Commons:Kandydatury do grafik wysokiej jakości

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 41% 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Outdated translations are marked like this.
Shortcut
COM:QIC
Przejdź do nominacji
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

Na tej stronie znajdują się kandydatury do grafik wysokiej jakości. Proszę nie mylić grafik wysokiej jakości z grafikami na medal. Additionally, if you just want some feedback on your pictures you can get that at Commons:Photography critiques.

Cel

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.

Wytyczne

Wszystkie nominowane zdjęcia muszą być stworzone przez jednego z użytkowników Wikimedia Commons.

Dla nominujących

Poniżej znajdują się ogólne wytyczne dotyczące jakości zdjęcia, bardziej szczegółowe kryteria dostępny w linku Image guidelines (en).


Wymagania co do strony
  1. Prawa autorskie. Grafika wysokiej jakości musi być przesłana do Commons pod właściwą licencją. Pełne wymagania co do licencji dostępne są na stronie oznaczenia licencji.
  2. Images should comply with all Commons policies and practices, including Commons:Photographs of identifiable people.
  3. Grafika wysokiej jakości powinna mieć wyrazistą nazwę, być odpowiednio skategoryzowana oraz mieć na stronie pliku opis w jednym lub więcej językach. Mile widziany, ale nie obowiązkowy, jest opis w języku angielskim.
  4. Grafika nie może zawierać reklam ani podpisów autora. Informacja o prawach autorskich i twórcy zawiera się na stronie opisu grafiki. Może także znaleźć się w metadanych pliku. Nie powinna jednak zawierać się w treści grafiki.


Twórca

Zdjęcia muszą być utworzone przez jednego z użytkowników Wikimedia Commons. Oznacza, to że zdjęcia z serwisów takich jak Flickr nie będą mogły uzyskać statusu grafiki wysokiej jakości (w przypadku grafik na medal nie ma takiego ograniczenia). 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.

Wymagania techniczne

More detailed criteria are available at Commons:Image guidelines.


Rozdzielczość

Obrazy rastrowe (JPEG, PNG, GIF, TIFF) muszą mieć rozdzielczość przynajmniej 2 Mpx. Oceniający mogą zwrócić się do autora o plik w większej rozdzielczości, jeśli obiekt na zdjęciu może być względnie łatwo sfotografowany ponownie. Wymóg ten wynika z tego, że grafiki z Commons mogą być drukowane, oglądanie na monitorach o wysokiej rozdzielczości lub wykorzystywane w inny sposób.


Wysoka jakość

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.


Kompozycja i oświetlenie

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.


Wartość

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


Jak nominować

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

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Bardzo krótki opis  --~~~~ |}}

Opis powinien być nie dłuższy niż kilka słów. Prosimy pozostawić pustą linię pomiędzy twoją a poprzednią nominacją.

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]]) --~~~~ |}}

Informacja: istnieje gadżet, QInominator, ułatwiający nominowanie grafik. 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.


Liczba nominacji

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


Ocenianie grafik

Każdy zarejestrowany użytkownik może recenzować grafiki
When evaluating images the reviewer should consider the same guidelines as the nominator.


Jak oceniać?

Jak zaktualizować 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.


Jak wykonać decyzję

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


Nieocenione zdjęcia (nominacja zakreślona na niebiesko)

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 April 24 2018 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.


Zasady dyskusji

Zobacz Commons:Quality_images_candidates#Rules

Odśwież stronę: purge this page's cache

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]] 19:13, 24 kwiecień 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.

April 24, 2018

April 23, 2018

April 22, 2018

April 21, 2018

April 20, 2018

April 19, 2018

April 18, 2018

April 17, 2018

April 16, 2018

April 15, 2018

April 14, 2018

April 11, 2018

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:Yellow_insects_on_yellow_marigold.jpg

Yellow insects on yellow marigold.jpg

  • Nomination Vespidae and eurema andersonii (one-spot grass yellow) butterfly on a tagetes lucida (marigold), in Laos --Basile Morin 13:39, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Gzen92 13:51, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I disagree, failed focus stack - antenna of butterfly is doubled, as is part of the flower border --Exonie 22:39, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes, ✓ Done thanks -- Basile Morin 01:05, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Looks OK to me. -- Ikan Kekek 18:00, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Ikan Kekek 18:00, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

File:2012_Powiat_pszczyński,_Pielgrzymowice,_Kościół_św._Katarzyny_(03).jpg

2012 Powiat pszczyński, Pielgrzymowice, Kościół św. Katarzyny (03).jpg

  • Nomination Saint Catherine church. Pielgrzymowice, Silesian Voivodeship, Poland. --Halavar 10:00, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturated, probably (very slight) perspective overcorrection. --Smial 12:10, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done I agree about the saturation. I changed it now, but I don't agree about the perspective. Verticals of the church are perfect straight. Please take a look again. More opinions are also welcome. --Halavar 13:26, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline?   --Basotxerri 14:33, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Close wing position of Burara amara Moore, 1865 – Small Green Awlet WLB DSC 9170.jpg

Close wing position of Burara amara Moore, 1865 – Small Green Awlet WLB DSC 9170.jpg

  • Nomination Close wing position of Burara amara Moore, 1865 – Small Green Awlet (by Sandipoutsider) --Atudu 15:37, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 17:18, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose over-processed, false background. Charlesjsharp 22:21, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Charlesjsharp, sorry--Lmbuga 22:58, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no QI, revised. --Fischer.H 08:35, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   ---Ermell 06:30, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Garden Lizard (Calotes) in village chotian, punjab.jpg

Garden Lizard (Calotes) in village chotian, punjab.jpg

  • Nomination Calote in village Chotian, Punjab, India -- Satpal Dandiwal 11:13, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Martin Falbisoner 12:20, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Image is fine, but you should identify with genus if not species. Charlesjsharp 22:13, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment File name's changed. Done with "Garden Lizard (Calotes) in village chotian, punjab.jpg" --Satpal Dandiwal 03:39, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Charlesjsharp 09:54, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality --Billy69150 16:28, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice one and QI IMO--Lmbuga 17:15, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   ----Billy69150 16:28, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Wandelingen door de laagveenmoerassen De Deelen 01.jpg

Wandelingen door de laagveenmoerassen De Deelen 01.jpg

  • Nomination Walks through the low moorland marshes De Deelen. Frozen draw hole.
    --Famberhorst 06:06, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 06:59, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeThis is an excerpt from this picture. I don't think it's a good idea to just re-nominate a slightly expanded copy of an existing QI. --Ermell 07:14, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree. Charlesjsharp 09:56, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Me too. Derivative works really need to be significantly altered.--Peulle 10:29, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Good quality, and the composition feels significantly different to me. I disagree with you guys. -- Ikan Kekek 13:35, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ermell --Billy69150 16:24, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no QI for me. --Fischer.H 08:43, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Decline?   ---Billy69150 16:24, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Heldburg_Heißluftballon_8068379.jpg

Heldburg Heißluftballon 8068379.jpg

  • Nomination Launch preparation for a hot air balloon --Ermell 06:30, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversharpened, scarf blown. Good composition, but sorry, not QI for me. --Yerpo 07:20, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality for me --Ercé 09:23, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
    More opinions will be helpful. --Ermell 08:24, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not the nain subject I know, but the man is not in focus. Charlesjsharp 09:57, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition doesn't look thought through.--Peulle 10:30, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Slight overexposure, but not really disturbing. IMO very nice composition. --Smial 12:01, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support Why not --Billy69150 16:27, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support Very nice composition. QI for me in spite of it's a bit oversharpened (upper half)--Lmbuga 22:52, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Promote?   ----Billy69150 16:27, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

File:2012_Jastrzębie-Zdrój,_Miejsce_pamięci_żołnierzy_Armii_Czerwonej_i_Czechosłowackiej_poległych_w_1945_roku_(02).jpg

2012 Jastrzębie-Zdrój, Miejsce pamięci żołnierzy Armii Czerwonej i Czechosłowackiej poległych w 1945 roku (02).jpg

  • Nomination Memorial of Red Army and Czechoslovakia soldiers who died in 1945. Jastrzębie-Zdrój, Silesian Voivodeship, Poland. --Halavar 11:40, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --GT1976 12:45, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • {{o}} Sorry, see notes. I think the image is not easily improved. Strong chromatic aberrations (head). Pour detail (head). In my opinion, too tight at top--Lmbuga 21:34, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done New fixed version uploaded now. Please take a look again. --Halavar 21:49, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Deleted notes about CAs. Much better, but the detail (head) is not good IMO to be QI, sorry. And too tight at top (composition) --Lmbuga 22:21, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Good and detailed enough, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek 06:02, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK for me. --Basotxerri 17:38, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good enough -- DerFussi 19:02, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support--Lmbuga 21:32, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Still many small remains of CA (green/cyan). --Smial 12:04, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --DerFussi 19:02, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Inge Keller - Dorotheenstädtischer Friedhof - Mutter Erde fec.JPG

Inge Keller - Dorotheenstädtischer Friedhof - Mutter Erde fec.JPG

  • Nomination Grave of German actress Inge Keller in Dorotheenstadt cemetery --Mutter Erde 09:24, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Small photo, but not too small. Stronger colours would have been an improvement. Quality high enough for Q1 --Michielverbeek 07:49, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor proposal when taking the image. It's distorted (It needs perspective correction). Not QI IMO--Lmbuga 23:35, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Seems good enough to me. -- Ikan Kekek 06:59, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Needs perspective correction. --Basotxerri 17:35, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I disagree, a perspective correction of the base would distort the sculpture excessive and look strange. Its ok as it is. -- DerFussi 17:46, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distracting perspective, too low resolution for an easy-to-take image, which should have at least 4, better 6 MPix nowadays. --Smial 14:03, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per DerFussi --Billy69150 19:11, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Promote?   --Billy69150 19:11, 24 April 2018 (UTC)


Harmonogram (dzień 8 po nominacji)

Pn 16 kwi → Wt 24 kwi
Wt 17 kwi → Śr 25 kwi
Śr 18 kwi → Cz 26 kwi
Cz 19 kwi → Pt 27 kwi
Pt 20 kwi → So 28 kwi
So 21 kwi → N 29 kwi
N 22 kwi → Pn 30 kwi
Pn 23 kwi → Wt 01 maj
Wt 24 kwi → Śr 02 maj