Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives March 01 2020

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Teatro_Indiana_Repertory,_Indianápolis,_Estados_Unidos,_2012-10-22,_DD_02.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Indiana Repertory Theater, Indianapolis, USA --Poco a poco 07:19, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Tournasol7 07:29, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Some parts of the lit facade is overexposed. We should discuss it. --Peulle 13:38, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support I quite like the light, it's interesting. --Podzemnik 18:25, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Per Podzemnik. --Streetdeck 02:21, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support - Good high-quality photo and obvious QI to my eyes. -- Ikan Kekek 05:10, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support A small part at the top left is overexposed, but overall the image is very good. In 2012, the dynamic range of most digital cameras was quite lower than today. --Aristeas 06:22, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Seven Pandas 21:36, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Puerto_de_Gibraltar,_2015-12-09,_DD_07.JPG

[edit]

  • Nomination Port of Gibraltar --Poco a poco 18:36, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Insufficient quality. very noisy and few details, possibly due to censor limitations --Wilfredor 19:00, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
  • ✓ New version Poco a poco 20:57, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
  • No reaction, hopefully you don't mind if I move it to CR --Poco a poco 21:12, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
  • CA, also strong distortion. Sorry but IMHO its not QI, sorry for the delay --Wilfredor 22:20, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Clearly not a QI, for the reasons Wilfredor mentioned. What's going on with your work these days, Poco? This really is far below the excellent quality you usually deliver.--Peulle 09:37, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Peulle... --Podzemnik 18:20, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Seven Pandas 21:35, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Zugspitzbahn_en_Theresienhöhe,_Múnich,_Alemania,_2013-03-30,_DD_01.JPG

[edit]

  • Nomination Zugspitzbahn in Theresienhöhe, Munich, Germany --Poco a poco 14:02, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Blown highlights and CA. --Peulle 20:56, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
  • ✓ New version I really believe that this image is QI, can you please have another look now? Poco a poco 21:21, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
  • No reaction, hopefully you don't mind if I move it to CR --Poco a poco 21:12, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Yes, looks OK now.--Peulle 09:32, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support despite somewhat tight crop at the bottom. The sloping concrete base should have been shown completely. At first sight it is not clear whether the photo is tilted or the locomotive... -- Smial 10:32, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support --Podzemnik (talk) 18:22, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Seven Pandas 21:34, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Gurung_(Tamu)_Kids_at_Dana,Nepal-Wiki_Loves_Villages-0605.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Gurung (Tamu) Kids at Dana,Nepal.This image was uploaded as part of Wiki Loves Villages. --Bijay chaurasia 10:42, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Oppose Insufficient quality. Lovely but satured --Wilfredor 19:08, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
     Support I can not say that it is satured (?) or saturated. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 12:17, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Slight oversaturation could be accepted, but: wrong focus. Should have been focused on the girl's face, not the boy's ear.
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Seven Pandas 21:34, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

File:AU_1000_SP_Armaturenbrett_(2008-07-12_Sp).JPG

[edit]

  • Nomination Steering wheel and dashboard of a AU 1000 Sp which was built from 1958 to 1965 -- Spurzem 17:21, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Insufficient quality. The glass of the door is distracting, in addition to chromatic aberration at the top of the steering wheel --Wilfredor 19:02, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support I disagree. o.k. for me. --Ermell 19:13, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Not a perfect studio shot, but regarding the lighting situation very good. --Smial 12:38, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support - Good for me. The reflection of the jeans is distracting, but not enough to detract from the clear depiction of the steering wheel and dashboard. -- Ikan Kekek 09:31, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Fine 4 me. --Palauenc05 21:24, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Seven Pandas 21:33, 29 February 2020 (UTC)