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 43% 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.

Przejdź do nominacji
Other languages:
العربية • ‎čeština • ‎Deutsch • ‎English • ‎español • ‎français • ‎日本語 • ‎македонски • ‎Nederlands • ‎polski • ‎português • ‎русский • ‎svenska
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[edit]

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[edit]

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

Dla nominujących[edit]

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

Wymagania co do strony[edit]
  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[edit]

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[edit]

More detailed criteria are available at Commons:Image guidelines.

Rozdzielczość[edit]

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.

Zasada nie jest stosowana dla grafiki wektorowej (SVG).

Wysoka jakość[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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

Jak nominować[edit]

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[edit]

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


Ocenianie grafik[edit]

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

Jak oceniać?[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

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)[edit]

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 wrzesień 2015 and Category:Unassessed QI candidates added to the image.

Consensual review process[edit]

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[edit]

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[edit]

Zobacz Commons:Quality_images_candidates#Rules

Odśwież stronę: purge this page's cache


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]] 08:46, 3 wrzesień 2015 (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.

September 3, 2015[edit]

September 2, 2015[edit]

September 1, 2015[edit]

August 31, 2015[edit]

August 30, 2015[edit]

August 29, 2015[edit]

August 28, 2015[edit]

August 27, 2015[edit]

August 26, 2015[edit]

August 25, 2015[edit]

August 24, 2015[edit]

August 23, 2015[edit]

August 22, 2015[edit]

August 19, 2015[edit]

August 18, 2015[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:Ceinling_in_Vatican_Museums.jpg[edit]

Ceinling in Vatican Museums.jpg

  • Nomination Ceinling in Vatican Museums --Livioandronico2013 22:42, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Good quality.--Famberhorst 04:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Insufficient description and categorization are a lack of respect of our common QIC guidelines.--Jebulon 19:45, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Cows in Caucasus.JPG[edit]

Cows in Caucasus.JPG

  • Nomination Cows on a mountain pasture in vicinities of Krasnaya Polyana, Sochi. --Sergei Kazantsev 19:55, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion Good quality. Sky overexposed --Moroder 06:55, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
    I disagree: Sky overexposed. Colour handling and sharpening resulted in white alias line around the cow. --Cccefalon 05:26, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Apollo_del_Belvedere_in_Vatican.jpg[edit]

Apollo del Belvedere in Vatican.jpg

  • Nomination Apollo del Belvedere --Livioandronico2013 13:47, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 15:09, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Excellent point of view and composition for this famous work. But some parts are overexposed IMO, and there is some noise. As an example, please see File:Apollo del belvedere, 01.JPG for comparison and better details. Anyway, I wish a third opinion before promoting.--Jebulon 09:58, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl 06:35, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Dian HP playing the keyboard, 2015-08-22 01.jpg[edit]

Dian HP playing the keyboard, 2015-08-22 01.jpg

  • Nomination Indonesian composer Dian HP playing the keyboard Crisco 1492 01:58, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good enough.--PetarM 07:49, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, I see the same issues than another nominations of the uploader, too much noise reduction with loss of quality and probably ISO noise Ezarate 21:54, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl 12:38, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Buchberg - Randen - Panorama.jpg[edit]

Buchberg - Randen - Panorama.jpg

  • Nomination Panoramic view of Buchberg and Randen from a field near Stühlingen-Grimmeslhofen --Llez 11:55, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Livioandronico2013 13:52, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Small issues, I added some notes. --Iifar 19:11, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I will correct it this afternoon --Llez 11:30, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
      • ✓ Done --Llez 13:51, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good now! --Hubertl 08:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Hubertl 08:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

File:Xylocopa violacea 1432.jpg[edit]

Xylocopa violacea 1432.jpg

  • Nomination Xylocopa violacea on a lavender flower. --C messier 09:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry,dark and not very clear --Livioandronico2013 10:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
✓ New version, brighter. --C messier 10:38, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Keep in mind that the black insect is in shadow. --C messier 10:41, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The word "shadow" isn't good in QI. Anyway in my opinion isn't QI --Livioandronico2013 12:24, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Not in my hand to make it move to a sunny location. --C messier 12:58, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 07:34, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Сурнайист (Гиссар, Таджикистан).JPG[edit]

Сурнайист (Гиссар, Таджикистан).JPG

  • Nomination Musical Instruments in Tajikistan (Hissar, Tajikistan) --Шухрат Саъдиев 10:13, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Could work, but some flaws... (composition, crop below...). Try and try again, good luck !--Jebulon 14:24, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Two dust spots in the sky, tight crop to the left, tilt/perspective IMHO should be corrected (see the building in the background). --C messier 12:33, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bad framing, IMO no QI --Hubertl 07:26, 31 August 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl 04:32, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

File:Aerial_photo_of_Mercer_Island,_Washington.jpg[edit]

Aerial photo of Mercer Island, Washington.jpg

  • Nomination Aerial photo of Mercer Island as seen from a commercial flight from Seattle to Detroit. --Dllu 11:54, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Color cast, haze and low contrast (fixable), blown out roofs, CA --Ralf Roletschek 10:32, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done I have applied some dehazing. Note that the original JPEG out of camera is looks like this. I've already tried hard to improve the contrast from the RAW file. I don't see any significant chromatic aberration, although there are some demosaicing artifacts in the docks to the left (both the AHD and VNG demosaicers in ufraw-gimp struggle with the lack of antialiasing filter in the Sony ILCE-7R's sensor). Dllu 17:02, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Way better and works for QI now imho, though RR is right: there is fixable CA (edges of white buildings in the centre of the settlement and coast in the upper right quarter. Denis Barthel 07:30, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Hubertl 04:35, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Harmonogram (dzień 8 po nominacji)[edit]

Śr 26 sie → Cz 03 wrz
Cz 27 sie → Pt 04 wrz
Pt 28 sie → So 05 wrz
So 29 sie → N 06 wrz
N 30 sie → Pn 07 wrz
Pn 31 sie → Wt 08 wrz
Wt 01 wrz → Śr 09 wrz
Śr 02 wrz → Cz 10 wrz
Cz 03 wrz → Pt 11 wrz