Commons:Valued image candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
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
33,145 closed valued image candidates
 Closed as Nominations 
Promoted
  
29,467 (88.9%) 
Undecided
  
1,674 (5.1%) 
Declined
  
2,004 (6%) 



New valued image nominations[edit]

   
Yamaha Clarinet YCL-457II-22.png
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Habitator terrae 🌍 on 2018-11-18 18:31 (UTC)
Scope:
Clarinets
Open for review.
LorcaCastle LargeCistern.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Martinvl (talk) on 2018-11-13 21:33 (UTC)
Scope:
Medieval cistern of Lorca Castle
Used in:
Reason:
Although North European castles were able to rely on unerground water supplies, cisterns were commonplace in Spanish medieval castles. This is an exampe of one such cistern. -- Martinvl (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Useful, best in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:17, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:01, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
Tectarius spinulosus 01.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2018-11-14 18:19 (UTC)
Scope:
Tectarius spinulosus, shell
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:01, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
Tadorna cana MHNT.ZOO.2010.11.21.2.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2018-11-14 19:49 (UTC)
Scope:
Tadorna cana (South African shelduck) eggs
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 00:01, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
BYU vs Utah 2009, post-game.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
IagoQnsi (talk) on 2018-11-14 21:52 (UTC)
Scope:
pitch invasions by a crowd
Used in:
en:Holy War (Utah vs. BYU), en:BYU Cougars football, en:2009 BYU Cougars football team
Reason:
We have a VI for individual pitch invasions; figured there ought to be one for crowds as well -- IagoQnsi (talk)
Open for review.
Callambulyx poecilus poecilus MHNT CUT 2010 0 284 Assam India male dorsal.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2018-11-15 05:57 (UTC)
Scope:
Callambulyx poecilus mounted specimen male dorsal

Symbol support vote.svg Support Best in scope and used --Llez (talk) 22:17, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Open for review.
Portail néo-Renaissance de Virebent pour l'hôtel Cassan.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2018-11-15 05:59 (UTC)
Scope:
Porch of the Hôtel Cassan, in Toulouse, by Virebent
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Usefull --Ercé (talk) 06:59, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Open for review.
Bemberg Fondation Toulouse - La Tahitienne - Paul Gauguin Lavis aquarelle 41x25.5.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2018-11-15 06:02 (UTC)
Scope:
La Tahitienne by Paul Gauguin, Fondation Bemberg, Toulouse

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 22:19, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Open for review.
Somateria mollissima MHNT.ZOO.2010.11.26.1.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2018-11-15 06:52 (UTC)
Scope:
Somateria mollissima (common eider) eggs


*Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:44, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Open for review.
RNLB Mary Stanford.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
-- DeFacto (talk). on 2018-11-15 07:15 (UTC)
Scope:
The RNLB Mary Stanford lifeboat of 1930
Used in:
en:Ballycotton, en:RNLB Mary Stanford (ON 733)
Reason:
This lifeboat, preserved and displayed in Ballycotton, was used for many courageous rescues at sea. -- -- DeFacto (talk).
Open for review.
Reformierte Kirche Waltensburg (d.j.b.) 12.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Famberhorst (talk) on 2018-11-15 07:18 (UTC)
Scope:
Reformierte Kirche Waltensburg – Pipe organ
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I have adapted the scope a bit --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:28, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
Open for review.
Crown Prince Dependra Bikram Shah Dev.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nabin K. Sapkota (talk) on 2018-11-15 10:30 (UTC)
Scope:
Dipendra of Nepal
Used in:
See global usage
Open for review.
Freiburg Münster rechtes Seitenschiff Schuhmacherfenster 01.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Uoaei1 (talk) on 2018-11-15 11:21 (UTC)
Scope:
Stained glass windows in the main hall of Freiburg Minster – Schuhmacherfenster
Used in:
fr:Cathédrale Notre-Dame de Fribourg


*Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:42, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Open for review.
Schloss Schönbühel 20180919.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Uoaei1 (talk) on 2018-11-15 11:21 (UTC)
Scope:
Schloss Schönbühel – west view
Used in:
fr:Schönbühel-Aggsbach


*Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:47, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Open for review.
Reformierte Kirche Waltensburg (actm) 11.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2018-11-15 18:50 (UTC)
Scope:
Reformierte Kirche Waltensburg Shielded niche.
Open for review.
Vito Crimi - Lucca Comics & Games 2018 01.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jaqen (talk) on 2018-11-15 22:21 (UTC)
Scope:
Vito Crimi
Used in:
it:Vito Crimi
Reason:
Best in scope imho. -- Jaqen (talk)
Open for review.
BBCBroadcastingHouse.JPG
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
ImprovedWikiImprovment (talk) on 2018-11-15 22:57 (UTC)
Scope:
Broadcasting House, London
Reason:
Is the only image illustrating the building at night showing its lights. -- ImprovedWikiImprovment (talk)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It would be necessary to be more precise in scope, adding, southern exposure at night. We must also add geocoding in the caption. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:55, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
Open for review.
Firma de JuanaAzurduy.svg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ezarateesteban on 2018-11-15 23:58 (UTC)
Scope:
Signature of Juana Azurduy
Open for review.
Callambulyx poecilus poecilus MHNT CUT 2010 0 284 Assam India male ventral.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2018-11-16 06:02 (UTC)
Scope:
Callambulyx poecilus mounted specimen male ventral

Symbol support vote.svg Support Best in scope and used --Llez (talk) 20:11, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Open for review.
Hotel Reynier façade rue Rue Mage (Toulouse) - Ferronnerie - PA00094568.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2018-11-16 06:04 (UTC)
Scope:
Ironwork on facade of Hôtel Reynier, in Toulouse
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Best in scope --Ercé (talk) 06:10, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
Open for review.
Bemberg Fondation Toulouse - Paysage du Midi - Pierre Bonnard (1917-1918) 46.5x48 Inv.2019.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2018-11-16 06:06 (UTC)
Scope:
Paysage du Midi (Landscape of the Midi) by Pierre Bonnard, Fondation Bemberg, Toulouse
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Usefull --Ercé (talk) 06:12, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
Open for review.
Somateria spectabilis MHNT.ZOO.2010.11.27.3.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2018-11-16 07:14 (UTC)
Scope:
Somateria spectabilis (king eider) eggs
Open for review.
Punctum pygmaeum 01.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2018-11-16 20:49 (UTC)
Scope:
Punctum pygmaeum, shell
Open for review.
Hemeroplanes longistriga MHNT CUT 2010 0 285 Boraceia (Sao Paulo) Brazil male ventral.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2018-11-17 05:32 (UTC)
Scope:
Hemeroplanes longistriga mounted specimen male ventral

Symbol support vote.svg Support Best in scope and used --Llez (talk) 20:12, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Open for review.
Barcelona Cathedral Interior - Sepulcre de Manuel Girona, amb grup escultòric de Manel Fuxà.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2018-11-17 05:35 (UTC)
Scope:
Cathedral of Barcelona, statuary group of Manel Fuxà, representing the theological virtues

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:54, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Open for review.
Bemberg Fondation Toulouse - Sébastien de Luxembourg Martigues - Marc Duval 32x23.5 Inv.1018 Huile sur panneau.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2018-11-17 05:40 (UTC)
Scope:
Portrait of Sébastien de Luxembourg Martigues by Marc Duval, Fondation Bemberg, Toulouse

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:55, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Open for review.
Aix sponsa MHNT.ZOO.2010.11.27.4.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2018-11-17 06:08 (UTC)
Scope:
Aix sponsa (wood duck) eggs
Open for review.
Reformierte Kirche Waltensburg (actm) 08.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2018-11-17 07:43 (UTC)
Scope:
Reformierte Kirche Waltensburg (Reformed Church of Waltensburg), Fresco.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful & used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:52, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Let me know if my copy edit of the scope is OK. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:09, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • No. I changed the scope slightly. First, I fixed the typo on "Fresco"; second, I added the English translation of Reformierte Kirche Waltensburg and if I remember correctly, deleted the repetition of the German name. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:56, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Open for review.
Procol Harum Matt Pegg.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Palauenc05 (talk) on 2018-11-17 10:10 (UTC)
Scope:
Matt Pegg, 2018.
Open for review.
St Anne's church, Rock Ferry 3.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Rodhullandemu (talk) on 2018-11-17 13:03 (UTC)
Scope:
St Anne's Church, Rock Ferry
Used in:
See global usage
Reason:
Includes part of presbytery, included in the Grade II listing -- Rodhullandemu (talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Usefull --Ercé (talk) 06:24, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Open for review.
Wijnjeterper Schar, Natura 2000-gebied provincie Friesland 25.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Famberhorst (talk) on 2018-11-17 13:44 (UTC)
Scope:
Natura 2000 in the Netherlands Wijnjeterper Schar.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Usefull --Ercé (talk) 06:24, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Open for review.
Hafnia Taurus (ship, 2011), Sète 2018.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Christian Ferrer (talk) on 2018-11-17 18:39 (UTC)
Scope:
Hafnia Taurus (ship, 2011)
Reason:
used, alone in scope -- Christian Ferrer (talk)
Open for review.
Helcion pruinosus 01.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2018-11-17 20:09 (UTC)
Scope:
Helcion pruinosus (Rayed Limpet), shell
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Best in scope --Ercé (talk) 06:23, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Open for review.
32 - 36 Argyle Street, Birkenhead 1.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Rodhullandemu (talk) on 2018-11-17 21:05 (UTC)
Scope:
32 - 36 Argyle Street, Birkenhead
Used in:
en:Listed buildings in Birkenhead
Open for review.
Aix galericulata MHNT.ZOO.2010.11.27.5.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2018-11-18 06:19 (UTC)
Scope:
Aix galericulata (mandarin duck) eggs
Open for review.
Hemeroplanes longistriga MHNT CUT 2010 0 285 Boraceia (Sao Paulo) Brazil male dorsal.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2018-11-18 06:46 (UTC)
Scope:
Hemeroplanes longistriga mounted specimen male dorsal


*Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful & used.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:02, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Open for review.
La rue Mage (Toulouse) - Vue depuis la place Perchepinte.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2018-11-18 06:47 (UTC)
Scope:
Rue Mage, in Toulouse, view from place Perchepinte
Open for review.
Bemberg Fondation Toulouse - L'Age d'Airain - Auguste Rodin (1875-1876) Inv.3084 Bronze à patine brune.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2018-11-18 07:01 (UTC)
Scope:
L'Âge d'airain (The Age of Bronze) by Auguste Rodin, Fondation Bemberg, Toulouse
Open for review.
2A Price Street, Birkenhead.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Rodhullandemu (talk) on 2018-11-18 13:08 (UTC)
Scope:
2A Price Street, Birkenhead
Used in:
en:Listed buildings in Birkenhead
Reason:
Higher resolution, has correct perspective. -- Rodhullandemu (talk)
Open for review.
51 - 57 Hamilton Square, Birkenhead.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Rodhullandemu (talk) on 2018-11-18 14:12 (UTC)
Scope:
51 - 57 Hamilton Square, Birkenhead
Used in:
en:Listed buildings in Birkenhead
Open for review.
Waterford Memorial.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
-- DeFacto (talk). on 2018-11-18 15:31 (UTC)
Scope:
The Waterford World War I Memorial in Dungarvan
Used in:
en:Dungarvan


*Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful & used.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:06, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Open for review.
6 Duncan Street, Birkenhead 2.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Rodhullandemu (talk) on 2018-11-18 20:09 (UTC)
Scope:
6 Duncan Street, Birkenhead
Used in:
en:Listed buildings in Birkenhead
Open for review.
Stables to 52 - 57 Hamilton Square.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Rodhullandemu (talk) on 2018-11-18 20:49 (UTC)
Scope:
Former stables and carriage houses, Gertrude Street, Birkenhead
Used in:
en:Listed buildings in Birkenhead
Open for review.


Pending Most valued review candidates[edit]

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.