolerable. I am much more bothered by the fact that areas in the shadows have the same brightness in large parts as those areas that are directly illuminated. This creates an unnatural colour intensity where the colours would fade in a natural representation. At the same time, local contrasts are lost and the whole image looks flat and expressionless. If you look at paintings by the old masters, you will see that they recognised and mastered this problem. Photography lives from the play of light and shadow, this photo is only colourful. I am explicitly not criticising perspective and sharpness, nor do I have any fundamental objections to appropriate tonemapping. --Smial 10:08, 4 June 2022 (UTC) Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
Support Impressive photo. --Steindy 23:26, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Nomination Wind turbines at the german north-sea coast --Ssprmannheim 17:02, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Promotion
Support Good quality. --Velvet 06:55, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
OpposeI disagree. The main subject is good in focus but much of the foreground isn't. the chosen DOF isn't working in my opinion.. --Milseburg 19:19, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Support Focus is well set and the contrast of blue-yellow-blue areas works perfectly for me. Without the foreground the impression of distance would get lost. Good composition. --Zinnmann 21:00, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Oppose Composition, colours, DOF are all fine. But there is some CA and too much sharpening. When that is fixed, I will switch to full support. I just don't like those black and white sharpening edges. They usually "fit" only for a certain resolution and often prevent meaningful use in deviating image size. --Smial 09:51, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Support Gives a very good impression of reality. Technically good imho. Greetings --Dirtsc 07:32, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Support Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 04:30, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry. Details missing (full of artifacts). Perspective correction necessary. Red car on the left disturbing. Categorization should be improved. Please do not use strong JPEG compression. --XRay 03:55, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
_Lelystad._07-03-2022._(actm.)_05.jpg)
_20.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
,_franja_marina_Teno-Rasca,_Tenerife,_Espa%C3%B1a,_2022-01-08,_DD_40.jpg)
,_franja_marina_Teno-Rasca,_Tenerife,_Espa%C3%B1a,_2022-01-06,_DD_70.jpg)
,_franja_marina_Teno-Rasca,_Tenerife,_Espa%C3%B1a,_2022-01-06,_DD_38.jpg)
,_franja_marina_Teno-Rasca,_Tenerife,_Espa%C3%B1a,_2022-01-06,_DD_37.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_1X7A0377.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_15-05-2022._(d.j.b)_02.jpg)
.jpg)
,_franja_marina_Teno-Rasca,_Tenerife,_Espa%C3%B1a,_2022-01-08,_DD_42.jpg)
,_franja_marina_Teno-Rasca,_Tenerife,_Espa%C3%B1a,_2022-01-06,_DD_15.jpg)
_-_img_01.jpg)
_1X7A0359.jpg)
_1X7A0372.jpg)
_Homura_1X7A0343.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
_underside_Phi_Phi.jpg){kind=link}
_1X7A0318.jpg){kind=link}
_underside_Phi_Phi.jpg)
Promoted --Robert Flogaus-Faust 22:12, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Promoted --Robert Flogaus-Faust 22:12, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Comment Indegenous tribal communities, like the Mishmis, have engaged in substainable hunting practices for hundreds of years. British colonisers and their native "royal" lackeys otoh, have successfully driven hundreds of species to extinction in very short periods of time. In any case, images are to be judged on quality, not on european morality, especially when it is the indegenous tribal groups at the forefront of conservation. UnpetitproleX 09:38, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Neutral Per Ikan Kekek and UnpetiproleX I support this image on Commons. It is a valuable depiction. The opposition based on personal dislikes is not justified. Many countries permit killing of wild animals, birds and fish under the guise of "sports". Incidentally, this image is from 2008 and by 2021 the tribals have reportedly found synthetic alternatives. I do not support the image for QI as I find the quality is not upto the mark. --Tagooty 04:04, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Question So no photographs of Nazi crimes or war could ever be considered quality images? Unbelievable. -- Ikan Kekek 14:52, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Declined --Robert Flogaus-Faust 22:11, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Declined --Robert Flogaus-Faust 22:11, 8 June 2022 (UTC)_1X7A0318.jpg)
