Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives May 07 2023

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Aguja_de_mar_(Syngnathus_acus),_Parque_natural_de_la_Arrábida,_Portugal,_2022-07-19,_DD_16.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Greater pipefish (Syngnathus acus), Arrábida National Park, Portugal --Poco a poco 09:10, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Sorry, but I think left side is too blurred and not sharp enough. --Halavar 09:54, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
  • The tail is moving, I don't think that is a deal-breaker for this kind of tricky image. Please, let's discuss. --Poco a poco 10:07, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support I agree. -- Ikan Kekek 17:07, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Eyes are sharp.--Ermell 19:01, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support --Palauenc05 20:22, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Augustgeyler 00:03, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

File:Leona_Popovic_Grandvalira_2023_SL_1st_run_(9).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Leona Popović (CRO), Women's Slalom, 1st run, Grandvalira 2023. --Tournasol7 04:11, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:21, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose weak composition --Charlesjsharp 21:19, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support I don't see a problem with the composition; it's a fairly close up image of an athlete taken from the side. Commons need side views too, not just portraits.--Peulle 07:31, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Good sport image, I see nothing wrong --LexKurochkin 13:52, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support per others, especially Peulle's points. -- Ikan Kekek 17:09, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Augustgeyler 00:03, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

File:Leaning_Tower_of_Pisa_(51352272775).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Leaning Tower of Pisa, Italy --DnaX 09:06, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Halavar 09:46, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Not a bad image, but image probably created not by a Commons user and unfortunately the flag is croppd --PantheraLeo1359531 15:42, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Ineligible.--Peulle 07:28, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Peulle --LexKurochkin 13:53, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per PantheraLeo1359531 --Milseburg (talk) 19:03, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Augustgeyler 00:02, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

File:Resting_position_of_Argiope_sp._on_its_signature_web_at_Jayanti_Riverbed.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Resting position of Argiope sp. on its signature web at Jayanti Riverbed --ManaskaMukhopadhyay 08:11, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --BigDom 08:45, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
    • Changed my mind based on comments below. BigDom 15:36, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose web excellent but spider blurred --Charlesjsharp 21:07, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
  • Weak  Oppose per Charlesjsharp. Low DOF and/or wrong focus. If this were a photo with significantly more than 6 or 12 MPixels, I'd say: Ok, you can still scale it for an A4 print so that it appears sharp enough, but it unfortunately only has a little more than 4 Mpixels, and that's where you see the flaw in a high-quality print. Too bad, because the composition is very nice and also the lighting is appropriate. VI? --Smial 09:46, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Augustgeyler 23:59, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

File:Grave_of_the_Costin_Petrescu_Family_in_the_Bellu_Cemetery_in_Bucharest,_Romania_(02).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Grave of the Costin Petrescu Family in the Bellu Cemetery in Bucharest, Romania --Neoclassicism Enthusiast 06:51, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Very good composition. But the image lacks sharpness and detail. --Augustgeyler 07:02, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support. In my opinion it is sharp enough and I miss no detail. We should not overdo. Let's discuss please. -- Spurzem 18:17, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Sharp enough IMO.--Ermell 19:04, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support --Palauenc05 20:24, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Augustgeyler 23:57, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

File:399_Calea_Griviței,_Bucharest_(03).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination 399 Calea Griviței, Bucharest --Neoclassicism Enthusiast 16:22, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Chainwit. 01:43, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The image shows lens distortion (at the edges of the building) and its level of detail is too low. --Augustgeyler 13:44, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Augustgeyler. --Sebring12Hrs 07:21, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Augustgeyler 18:27, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

File:Monument_aux_morts_des_Première_et_Seconde_Guerres_mondiales_(Sundhoffen).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Monument to the fallen of the First and Second World Wars in Sundhoffen (Haut-Rhin, France). --Gzen92 06:44, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Comment The image looks slightly  Underexposed. Fixable? --Augustgeyler 07:29, 26 April 2023 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Gzen92 08:04, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment It improved. Now it looks brighter but still shows very dark shadows. Can you improve them as well? --Augustgeyler 05:18, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Better ? Gzen92 13:17, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment  Thank you. I think you got the most out of it now. The shadows are improved. Exposure is corrected. But I still can't support the nomination: I think now with good light some compression artefacts and lack of detail are visible. But lets see what other reviewers think. Feel free to move it to discussion. --Augustgeyler 18:29, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Good enoug for QI.--Ermell 19:10, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --August Geyler (talk) 23:55, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

File:Transat_Paprec_2023_01.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Paprec Transat Sailing Race leaders leaving Concarneau (Brittany). --Bzh-99 18:49, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Not sharp enough. Also tilted CW. --MB-one 20:45, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support. Beautiful image, good composition, for me sharp enough. Please discuss -- Spurzem 18:59, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Very good composition. But I agree with MB-one. Especially the boats are motion blurred. --Augustgeyler 06:59, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose +1.--Peulle 07:19, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Augustgeyler and MB-one --LexKurochkin 15:08, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --August Geyler (talk) 18:25, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

File:Hotel_Timisoara,_Timișoara_(2023)_-_IMG_05.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Hotel Timișoara, Timișoara, Romania --Chainwit. 09:13, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Fabian Roudra Baroi 02:42, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The image lacks detail and sharpness. --Augustgeyler 07:02, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Good enough for QI. --Palauenc05 17:43, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support I think so too -- Spurzem 11:46, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per August: upper reaches of the hotel are not sharp enough, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek 17:29, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --Augustgeyler 23:54, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

File:Hotel_Continental,_Timișoara_(2023)_-_IMG_01.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Hotel Continental, Timișoara, Romania --Chainwit. 09:13, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Good composition. But the image has compression artifacts und lacks detail. --Augustgeyler 07:02, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support I can't see those artifacts. --Palauenc05 17:43, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
  • Stitching error at the left rim. --Palauenc05 11:00, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Good image, I see no lack. -- Spurzem 11:50, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Compression problems, especially heavy on the left edge of the image.--Peulle 10:25, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Low level of detail and too strong processing, as usual for iPhone --LexKurochkin 10:50, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The hotel looks pretty decent to me, but there is weirdness and a bad crop on the left, and parts of the road/driveway look bad. -- Ikan Kekek 17:32, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Augustgeyler 18:27, 6 May 2023 (UTC)