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 are only working on this page if you have JavaScript enabled. If you do not have JavaScript enabled please manually sign with:

--[[User:yourname|yourname]] 08:09, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Please open a new date section if you are nominating an image after 0:00 o'clock (UTC).
  • Please leave a blank line between your new entry and any existing entries.
  • Please help in reviewing "old" nominations here below first, many are still unassessed.
Thank you.

add nomination below this line, inside the gallery tags, in the following form — new nominations

December 11, 2018[edit]

December 10, 2018[edit]

December 9, 2018[edit]

December 8, 2018[edit]

December 7, 2018[edit]

December 6, 2018[edit]

December 5, 2018[edit]

December 4, 2018[edit]

December 3, 2018[edit]

December 2, 2018[edit]

December 1, 2018[edit]

November 30, 2018[edit]

November 29, 2018[edit]

November 28, 2018[edit]

November 27, 2018[edit]

November 21, 2018[edit]

November 20, 2018[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:Gerhard_Spitzer_(MA_der_Volkshilfe_Wien)_HaJN_4822.jpg[edit]

Gerhard Spitzer (MA der Volkshilfe Wien) HaJN 4822.jpg

  • Nomination Gerhard Spitzer (MA der Volkshilfe Wien) HaJN 4822.jpg --Hans-Jürgen Neubert 10:26, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportGood quality. --Cayambe 16:49, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeThe categorization must be better --Ermell 22:33, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   ----Ermell 07:38, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

File:20180929_UCI_Road_World_Championships_Innsbruck_Women_Elite_Road_Race_Omer_Shapira_850_7606.jpg[edit]

20180929 UCI Road World Championships Innsbruck Women Elite Road Race Omer Shapira 850 7606.jpg {{/Discuss|2018 UCI Road World Championships Innsbruck/Tirol Women Elite Road Race. Picture shows: Omer Shapira of Israel --Granada 11:01, 9 December 2018 (UTC)|

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Isiwal 13:51, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The strong tilt plays against the normal inclination --Basile Morin 13:58, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The orange cyclist is completely blurry. Also tilt compromises the overall image :) ---EurovisionNim 05:09, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't mind the tilt here, but the right rider being so out of focus really is a distraction, given that she is so clearly a part of the composition.--Peulle 08:26, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I can accept depth of field as a way of design. Perhaps the blur could have been a little stronger. --Smial 09:47, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The goal was to capture the motion in the turning weels, so I've set the shutter speed to 1/250s thus had to close the aperture. --Granada 10:41, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   ----Hans-Jürgen Neubert 03:51, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

File:12437_SC-NZM_Rajdhani_07-11-2018.jpg[edit]

12437 SC-NZM Rajdhani 07-11-2018.jpg

  • Nomination 12437 SC - NZM Rajdhani Express hauled by a WAP7 of LGD near Kazipet Junction --Nikhil B 02:22, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but I think that the quality is quite poor, it's only 3 megapixels and not sharp even though downsized like that even though do --Podzemnik 08:37, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
@Podzemnik the picture is not downsized, but heavily cropped to get the composition right--Nikhil B 15:22, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
@Nikhil B Thank you for the explanation. However, I don't think that the right way to take these type of pictures is to take a shot on 98 mm focal length with 200mm lens and then to crop it so much. Let's see what other people think. --Podzemnik 17:14, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose insufficient quality,--Fischer.H 17:56, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose insufficient quality. -- Ikan Kekek 23:02, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Ikan Kekek 23:02, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

File:12625_Kerala_Express_25112018_2.jpg[edit]

12625 Kerala Express 25112018 2.jpg

  • Nomination 12625 TVC - NDLS Kerala Express with LHB coaches powered by RPM WAP-7 near Warangal --Nikhil B 02:22, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient quality. Heavily downsized, noisy --Podzemnik 08:37, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
@Podzemnik the picture is not downsized, but heavily cropped to get the composition right--Nikhil B 15:22, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose insufficient quality,--Fischer.H 17:57, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose insufficient quality. -- Ikan Kekek 23:03, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Ikan Kekek 23:03, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

File:12625_Kerala_Express_25112018.jpg[edit]

12625 Kerala Express 25112018.jpg

  • Nomination TVC - NDLS Kerala Express near Warangal --Nikhil B 02:22, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Vengolis 03:07, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I disagree. We're getting here under 10 % off camera's megapixels --Podzemnik 08:37, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
@Podzemnik the picture is not downsized, but heavily cropped to get the composition right--Nikhil B 15:22, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose insufficient quality,--Fischer.H 17:59, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose insufficient quality. -- Ikan Kekek 23:04, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Ikan Kekek 23:04, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

File:South-West_from_Waterloo_Bridge_at_Night.jpg[edit]

South-West from Waterloo Bridge at Night.jpg

  • Nomination Long exposure panorama of the view South-West from Waterloo Bridge at Night.--Prosthetic Head 21:18, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 00:06, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I disagree. Parts have a sligt tilt to the left I think. The very right part isn´t QI. I propose to cut it out. The motion blur of the ships isn´t ideal. --Milseburg 09:21, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Milseburg (talk) 11:53, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Hamburg_Sandhoehe_10.jpg[edit]

Hamburg Sandhoehe 10.jpg

  • Nomination Hamburg-Finkenwerder, Sandhoehe 10, residential building --KaiBorgeest 21:47, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Quite good and interesting in comparison with 2012. But the half garbage bins in the front are distracting. Is that there normal place? Was there no way to take this shot differently?--Milseburg 13:14, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
They disturbed me too, but there was no place to roll them decently away. And there has been some traffic, so putting them in the middle of the small road has not been an option. Since there are bins with different colour markings, which are probably emptied in different days, this seems to be their regular place.--KaiBorgeest 17:05, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I can not make friends with the garbage cans. But it is not a clear case. So I send it in CR.--Milseburg 10:43, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Quality is IMO acceptable, and I really don't think that aesthetic objections to having garbage cans in the picture are relevant. I mean, OK, if they distract you from the main subject (the 2 houses) so much, but they don't distract me much at all but are simply part of a residential scene that I accept with no problem. -- Ikan Kekek 23:10, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support, bins aren't a really big deal. Its a house really? Why should that play a factor in the quality. Nice shot !! --EurovisionNim 05:12, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. Two steps to the left and a bit shorter focal length would have been better... --Smial 10:07, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --EurovisionNim 13:47, 10 December 2018 (UTC))

File:Teatro_marmoreo_fontana_Filippo_V_lato_dettaglio_Palermo.jpg[edit]

Teatro marmoreo fontana Filippo V lato dettaglio Palermo.jpg {{/Discuss|The Teatro marmoreo fountain in Palermo. --Moroder 12:06, 20 November 2018 (UTC)|

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too many unsharp areas, and sky has a little noise --Daniel Case 04:19, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I disagree --Moroder 06:36, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very large file (I actually had trouble opening it earlier), and quite good enough, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek 04:35, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roletschek 21:34, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schadeǃ Wunderschöne Farben, das müssten andere erst mal hinbekommen. Der Ausschnitt ist ein Teil der größeren Ansicht, manche Kommentare erschliessen sich mir nicht.Hans-Jürgen Neubert 13:00, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose der oberere Teil des Bildes nicht vorhanden,--Fischer.H 18:08, 9 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Fischer.H. Why landscape orientation? --Smial 10:23, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose top is too tightly cropped --EurovisionNim 13:26, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's a detail as explained --Moroder 21:23, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Decline?   ----EurovisionNim 13:26, 10 December 2018 (UTC)