From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
This page is a translated version of a page Commons:Quality images candidates and the translation is 39% complete. Changes to the translation template, respectively the source language can be submitted through Commons:Quality images candidates and have to be approved by a translation administrator.

Other languages:
العربية • ‎čeština • ‎Cymraeg • ‎Deutsch • ‎English • ‎Canadian English • ‎español • ‎français • ‎日本語 • ‎latviešu • ‎मैथिली • ‎македонски • ‎Nederlands • ‎polski • ‎português • ‎русский • ‎shqip • ‎svenska • ‎українська • ‎中文

ここは「良質な画像」を選定するため候補画像を集めたページです。 「秀逸な画像」とは違う事に注意して下さい。 Additionally, if you just want some feedback on your pictures you can get that at Commons:Photography critiques.


「良質な画像」の目的は、コモンズのの活動の基盤となっている人々、すなわちコレクションの拡大につながる独特の画像を提供している個々の利用者を応援することにあります。 While featured pictures identifies the absolute best of all the images loaded into Commons, Quality images sets out to identify and encourage users' efforts in providing quality images to Commons.
Additionally, quality images should be a place to refer other users to when explaining methods for improving an image.




Below are the general guidelines for Quality images; more detailed criteria are available at Image guidelines.

  1. Copyright status. Quality image candidates have to be uploaded to Commons under a suitable license. The full license requirements are at Commons:Copyright tags.
  2. Images should comply with all Commons policies and practices, including Commons:Photographs of identifiable people.
  3. Quality images shall have a meaningful file name, be properly categorized and have an accurate description on the file page in one or more languages. It is preferred, but not mandatory, to include an English description.
  4. No advertisements or signatures in image. Copyright and authorship information of quality images should be located on the image page and may be in the image metadata, but should not interfere with image contents.


Pictures must have been created by a Wikimedian in order to be eligible for QI status. This means that pictures from, for example, Flickr are ineligible. (Note that Featured Pictures do not have this requirement.) Photographical reproductions of two-dimensional works of art, made by Wikimedians, are eligible (and should be licensed PD-old according to the Commons guidelines). If an image is promoted despite not being the creation of a Wikimedian, the QI status should be removed as soon as the mistake is detected.




Bitmapped images (JPEG, PNG, GIF, TIFF) should normally have at least 2 megapixels; reviewers may demand more for subjects that can be photographed easily. This is because images on Commons may be printed, viewed on monitors with very high resolution, or used in future media.

This does not apply to vector graphics (SVG).


Digital images can suffer various problems originating in image capture and processing, such as preventable noise, problems with JPEG compression, lack of information in shadow or highlight areas, or problems with capture of colors. All these issues should be handled correctly.


The arrangement of the subject within the image should contribute to the image. Foreground and background objects should not be distracting. Lighting and focus also contribute to the overall result; the subject should be sharp, uncluttered, and well-exposed.




Simply add a line of this form at the top of Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list Nominations section

File:画像名.jpg|{{/Nomination|簡潔に画像の説明を記入  --~~~~ |}}

The description shouldn't be more than a few words, and please leave a blank line between your new entry and any existing entries.

If you are nominating an image by another Wikimedian, include their username in the description as below

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description (by [[User:USERNAME|USERNAME]]) --~~~~ |}}

Note: there is a Gadget, QInominator, which makes nominations quicker. It adds a small "Nominate this image for QI" link at the top of every file page. Clicking the link adds the image to a list of potential candidates. When this list is completed, edit Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list. At the top of the edit window a green bar will be displayed. Clicking the bar inserts all potential candidates into the edit window.






How to update the status


  • その画像が品質を満たしていると判断したら、下記の様に該当箇所を書き換えます。
File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description --~~~~ | }}


File:画像名.jpg|{{/Promotion| 画像説明 --推薦者署名 | 評価理由 --~~~~ }}

つまりテンプレートを /Nomination から /Promotion へ切り替え、署名をし、可能ならコメントを記入するのみです。

  • 画像が基準を満たしていないと判断した場合は、下記の様に書き換えます。
File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description --~~~~ | }}


File:画像名.jpg|{{/Decline| 画像説明 --推薦者署名 | 評価理由 --~~~~ }}

In other words, change the template from /Nomination to /Decline and add your signature, possibly with a statement of the criteria under which the image failed (you can use titles of section from the guidelines). If there are many problems, please note only 2 or 3 of the most severe, or add multiple problems. When declining a nomination please do explain the reasons on the nominator's talk page - as a rule, be nice and encouraging! In the message you should give a more detailed explanation of your decision.

Note: Please evaluate the oldest images first and, if possible, for every picture you nominate, please review at least one of the other candidates.


If there are no objections in period of 2 days (exactly: 48 hours) from review, the image becomes promoted or fails, according to the review it received. If you have objection, just change its status to Discuss and it will be moved to the Consensual review section.

How to execute decision

QICbot automatically handles this 2 days after a decision has been made, and promoted images are cached in Commons:Quality Images/Recently promoted awaiting categorization before their automatic insertion in to appropriate Quality images pages.

If you believe that you have identified an exceptional image that is worthy of Featured picture status then also nominate the image at Commons:Featured picture candidates.

  • Images awaiting review show the nomination outlined in blue.
  • Images the reviewer has accepted show the nomination outlined in green
  • Images the reviewer has rejected show the nomination outlined in red


Nominated images which have not generated assessments either to promote nor to decline, or a consensus (equal opposition as support in consensual review) after 8 days on this page should be removed from this page without promotion, archived in Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives 8月 2016 and Category:Unassessed QI candidates added to the image.

Consensual review process

Consensual review is a catch all place used in the case the procedure described above is insufficient and needs discussion for more opinions to emerge.

How to ask for consensual review

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.

Please only send things to consensual review that have been reviewed as promoted/declined. If, as a reviewer, you can not make a decision, add your comments, but leave the candidate on this page.

Consensual review rules

See Commons:Quality images candidates#Rules

Page refresh: purge this page's cache


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]] 13:51, 26 8月 2016 (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.

August 26, 2016

August 25, 2016

August 24, 2016

August 23, 2016

August 22, 2016

August 21, 2016

August 20, 2016

August 19, 2016

August 18, 2016

August 12, 2016

August 7, 2016

August 5, 2016

Consensual review


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


Prismas Basálticos, Huasca de Ocampo, Hidalgo, México, 2013-10-10, DD 41.JPG

  • Nomination Basaltic Prisms, Huasca de Ocampo, Hidalgo, Mexico --Poco a poco 18:40, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very nice but unfortunately pretty blurred on top left --Moroder 20:55, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's a QI now. If you would just give me the option to improve it... --Poco a poco 21:07, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Moroder.--Jebulon 10:20, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support That small unsharpness up left doesn't bother me at all since it does not affect the main motif. The setting is already at f/8 and there is a lot of depth and long distcance to cover here. W.carter 11:54, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 06:26, 26 August 2016 (UTC)


Castell Llanymddyfri Sir Gaerfyrddin gyda cherflun o - LLywelyn ap Gruffydd Fychan 12.JPG

  • Nomination Castell Llanymddyfri, Sir Gaerfyrddin; sculpture of LLywelyn ap Gruffydd Fychan, Welsh Prince. --Llywelyn2000 07:13, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, this is not QI. Insufficient quality. --Hubertl 08:32, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I disagree, and think we could discuss, after some possible improvements. Let this one have a chance.--Jebulon 09:10, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the composition, but too dark - it should be reshot in nicer weather. Also, issues with sharpness and compression artifacts. --Yerpo 10:45, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl 06:27, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

File:PL-SK Kałków, Sanktuarium Matki Bożej Bolesnej Pani Świętokrzyskiej 2016-08-18--14-58-08-002.jpg

PL-SK Kałków, Sanktuarium Matki Bożej Bolesnej Pani Świętokrzyskiej 2016-08-18--14-58-08-002.jpg

  • Nomination Monument to 2010 Polish Air Force Tu-154 crash, Sanctuary in Kałków, Poland --Kroton 17:23, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 18:25, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Composition: tree (foreground) is disturbing--Lmbuga 20:31, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportThe trees are part of the monument site, four of them planted in formation around the plane, no way to avoid them. --W.carter 20:37, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Ok, but composition could be better, not QI IMO, sorry--Lmbuga 20:42, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki 21:09, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roletschek 06:15, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Parts of the plane are unsharp and overexposed --A.Savin 09:03, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as A.Savin. --Hubertl 09:25, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Also per A.Savin. --Peulle 10:22, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry,for the opposers --Livioandronico2013 21:31, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 21:37, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Timetable (day 8 after nomination)

木 18 8月 → 金 26 8月
金 19 8月 → 土 27 8月
土 20 8月 → 日 28 8月
日 21 8月 → 月 29 8月
月 22 8月 → 火 30 8月
火 23 8月 → 水 31 8月
水 24 8月 → 木 01 9月
木 25 8月 → 金 02 9月
金 26 8月 → 土 03 9月