Commons:Kwaliteitsafbeeldingen kandidaten

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 16% 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.

Outdated translations are marked like this.
Ga naar nominaties
Other languages:
العربية • ‎čeština • ‎Cymraeg • ‎Deutsch • ‎English • ‎Canadian English • ‎español • ‎français • ‎Bahasa Indonesia • ‎日本語 • ‎latviešu • ‎मैथिली • ‎македонски • ‎Nederlands • ‎polski • ‎português • ‎русский • ‎shqip • ‎svenska • ‎українська • ‎中文
float

Dit zijn kandidaten om een kwaliteitsafbeelding te worden. Onthoud dat dit niet hetzelfde is als een uitgelichte afbeelding. Bovendien, als je gewoon wat feedback wilt op je afbeeldingen, kun je dat krijgen op Commons:Photography critiques.

Doel

The purpose of quality images is to encourage the people that are the foundation of Commons, the individual users who provide the unique images that expand this collection. 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.

Richtlijnen

Alle genomineerde afbeeldingen moeten het werk van Commonsgebruikers zijn.

Voor nominatoren

Hieronder staan de algemene richtlijnen voor kwaliteitsafbeeldingen. Gedetailleerde criteria zijn beschikbaar op richtlijnen voor afbeeldingen.


Vereisten voor afbeeldingspagina
  1. Copyrightstatus. Kandidaten voor kwaliteitsafbeelding moeten worden geüpload onder een geschikte licentie. De volledige vereisten zijn beschikbaar op Commons:Licentiesjablonen.
  2. Afbeeldingen moeten voldoen aan alle richtlijnen en voorwaarden van Commons, inclusief Commons:Photographs of identifiable people.

Kwaliteitsafbeeldingen moeten gecategoriseerd zijn en een goede titel en omschrijving hebben. Dit moet ook taxonomische naamgeving bevatten voor organisme.

  1. Geen advertenties of handtekeningen in de afbeelding. Copyright en auteurschap van kwaliteitsafbeeldingen moeten zich op de afbeeldingspagina bevingen en mogen in de metadata van de afbeelding staan, maar niet in de afbeelding zelf.


Maker

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.

Technical requirements

More detailed criteria are available at Commons:Image guidelines.


Resolution

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 rule excludes vector graphics (SVG) or computer-generated images that have been constructed with freely-licensed or open software programs as noted in the image's description.


Image quality

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.


Composition and lighting

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.


Value

Our main goal is to encourage quality images being contributed to Wikicommons, valuable for Wikimedia and other projects.


How to nominate

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

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description  --~~~~ |}}

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.


Number of nominations

Carefully select your best images to nominate. No more than five images per day can be added by a single nominator.


Evaluating images

Any registered user whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits, other than the author and the nominator, can review a nomination.
When evaluating images the reviewer should consider the same guidelines as the nominator.


How to review

How to update the status

Carefully review the image. Open it in full resolution, and check if the quality criteria are met.

  • If you decide to promote the nomination, change the relevant line from
File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description --~~~~ | }}

to

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Promotion|Very short description --Nominators signature |Why you liked it. --~~~~}}

In other words, change the template from /Nomination to /Promotion and add your signature, possibly with some short comment.

  • If you decide to decline the nomination, change the relevant line from
File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description --~~~~ | }}

to

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Decline|Very short description --Nominators signature |Why you didn't like it. --~~~~}}

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.


Grace period and promotion

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


Unassessed images (nomination outlined in blue)

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 December 17 2017 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


Contents

Nominations

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]] 12:25, 17 december 2017 (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.
Other languages:
العربية • ‎čeština • ‎Cymraeg • ‎Deutsch • ‎English • ‎Canadian English • ‎español • ‎français • ‎Bahasa Indonesia • ‎日本語 • ‎latviešu • ‎मैथिली • ‎македонски • ‎Nederlands • ‎polski • ‎português • ‎русский • ‎shqip • ‎svenska • ‎українська • ‎中文

December 17, 2017

December 16, 2017

December 15, 2017

December 14, 2017

December 13, 2017

December 12, 2017

December 11, 2017

December 10, 2017

December 9, 2017

December 8, 2017

December 5, 2017

December 4, 2017

December 2, 2017

Consensual review

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

File:Luebeck_04_2008_047.jpg

Luebeck 04 2008 047.jpg Commons:Quality images candidates/nl/Discuss

File:15-07-31-MilwaukeeRiver_IMG_1097.jpg

15-07-31-MilwaukeeRiver IMG 1097.jpg Commons:Quality images candidates/nl/Discuss

File:15-08-SchmitzCargobull_IMG_1087.JPG

15-08-SchmitzCargobull IMG 1087.JPG Commons:Quality images candidates/nl/Discuss

File:15-08-04-Minocqua-Daniela-Kloth-IMG_1367.JPG

15-08-04-Minocqua-Daniela-Kloth-IMG 1367.JPG Commons:Quality images candidates/nl/Discuss

File:Place_Dailly_-_Arret_STIB_Brabanconne.jpg

Place Dailly - Arret STIB Brabanconne.jpg Commons:Quality images candidates/nl/Discuss

File:Teletón 2017 - Kika Silva - 03.jpg

Teletón 2017 - Kika Silva - 03.jpg Commons:Quality images candidates/nl/Discuss

File: Trier, Dom - Marienkapelle, Krippe (um 1740).JPG

Trier, Dom - Marienkapelle, Krippe (um 1740).JPG Commons:Quality images candidates/nl/Discuss

File:Андріївська_церква,_Андріївський_узвіз_-_1.jpg

Андріївська церква, Андріївський узвіз - 1.jpg Commons:Quality images candidates/nl/Discuss

File:Генуезька_фортеця_(Судак)._Панорама.jpg

Генуезька фортеця (Судак). Панорама.jpg Commons:Quality images candidates/nl/Discuss

File:«Флігель_Тараса_Шевченка»_(Яготин).jpg

«Флігель Тараса Шевченка» (Яготин).jpg Commons:Quality images candidates/nl/Discuss

File:Common_kestrel_(Falco_tinnunculus)_female_India.jpg

Common kestrel (Falco tinnunculus) female India.jpg Commons:Quality images candidates/nl/Discuss

File:2017-11-16 Michael Müller (Wiki Loves Parliaments 2017 in Berlin) by Sandro Halank–2.jpg

2017-11-16 Michael Müller (Wiki Loves Parliaments 2017 in Berlin) by Sandro Halank–2.jpg Commons:Quality images candidates/nl/Discuss

File:2017-11-16 Kristian Ronneburg by Sandro Halank.jpg

2017-11-16 Kristian Ronneburg by Sandro Halank.jpg Commons:Quality images candidates/nl/Discuss

File:Buddhist_child_monk_in_Wat_Phou.jpg

Buddhist child monk in Wat Phou.jpg Commons:Quality images candidates/nl/Discuss

File:Pholiota aurivella 2017 G1.jpg

Pholiota aurivella 2017 G1.jpg Commons:Quality images candidates/nl/Discuss

File:Camel_market_at_Daraw,_photo_by_Hatem_Moushir_26.jpg

Camel market at Daraw, photo by Hatem Moushir 26.jpg Commons:Quality images candidates/nl/Discuss


Timetable (day 8 after nomination)

za 09 dec → zo 17 dec
zo 10 dec → ma 18 dec
ma 11 dec → di 19 dec
di 12 dec → wo 20 dec
wo 13 dec → do 21 dec
do 14 dec → vr 22 dec
vr 15 dec → za 23 dec
za 16 dec → zo 24 dec
zo 17 dec → ma 25 dec