Commons:Valued image candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from Commons:VIC)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Shortcut
COM:VIC
This project page in other languages:
Skip to image nominations Skip to image nominations Most valued reviews Skip to most valued reviews Skip to set nominations Skip to set nominations
Valued image seal.svg

These are the candidates to become valued images. Please note that this is not the same as featured pictures or quality images. If you simply want some feedback on your pictures you can get that at photography critiques.

Single images can be proposed for valued image (VI) status. Candidates must be proposed as being the most valuable of all Commons' images within a specified scope. Judging is carried out according to the valued image criteria.

A Most Valued Review (MVR) is opened where there are two or more candidates competing within essentially the same scope.

The rules for promotion can be found at Commons:Valued image candidates/Promotion rules.

An image which has previously been declined can be renominated within the same scope only if the issues leading to the original decline have been addressed. Previously nominated images that were closed as "undecided" can be renominated at any time. Once a candidate achieves VI or VIS status it can normally be demoted only if some better candidate replaces it during an MVR.

If you would like to nominate an image for VI status, please do so following the instructions below. If you are proposing a better candidate within essentially the same scope as an image which already has VI status, please open an MVR.

Skip to current candidates Valued Image links:

How to nominate an image for VI status[edit]

Nominations will be evaluated using the criteria listed at Commons:Valued image criteria. Please read those criteria before submitting an image to help cut down on the number of candidates that have a low chance of success. Make sure you understand the concept of scope and how to choose the correct scope for your nomination. Please make sure that your proposed image fulfills all of the necessary criteria before nominating it. For example, if it needs to be geocoded, do that in advance. If no appropriate categories exist, create and link them beforehand. Although some reviewers may help by fixing minor issues during the review process, it is your responsibility as nominator to ensure your image ticks all the necessary boxes before you propose it. If you nominate an image that ignores one of the criteria, don't be surprised if it fails VI review.

Adding a new nomination (image)[edit]

Step 1: Copy the image name into this box (excluding the File: prefix), at the end of the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Valued image candidates/My-image-filename.jpg. Then click on the "Create new nomination" button.


Step 2: Follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save the resulting VIC subpage.

Step 3: Manually add the candidate image towards the end of Commons:Valued image candidates/candidate list (under the heading "New valued image nominations"), as the last parameter in the VICs template. Click here, and append the following line as the last parameter of the relevant section:

|My-image-filename.jpg

so that it looks like this:

{{VICs
 ...
 |My-image-filename.jpg
}}

and save the candidate list.


Renomination[edit]

Declined VICs can be renominated by any registered user, but only after one or more of the root cause(s) leading to a decline has/have been addressed. Undecided VICs can be renominated as is although it is still recommended to consider and fix issue(s) which may have hindered a promotion of the candidate in the previous review.

Besides fixing issues with the previous nomination the following procedure shall be followed upon renomination.

Step 1: Edit the candidate subpage you intend to renominate. All declined and undecided VICs are placed in either Category:Declined valued image candidates, or Category:Undecided valued image candidates and sorted by the date of the previous nomination.

Step 2: Replace the previous nomination date and time by pasting in

|date={{subst:VI-time}}

Step 3: Replace the "undecided" or "declined" status with "nominated" (or "discussed" if you intend to add it to a Most Valued Review).

Step 4: If the previous nominator was a different user replace the nominator parameter with

|nominator=~~~

Step 5: If the candidate does not already have an archive link to previous reviews: Create one using the following procedure.

  • Cut the text in the previous review section (leave the closing braces "}}")
  • replace the review parameter with
|review=
{{subst:VIC-archive}}
}}
  • Save the page.
  • There is now a red link to Previous reviews. Click the link to create the archive subpage and paste in the previous reviews.
  • Save the previous reviews archive page

Step 6: Add the candidate to the candidates list.

How to open a Most Valued Review[edit]

There must be at least two candidates competing within essentially the same scope to open an MVR. Each needs its own VIC subpage, which should be created as above if it does not already exist, but with status set to "discussed". Then, add the following section at the end of the page Commons:Valued image candidates/Most valued review candidate list:

=== Scope ===
{{VICs
  |candidate1.jpg
  |candidate2.jpg
}}

where candidate1.jpg and candidate2.jpg are the VIC subpages of the respective candidates. If need be, also remove the relevant image(s) from the list in Pending valued image candidates

If one of the candidates is an existing VI within essentially the same scope, the original VIC subpage is re-opened for voting by changing its status to status=discussed and new reviews are appended to the original VIC subpage. However, any original votes are not counted within the MVR.

The status parameter of each candidate should remain set to "discussed" while the MVR is ongoing.

How to review the candidates[edit]

How to review an image[edit]

Any registered user can review the valued image candidates. Comments are welcome from everyone, but neither the nominator nor the original image author may vote (that does not exclude voting from users who have edited the image with a view to improving it).

Nominations should be evaluated using the criteria listed at Commons:Valued image criteria. Please read those and the page on scope carefully before reviewing. Reviewing here is a serious business, and a reviewer who just breezes by to say "I like it!" is not adding anything of value. You need to spend the time to check the nomination against every one of the six VI criteria, and you also need to carry out searches to satisfy yourself on the "most valuable" criterion.

Review procedure[edit]

  • On the review page the image is presented in the review size. You are welcome to view the image in full resolution by following the image links, but bear in mind that it is the appearance of the image at review size which matters.
  • Check the candidate carefully against each of the six VI criteria. The criteria are mandatory, and to succeed the candidate has to satisfy all six.
  • Use the where used field, if provided, to study the current usage of the candidate in Wikimedia projects. If you find usage of interest do add relevant links to the nomination.
  • Look for other images of the same kind of subject by following the links to relevant categories in the image page, and to any Commons galleries.
    • If you find another image which is already a VI within essentially the same scope, the candidate and the existing VI should be moved to Most Valued Review (MVR) to determine which one is the more valued.
    • If you find one or more other images which in your opinion are equally or more valued images within essentially the same scope, you should nominate these images as well and move all the candidates to an MVR.
  • Once you have made up your mind, edit the review page and add your vote or comment to the review parameter as follows:
You type You get When
*{{Comment}} My Comment. -- ~~~~ You have a comment.
*{{Info}} My information. -- ~~~~ You have information.
*{{Neutral}} Reason for neutral vote. -- ~~~~
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Reason for neutral vote. -- Example
You are uncertain or wish to record a neutral vote.
*{{Oppose}} Reason for opposing vote. -- ~~~~
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Reason for opposing vote. -- Example
You think that the candidate fails one or more of the six mandatory criteria.
*{{Question}} My question. -- ~~~~ You have a question.
*{{Support}} Reason for supporting. -- ~~~~
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Reason for supporting. -- Example
You think that the candidate meets all of the six mandatory criteria.
  • If the nomination fails one of the six criteria, but in a way that can be fixed, you can optionally let the nominator know what needs to be done using the {{VIF}} template.
  • Your comment goes immediately before the final closing braces "}}" on the page.


How to update the status
  • Finally, change the status of the nomination if appropriate:
    • status=nominated When no votes or only neutral votes have been added to the review field (blue image border).
    • status=supported When there is at least one {{Support}} vote but no {{Oppose}} votes (light green image border).
    • status=opposed When there is at least one {{Oppose}} vote but no {{Support}} votes (red image border).
    • status=discussed When there is at least one {{Oppose}} vote and one {{Support}} vote (yellow image border).


Remember the criteria: 1. Most valuable 2. Suitable scope 3. Illustrates well 4. Fully described 5. Geocoded 6. Well categorized.

Changes in scope during the review period[edit]

The nominator is allowed to make changes in scope as the review proceeds, for example in response to reviewer votes or comments. Whenever a scope is changed the nominator should post a signed comment at the bottom of the review area using {{VIC-scope-change|old scope|new scope|--~~~~}}, and should also leave a note on the talk page of all existing voters asking them to reconsider their vote. A support vote made before the change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn.

You can submit new nominations starting on COM:VIC.

Pending valued image candidates[edit]

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache
39,457 closed valued image candidates
 Closed as Nominations 
Promoted
  
35,334 (89.6%) 
Undecided
  
1,946 (4.9%) 
Declined
  
2,177 (5.5%) 



New valued image nominations[edit]

   
2018-07-14 45 Sifto Salt Mine, Goderich ON Canada.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
GRDN711 (talk) on 2020-07-04 23:00 (UTC)
Scope:
Sifto Salt Mine in Goderich Harbour

Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question GRDN711, does File:2018-07-14 019 Sifto Salt Mine, Goderich ON Canada.jpg show more of the facilities? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:15, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Ikan – this is a stitched panorama of 2 images that includes all of the mine buildings. I did make a further image in this sequence and have an alternate panorama (3 images) that shows more of the road on the right leading to the plant, as well as well as train shipping. It doesn't show more of the buildings but does give a wider view of the mine facility. Please review and comment. --GRDN711 (talk) 01:13, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Your link isn't working. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:04, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
  • The other one's a nice photo, though. Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:37, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 21:44, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Diamond cutter. Amsterdam. 2012.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Ввласенко (talk) on 2020-07-05 09:39 (UTC)
Scope:
Gem cutting
Used in:
Амстердам, Gemstone, Diamantaire, Amsterdam and etc.
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Once again, the city is irrelevant. Do you think this is the best photo of gem-cutting on the site? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:11, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  • O'k, now without Amsterdam. -- Ввласенко (talk) 14:29, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This is a large category with subcategories, so somewhat time-consuming to look through. Did you look through all photos in scope before nominating this one? I can't see the gem in this photo, so maybe it's a good photo of a gem-cutter (though I'd have to look through the photos again before deciding if it's best in that scope...), but not of gem-cutting. For that, if "cut" is taken literally, File:Zafirs-treball2.jpg looks best in scope, I think, but if grinding counts, File:Isini Jewellerie (1).JPG or File:Isini Jewellerie Facetteuse head.JPG - which are in the subcategory Category:Gem cutting in Sri Lanka, look to me to be slightly better than File:Facettieren Bild 10 Vorschleifen.JPG. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:09, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
    • @Ikan Kekek: I am impressed with your thoroughness when viewing photos. Thanks to it, I remembered that the photo was taken at the Gassan Diamonds factory, but this fact did not suggest me the right scope. The volume Category: Diamond industry is best suited for this photo, but I don’t think that my photo reflects this process from a technical point of view better than others, although I like the photo emotionally. The scope “Diamond cutter at work” is good, but this is not a VI. Thank you again for your efforts, but I think this photo is not for VI. -- Ввласенко (talk) 08:51, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Open for review.
Bullia melanoides 02.JPG
View promotion
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2020-07-07 05:40 (UTC)
Scope:
Bullia melanoides, shell, dark form
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Mdaniels5757 (talk) 21:43, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
RealWorldRear.jpg
View promotion
Nominated by:
Rodhullandemu (talk) on 2020-07-07 15:20 (UTC)
Scope:
Real World Studios, Box - exterior
Used in:
See global usage
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Mdaniels5757 (talk) 21:43, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
Hogebeintum, Fries, Hegebeintum (actm) 08.jpg
View promotion
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2020-07-07 16:01 (UTC)
Scope:
Main entrance of the Hervormde kerk, Hegebeintum
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Mdaniels5757 (talk) 21:43, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
Protambulyx carteri MHNT CUT 2010 0 416 Bahamas, male ventral.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2020-07-08 04:48 (UTC)
Scope:
Protambulyx carteri mounted specimen, male ventral

Symbol support vote.svg Support Best in scope.--Peulle (talk) 15:29, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Open for review.
Musée Ingres-Bourdelle - Apollon et sa méditation, 1911-12 - Platre - Antoine Bourdelle Joconde06070001200.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2020-07-08 04:51 (UTC)
Scope:
Musée Ingres-Bourdelle - Apollon et sa méditation, 1911-12 - Platre - Bourdelle (Apollo and his meditation)
Open for review.
Musée Ingres-Bourdelle - La Villa Médicis, XVIIIe siècle - MI.867.163.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2020-07-08 04:54 (UTC)
Scope:
Musée Ingres-Bourdelle - La Villa Médicis - Personal Ingres Collection

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:39, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Open for review.
HilarioLagos.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ezarateesteban on 2020-07-08 00:25 (UTC)
Scope:
Hilario Lagos
Open for review.
Tangen kirke april 2020 (1).jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Peulle (talk) on 2020-07-08 15:25 (UTC)
Scope:
Tangen church in Drammen, seen from the north.
Used in:
no: Tangen kirke (Drammen), nn: Tangen kyrkje i Drammen
Open for review.
Stapledon plaque, Simon's Bridge.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Rodhullandemu (talk) on 2020-07-08 19:09 (UTC)
Scope:
Plaque to Olaf Stapledon
Used in:
pt:Olaf Stapledon
Open for review.
Ambulyx auripennis MHNT CUT 2010 0 418, Sri Lanka, Ceylan male ventral.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2020-07-09 04:58 (UTC)
Scope:
Ambulyx auripennis mounted specimen, male ventral

Symbol support vote.svg Support Best in scope and used --Llez (talk) 05:43, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Open for review.
81 - Rabastens - L'église Notre-Dame-du-Bourg - Exposition sud-est.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2020-07-09 04:59 (UTC)
Scope:
Église Notre-Dame-du-Bourg (Rabastens, Tarn) Southeast exposure

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:39, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Open for review.
Musée Ingres-Bourdelle - La Tragédie - Platre - Antoine Bourdelle Joconde06070001208.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2020-07-09 05:02 (UTC)
Scope:
Musée Ingres-Bourdelle - La Tragédie - Platre - Antoine Bourdelle (Allegory of tragedy )

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:38, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Open for review.
Trochonanina jingaensis 01.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2020-07-09 05:41 (UTC)
Scope:
Trochonanina jingaensis, shell
Open for review.
DKW Lomos, Bj. 1923, v. (museum mobile 2013-09-03).JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Spurzem (talk) on 2020-07-09 12:12 (UTC)
Scope:
DKW Lomos from 1923, front
Used in:
de: Motorroller, de: Lomos Sesselrad
Open for review.
DKW Lomos, Bj. 1923, h. (museum mobile 2013-09-03).JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Spurzem (talk) on 2020-07-09 12:14 (UTC)
Scope:
DKW Lomos from 1923, rear
Used in:
de: Hinterradschwinge (Motorrad)

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:35, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Open for review.
Kerktoren van Nijemirdum. 26-05-2020 (actm.) 04.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2020-07-09 15:34 (UTC)
Scope:
Rear end Church tower, Nijemirdum National monument

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:38, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Open for review.
MAW-Motor, 49,5 cm³, 1,5 PS Bj. 1959 (2017-07-02 Sp).JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Spurzem (talk) on 2020-07-09 15:38 (UTC)
Scope:
MAW engine of a Motorized bicycles from 1959
Used in:
de: MAW (Hilfsmotor)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful & used. --GRDN711 (talk) 18:19, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Open for review.
Monument to Giuseppe Benedetto Dusmet. Catania, Italy.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ввласенко (talk) on 2020-07-09 17:30 (UTC)
Scope:
Monument to Giuseppe Benedetto Dusmet in Catania, Italy
Used in:
Katania

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:37, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Open for review.
Amplypterus mansoni takamukui MHNT CUT 2010 0 419 Wu She Taiwan male dorsal.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2020-07-10 04:53 (UTC)
Scope:
Amplypterus mansoni takamukui Mounted specimen, male dorsal

Symbol support vote.svg Support Best in scope and used --Llez (talk) 05:21, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Open for review.
81 - Rabastens - Église St Pierre Des Blancs - Façade.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2020-07-10 04:54 (UTC)
Scope:
Église des Pénitents blancs de Rabastens facade
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Best in scope --Ercé (talk) 08:18, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Open for review.
Musée Ingres-Bourdelle - Joueurs de cartes - Anthonie Palamedesz - Joconde06070000180.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2020-07-10 04:57 (UTC)
Scope:
Musée Ingres-Bourdelle - Joueurs de cartes - Anthonie Palamedesz (Card players)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Usefull --Ercé (talk) 08:20, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Open for review.
Nassarius arcularia 01.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2020-07-10 05:19 (UTC)
Scope:
Nassarius arcularia, shell
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Best in scope --Ercé (talk) 08:19, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Open for review.
Calidris pugnax MHNT.ZOO.2010.11.118.3.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2020-07-10 08:15 (UTC)
Scope:
Calidris pugnax (ruff) egg
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It looks like we already have a promoted image for this species.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:39, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment but not same subspecies... --Ercé (talk) 07:11, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
If this is the case, it must be named in the scope; but It seems that there is no subspecies.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:40, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Open for review.
Monument to the Pellinki Battle. Helsinki, Finland.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ввласенко (talk) on 2020-07-10 10:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Pellinki Battle Monument in Helsinki
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good and useful image, obviously the onla in scope -- Spurzem (talk) 15:46, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Open for review.
Hockende, Bad Neuenahr, Skulptur von Zeman im Kurgarten (2014-08-29 Sp).jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Spurzem (talk) on 2020-07-10 12:40 (UTC)
Scope:
Sculpture “The Crouching” by Bořek Zeman in Bad Neuenahr

I wonder if a better English translation would be Crouching? Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:53, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Before that, we should have the title in the original language (is that German or Czech?) Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:57, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Hallo Charlesjsharp and Ikan Kekek, please no offense, but I would like to have your problems. ;-) – The figure was cast for the spa gardens in Bad Neuenahr and is called "Die Hockende". There is a duplicate in a group of figures in the Czech Republic. See here. For me it would be enough to see a beautiful sculpture made by Bořek Zeman und to know that we have no other image of this work of art in the commons. Best regards -- Spurzem (talk) 13:30, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
For me it would be enough to see you take note of our helpful and constructive suggestions. We are not obliged to correct your errors. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:35, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

I see no error on my part. I photographed the statue of a Czech sculptor in the spa gardens of Bad Neuenahr and saw that there is no photo of this sculpture at this place in the Commons. I found out and named the name of the artist who is obviously known in his home country. Then I presented the photo to VI. What was wrong with that? -- Spurzem (talk) 17:30, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Open for review.
116.- MIX-3.2.56.0001 - Emiliano Zapata.tif
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Aurelio de Sandoval (talk) on 2020-07-11 03:05 (UTC)
Scope:
Documents from Centro de Estudios de Historia de México Carso Fundación Carlos Slim - Emiliano Zapata by anonymous author
Reason:
Emiliano Zapata was one of the people who fought in Mexico against the dictatorship to give the Mexicans the lands that belonged to them and this is one of the most iconic images that are remembered of him. -- Aurelio de Sandoval (talk)

Previous reviews

Result: 0 support, 1 oppose =>
declined. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:13, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
Open for review.
CheHigh.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Aurelio de Sandoval (talk) on 2020-07-11 02:53 (UTC)
Scope:
Guerrillero Heroico by Alberto Korda
Reason:
He is one of the most popular and admired icons of communism, he was a politician who for many fought against imperialism. -- Aurelio de Sandoval (talk)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The image is too contrasting, there are in this category several images that more meet the criteria of Value. It would be good to get closer to the original images. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:52, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Open for review.
Amplypterus mansoni takamukui MHNT CUT 2010 0 419 Wu She Taiwan male ventral.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2020-07-11 04:28 (UTC)
Scope:
Amplypterus mansoni takamukui Mounted specimen, male ventral

Symbol support vote.svg Support Best in scope and used --Llez (talk) 05:03, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Open for review.
Musée Ingres-Bourdelle - Madeleine Ingres né chapelle vers 1815 - Jean-Pierre Cortot - Joconde06070007320.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2020-07-11 04:29 (UTC)
Scope:
Musée Ingres-Bourdelle - Madeleine Ingres - Jean-Pierre Cortot
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good image, useful and used -- Spurzem (talk) 18:51, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Open for review.
Musée Ingres-Bourdelle - La Villa Madame à Rome - Alexandre Desgoffe - Joconde06070001402.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2020-07-11 04:31 (UTC)
Scope:
Musée Ingres-Bourdelle - La Villa Madame à Rome - Alexandre Desgoffe - Personal Ingres Collection
Open for review.
Nassarius gruneri 01.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2020-07-11 05:00 (UTC)
Scope:
Nassarius gruneri (Gruner's Nassa), shell
Open for review.
Tringa totanus totanus MHNT.ZOO.2010.11.118.6.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2020-07-11 07:07 (UTC)
Scope:
Tringa totanus ssp. totanus (common redshank) egg
Open for review.
Moto Guzzi PE, Fg.-Nr. SP7032, li. (2007-06-15 Sp).jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Spurzem (talk) on 2020-07-11 13:10 (UTC)
Scope:
Moto Guzzi P series, front and left side
Reason:
Not used but probably the best image of this bike in the commons -- Spurzem (talk)
Open for review.
Aston Martin DBR4, Bj. 1959 (2011-08-13 Sp).JPG
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Spurzem (talk) on 2020-07-11 13:55 (UTC)
Scope:
Aston Martin DBR4 from 1959 on the Nürburgring, driver with helmet from this time
Used in:
de: Astron Martin, de: Aston Martin DBR4 and so on
Open for review.
7 Rock Lane East, Rock Ferry.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Rodhullandemu (talk) on 2020-07-11 15:34 (UTC)
Scope:
7 Rock Lane East, Rock Ferry
Used in:
Wikidata:Q97149451
Open for review.
Kajhu Grand Mosque, Kajhu; February 2020 (01).jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · on 2020-07-11 16:36 (UTC)
Scope:
Kajhu Grand Mosque
Open for review.
Lamrabo Great Mosque, Lamrabo; February 2020 (06).jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · on 2020-07-11 16:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Lamrabo Great Mosque
Open for review.
Sabili Jannah Mosque, Doi; February 2020 (01).jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · on 2020-07-11 16:40 (UTC)
Scope:
Sabili Jannah Mosque
Open for review.


Pending Most valued review candidates[edit]

Type 11 light machine gun[edit]

   
Japanese Type 11 LMG from 1933 book.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
pandakekok9 on 2020-04-03 11:09 (UTC)
Scope:
Type 11 light machine gun
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose this is better, the nominated picture is too blurry Ezarateesteban 19:22, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Nominated the other image in the same scope for MVR. pandakekok9 03:07, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I still think this photo is better. This shows the ammunition box, and this image comes from a Japanese military source (the Type 11 is a Japanese machine gun after all). So I think this image is more valuable, despite the quality. pandakekok9 03:11, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per pandakekok9. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:29, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per pandakekok9. --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 17:51, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:44, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Automatic Rifle (9885171694).jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
pandakekok9 on 2020-04-04 02:37 (UTC)
Scope:
Type 11 light machine gun
Reason:
As suggested by Ezarate at Commons:Valued image candidates/Japanese Type 11 LMG from 1933 book.jpg. -- pandakekok9
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I still think the earlier nomination is better, since the reflections on this photo are distracting IMO. The right foot of the bipod is also a bit cut off. I won't object though if this one passes. --pandakekok9 02:37, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per pandakekok9. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:30, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose ditto. --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 17:51, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:44, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Amy Jackson[edit]

   
Amy jackson.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Yjenith (talk) on 2012-03-11 23:25 (UTC)
Scope:
Amy Jackson
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Copyrighted, no evidence of permission, so I am nominating for deletion. (Also, not geocoded!) cmadler (talk) 10:13, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This photograph is released under creative commons Share like 3.0 license. The more appropriate copyright tag is added. Also geocoded for further review. --Yjenith (talk) 11:55, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Now Symbol support vote.svg Support cmadler (talk) 13:57, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Who is this girl actually?--MrPanyGoff 20:26, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
  • This link doesn't helps a lot... I tend to oppose even I feel this nomination as some kind of insult.--MrPanyGoff 21:39, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info She is essentially a Bollywood actress. Article seems acceptable in en:WP (and 3 other WP), see en:Amy Jackson. --Myrabella (talk) 07:13, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
  • She is essentially a beauty pageant titleholder and not an actress at all. Since 2010 she just has tried to launch an actress career. There are thousands of girls like her. It seems that we have to place all of them in one group together with Sophia Loren, Gérard Philipe, Michel Piccoli, Jeremy Irons, Robert De Niro, Charles Chaplin, Claude Monet... Shame on all of us... We do nothing here. Alas, we have no choice since we work under the dictate of the crowd. Unfortunately, from a long time many articles in wikipedia cannot be used for reference at all. These articles can be marked for deletion.--MrPanyGoff 09:21, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
  • Actually, this nomination seems quite promotional, linked with this new movie release: en:Ekk Deewana Tha where she has the leading female role. --Myrabella (talk) 11:27, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 22:22, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Because of the two VI in this scope I open this MVR. This photo here is the initial VI.--MrPanyGoff 08:20, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support OK, this one is better. Yann (talk) 09:31, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment but you can't even see her face properly cause she is not looking at the camera, the crop is unfortunate cause the top of her head is missing,the blur is excessive with parts of her hair and right shoulder being blured. Just wanna know why you think this is better so atleast I can be clear about the criteria for a picture being VI.Boseritwik (talk) 15:25, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I still support this one as best in scope and meeting all criteria. Certainly the edges of her hair and right shoulder are blurred, but her face is in focus at a high resolution. Also important to the present comparison, in the other image her forehead, chin, and cheeks are washed out by the flash/glare. cmadler (talk) 13:29, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Scores: 
1. Amy jackson.jpg: +2 (current VI within same scope) <--
2. Amy Jackson attends press conference for 'Thaandavam' at London 04.jpg: +0 (second VI within same scope) <--
=>
File:Amy jackson.jpg: Promoted.
File:Amy Jackson attends press conference for 'Thaandavam' at London 04.jpg: Declined.
--MrPanyGoff 05:51, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Opening MVR. The other nomination can be found here. pandakekok9 08:38, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - The other one has higher resolution, but we're supposed to judge the photos at review size, and in review size, this photo is much bigger. I also prefer the background, but that could be because I have sore eyes tonight. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:44, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Amy Jackson headshot.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
pandakekok9 on 2020-04-04 08:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Amy Jackson
Reason:
Compared to the current VI, I think this photo represents the scope better, because it has a higher resolution. And IMO, the subject facing the camera is more valuable. -- pandakekok9

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I get a failure message about the image file containing errors if I try to open the full-resolution image in Firefox. --Bobulous (talk) 18:41, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Ignore my last comment; a machine reboot and a forced page refresh caused it to finally load the image without error. Must have been a bad download followed by a stubborn local cache. --Bobulous ( talk) 20:56, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support higher resolution & facing the camera --Arne (talk) 22:16, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per my remarks on the other one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:55, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment a crop of this one to exclude some of her body would split the difference and be best, imo. Buidhe (talk) 17:34, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
@Buidhe: What do you think of this crop? pandakekok9 06:29, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:44, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Theresa May, portrait photograph[edit]

   
Theresa May 2015.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Yann (talk) on 2017-02-19 18:52 (UTC)
Scope:
Theresa May, portrait photograph
Reason:
UK Prime Minister. Best image, much better quality than her official portrait. Studio shot, so not geocoded. Used on many projects. -- Yann (talk)

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 19:11, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Palauenc05 (talk) 23:05, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

MVR: see also Commons:Valued image candidates/Theresa May (2015) (cropped).jpg

Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:44, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Theresa May (2015) (cropped).jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
AlbanGeller (talk) on 2020-06-01 12:57 (UTC)
Scope:
Theresa May in 2015, portrait photograph
Used in:
Theresa May
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:44, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Oryx gazella[edit]

   
Oryx gazella (Chudop).jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Lycaon (talk) on 2009-02-12 16:54 (UTC)
Scope:
Oryx gazella (Gemsbok)
Used in:
en:Gemsbok, nl:Gemsbok, simple:Gemsbok, uk:Орікс
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Pose is less interesting, but I think the animal is better shown than on the previously nominated picture. --Eusebius (talk) 17:01, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Lycaon (talk) 23:05, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:44, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Gemsbok (Oryx gazella) male.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2020-06-22 08:00 (UTC)
Scope:
Oryx gazella (Gemsbok) male
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:44, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
To initiate a most valued review, please go to the dedicated MVR sub page.
Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache

All open candidates in an MVR have to have their status set as "discussed" while the review is ongoing. Only when all candidates are due for closure can the MVR be closed.

Refer to Most valued review, the promotion rules and the instructions for closure for details.

Pending valued image set candidates[edit]

Warning This section has been deactivated because of technical issues. Please do not add any VI set candidate.