Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list

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

Nominations[edit]

Due to the Mediawiki parser code ~~~~ signatures will only work on this page if you have JavaScript enabled. If you do not have JavaScript enabled please manually sign with:

--[[User:yourname|yourname]] 13:50, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Please open a new date section if you are nominating an image after 0:00 o'clock (UTC)
  • Please insert a blank line between your new entry and any existing entries
  • Please help in reviewing "old" nominations here below first; many are still unassessed
  • If you see terms with which you are unfamiliar, please see explanations at Photography terms


August 9, 2021[edit]

August 8, 2021[edit]

August 7, 2021[edit]

August 6, 2021[edit]

August 5, 2021[edit]

August 4, 2021[edit]

August 3, 2021[edit]

August 2, 2021[edit]

August 1, 2021[edit]

July 31, 2021[edit]

July 29, 2021[edit]

July 24, 2021[edit]

Consensual review[edit]

Rules

These rules are in accordance with the procedures normally followed in this section. If you don’t agree with them please feel free to propose changes.

  • To ask for consensual review, just change the /Promotion, /Decline to /Discuss and add your comments immediately following the review. An automatic bot will move it to the consensual review section within one day. Alternatively move the image line from the main queue to Consensual Review/Images and follow the instructions in the edit window.
  • You can move an image here if you contest the decision of the reviewer or have doubts about its eligibility (in which case an 'oppose' is assumed). In any case, please explain your reasons. Our QICBot will move it for you. When the bot moves it, you might have to revisit the nomination and expand your review into the Consensual Review format and add "votes".
  • The decision is taken by majority of opinions, including the one of the first reviewer and excluding the nominator's. After a minimum period of 48 hours since the last entry, the decision will be registered at the end of the text using the template {{QICresult}} and then executed, according to the Guidelines.
Using {{support}} or {{oppose}} will make it easier to count your vote.
Votes by anonymous contributors aren't counted
  • In case of draw, or if no additional opinions are given other than the first reviewer's, the nomination can be closed as inconclusive after 8 days, counted from its entry.
  • Turn any existing comments into bullet points—add Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose and Symbol support vote.svg Support if necessary.
  • Add a comment explaining why you've moved the image here - be careful to stay inside the braces.
  • Preview and save with a sensible edit summary like "+Image:Example.jpg".


Consensual Review[edit]

File:Eastern_Tiger_Swallowtale_Feeding.jpg[edit]

Eastern Tiger Swallowtale Feeding.jpg

  • Nomination Eastern tiger swallowtale feeding on a lily. --John Stockla 17:16, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Discussion
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Ermell 19:35, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very little in focus. Mostly obscured. --Charlesjsharp 17:25, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

File:'t_Hof_van_Brussel_(DSC_1869).jpg[edit]

't Hof van Brussel (DSC 1869).jpg

  • Nomination 't Hof van Brussel during golden hour. Castle in Woluwe-Saint-Lambert, Belgium --Trougnouf 23:15, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry! Outblown sky and chromatic noise on the door (left). --Steindy 00:24, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
    The sky wasn't blown (in either RAW or post-process). Still, I lowered its exposure a bit so that the gradient is more visible. I can't find the CA you are talking of, can you make a note? --Trougnouf 09:10, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry: Disturbing luminance noise in the dark areas and visible violett chromatic aberration at the top right. --F. Riedelio 07:07, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

  • ✓ Done I've increased CA removal strength which gets rid of those purple branches and increased denoising threshold on everything that's not the castle. --Trougnouf 20:25, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support IMO good quality now. --F. Riedelio 06:16, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Strange vertical lines in the lower left on the trees and door. Not currently a QI. -- Ikan Kekek 21:18, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Indeed. I couldn't see them on the door (different monitor and/or because the actual doors seem to have vertical lines) but they were definitely visible on the trees here. These lines were impossible to get rid off, turns out I pushed the dynamic range farther than the camera could handle trying to show details that shouldn't be visible so I toned it down significantly and they seem to be gone. Let me know if that's not the case. --Trougnouf 22:48, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I still see them, particularly in the trees, though much more subtly. -- Ikan Kekek 07:37, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question Do you think it'd be better to remove the lines completely by making the trees darker or the lines are subtle enough that it's better to keep the details visible? --Trougnouf 14:52, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Steindy 23:30, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

File:20210718_Pleurotus_ostreatus_21-35.jpg[edit]

20210718 Pleurotus ostreatus 21-35.jpg

  • Nomination Cultivated pleurotus ostreatus (Grey Oyster Mushroom) --Zinnmann 17:09, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Discussion
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Informative, but the combination of limited DoF + artificially made background does not work in my opinion. --Nefronus 15:48, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
    This is a focus stacked image taken with a macro lens. There's no artificial background. Just the wall about a meter behind the growing kit. --Zinnmann 18:52, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks fine to me. Rodhullandemu 18:44, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality IMO. --F. Riedelio 06:49, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Palauenc05 07:23, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 21:20, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Ikan Kekek 21:20, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

File:FC_Admira_Wacker_Mödling_vs._FC_Red_Bull_Salzburg_(Cup)_2017-04-26_(129).jpg[edit]

FC Admira Wacker Mödling vs. FC Red Bull Salzburg (Cup) 2017-04-26 (129).jpg

  • Nomination Wanderson Maciel Sousa Campos, footballlayer of FC Red Bull Salzburg. --Steindy 00:06, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Isiwal 05:13, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Hand cropped --Charlesjsharp 18:59, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Sandro Halank 18:04, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Palauenc05 07:24, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Sandro Halank 18:04, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Cabbage_white_in_Central_Park_(25672).jpg[edit]

Cabbage white in Central Park (25672).jpg

  • Nomination Cabbage white in Central Park --Rhododendrites 16:16, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Discussion
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Knopik-som 21:47, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not with the shadows --Charlesjsharp 19:02, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good quality and no loss of quality in the shadows. -- Ikan Kekek 14:51, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Charlesjsharp. --Fischer.H 17:12, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Steindy 23:00, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK for me. --Palauenc05 07:25, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Charlesjsharp.--GRDN711 12:46, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support Good enough for me as a QI. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 13:02, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Running total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Promote?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 12:59, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Cabbage_white_in_Central_Park_(25676).jpg[edit]

Cabbage white in Central Park (25676).jpg

  • Nomination Cabbage white in Central Park --Rhododendrites 16:16, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Discussion
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Ermell 20:47, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not with the shadows for a common species --Charlesjsharp 19:04, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality and the shadows are OK. -- Ikan Kekek 14:52, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Steindy 22:56, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Palauenc05 07:26, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Charlesjsharp. --GRDN711 12:46, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promote?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 13:03, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

File:20180512_B-1B_Lancer_Dyess_AFB_Air_Show_2018_43.jpg[edit]

20180512 B-1B Lancer Dyess AFB Air Show 2018 43.jpg

  • Nomination A B-1B Lancer at the Dyess AFB Air Show in May 2018. --Balon Greyjoy 06:09, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. Need to be a bit sharpen --Wilfredor 23:45, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose soft, poor light --Charlesjsharp 19:10, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Charles. --Kallerna 17:08, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The bottom of the object is too dark. --F. Riedelio 06:45, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 10:01, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

File:20180512_B-1B_Lancer_Dyess_AFB_Air_Show_2018_45.jpg[edit]

20180512 B-1B Lancer Dyess AFB Air Show 2018 45.jpg

  • Nomination A B-1B Lancer at the Dyess AFB Air Show in May 2018. --Balon Greyjoy 06:09, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. Need to be a bit sharpen --Wilfredor 23:45, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose soft, poor light --Charlesjsharp 19:10, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Charles. --Kallerna 17:08, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The bottom of the object is too dark. --F. Riedelio 06:48, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 10:02, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

File:20180512_B-1B_Lancer_Dyess_AFB_Air_Show_2018_46.jpg[edit]

20180512 B-1B Lancer Dyess AFB Air Show 2018 46.jpg

  • Nomination A B-1B Lancer at the Dyess AFB Air Show in May 2018. --Balon Greyjoy 06:09, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. Need to be a bit sharpen --Wilfredor 23:45, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose soft, poor light --Charlesjsharp 19:10, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Charles. --Kallerna 17:09, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The bottom of the object is too dark. --F. Riedelio 06:49, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 10:02, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

File:20180512_B-1B_Lancer_Dyess_AFB_Air_Show_2018_47.jpg[edit]

20180512 B-1B Lancer Dyess AFB Air Show 2018 47.jpg

  • Nomination A B-1B Lancer at the Dyess AFB Air Show in May 2018. --Balon Greyjoy 06:09, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. Need to be a bit sharpen --Wilfredor 23:45, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose soft, poor lighting --Charlesjsharp 19:05, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Charles. --Kallerna 17:09, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The bottom of the object is too dark. --F. Riedelio 06:50, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 10:03, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Päijänne_sunrise.jpg[edit]

Päijänne sunrise.jpg

  • Nomination Sunrise in Päijänne, near Kalkkinen canal. --Kallerna 19:12, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Discussion
    Horizontal correction necessary. --Steindy 22:05, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
    What do you mean? I don't think it is tilted. --Kallerna 07:15, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support I think it looks fine. There is no way to tell whether the "horizon" should be straight or the distance varies on each side. --Trougnouf 07:31, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It was slightly tilted to the left. In the center of the image, objects and their reflections should be perpendicular to each other. I uploaded an adjusted version. If that's not ok, please simply revert. --Zinnmann 11:30, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Thanks! --Kallerna 17:07, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Fischer.H 17:15, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Knopik-som 03:55, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. The horizon is horizontal. --F. Riedelio 06:58, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality, nice photo. -- Ikan Kekek 21:21, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Running total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Ikan Kekek 21:21, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Close_wing_Mud-Puddling_of_Athyma_perius_(Linnaeus,_1758)_–_Common_Sergeant_WLB_DSC_4660.jpg[edit]

Close wing Mud-Puddling of Athyma perius (Linnaeus, 1758) – Common Sergeant WLB DSC 4660.jpg

  • Nomination Close wing Mud-Puddling of Athyma perius (Linnaeus, 1758) – Common Sergeant. (by Amarttya Bagchi) --Atudu 11:59, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Discussion
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Quite good apart from the unsharp wings (but we shouldn’t rely on focus stacks). (Discuss?) --Nefronus 15:53, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not sharp enough --Charlesjsharp 19:08, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Quite good. --Steindy 22:53, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose by Charlesjsharp. Also quite a lot of background noise. Sorry. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 09:23, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Seems good enough to me. -- Ikan Kekek 21:24, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promote?   --Ikan Kekek 21:24, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Kiha40-500_Tadami-line.jpg[edit]

Kiha40-500 Tadami-line.jpg

  • Nomination Kiha 40-500 series diesel train on the Tadami Line. --MaedaAkihiko 03:55, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Discussion
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good composition, but very low resolution for this kind of photograph and IMO not sharp enough. Possibly a VIC. --XRay 04:45, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Over 5 mp is big enough for me, sharpness just acceptable, but an English file description would be fine. --Palauenc05 07:39, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I withdraw my support vote as there is no reaction to my request. --Palauenc05 06:54, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done I added an English description from the existing data (including an automated translation of the Japanese description). --Robert Flogaus-Faust 09:16, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentThank you for the translation.--MaedaAkihiko 05:39, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Compression artefacts. --Peulle 14:26, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support I see no compression artefacts. What I see is the heat in the air form the diesel engine. --Steindy 22:41, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support by Steindy. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 09:16, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A little small, but straightforwardly good quality to me. MaedaAkihiko, do you have a larger version of this file? -- Ikan Kekek 21:26, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentI've updated it with the largest image possible, but there's nothing bigger.--MaedaAkihiko 05:39, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Much appreciated. Larger and still solid quality to my eyes. Please upload your other photos in full size. -- Ikan Kekek 07:39, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promote?   --Ikan Kekek 21:26, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

File:林安泰古厝民俗文化館入口.jpg[edit]

林安泰古厝民俗文化館入口.jpg

  • Nomination 林安泰古厝民俗文化館入口. By User:Outlookxp --Cun Cun 08:58, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Discussion
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Harsh shadows --Trougnouf 15:55, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Good enough to me. -- Ikan Kekek 06:39, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Good enough to me. --MB-one 20:53, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose perspective. --Smial 13:50, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --MB-one 20:53, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

File:Neunkirchen_am_Brand_Kirche_Fresco-20210411-RM-160944.jpg[edit]

Neunkirchen am Brand Kirche Fresco-20210411-RM-160944.jpg

  • Nomination Holy water font in the Catholic Church of St. Michael in Neunkirchen am Brand around 1520 --Ermell 10:27, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Moroder 17:36, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This motiv is really hard to take a good picture of. It's not really sharp, out of focus or maybe to high ISO number. There are also some RGB spots which maybe is from the sensor of the camera. --Goran tek-en 19:30, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sharp at 70%. -- Ikan Kekek 21:32, 1 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Found one green, one red, one blue hot pixel artifact. If repaired, I'll change to "pro". The depicted fresco has rather low contrast. Such images appear often less sharp than images with high contrast. But this is sharp enough, regarding the resolution. --Smial 12:31, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support after rework. Thx. --Smial 13:48, 9 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good for me --Commonists 19:38, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Images with obvious, easily fixable, purely technical errors cannot become QI, in my humble opinion. I have added notes to the image and hope @Ermell: eliminates these shortcomings. --Smial 10:36, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Smial. --Nefronus 20:06, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support I see 4 hot pixels. They are easy to repair. Therefore no reason to decline. --Steindy 22:51, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Smial:@Nefronus:@Goran tek-en: Sorry, a bit late but I could find three and fixed them. Thanks for the reviews.--Ermell 08:31, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Promote?   --Commonists 19:38, 3 August 2021 (UTC)