Commons:Valued image candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Shortcut
COM:VIC
This project page in other languages:

English | فارسی | français | polski | русский | +/−

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 <!!--or image set--> 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. -- ~~~~
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info My information. -- Example
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. -- ~~~~
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question My question. -- Example
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
22,421 closed valued image candidates
 Closed as Nominations 
Promoted
  
19,572 (87.3%) 
Undecided
  
1,211 (5.4%) 
Declined
  
1,638 (7.3%) 



New valued image nominations[edit]

   
2012-12-29T13-09-03 Marcilhac-sur-Célé.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Mathieu MD (talk) on 2016-08-16 12:29 (UTC)
Scope:
Abbaye Saint-Pierre de Marcilhac-sur-Célé, panorama of the ruins

Symbol support vote.svg Support Ok pour me Olivier LPB (talk) 20:57, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not OK for me, upper part and bottom lacking (a panorama of several rows would have been better), many overexposed parts, severe chromatc aberrations --Llez (talk) 05:35, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Llez. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:02, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:52, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Jaguar E-Type series 2 coupé 1968.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
DeFacto (talk). on 2016-08-19 19:12 (UTC)
Scope:
Jaguar E-Type series 2 coupé - front
Used in:

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:46, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice image of many to choose from, but I don't agree with you creating your own number plate. Sorry. Charles (talk) 11:24, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment, @Charlesjsharp: fair enough, that's your opinion. I've been opposed in QI for blanking, blurring or pixelating number plates and advised to fake them, and now you have opposed me for faking one. I won't upload images with the genuine number plate showing - to protect privacy and so not to create the opportunity for illegal cloning - so what else could I do? DeFacto (talk). 17:55, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I suspect the problem might be in just using a picture taken of a private car. Use an image of a car in a concours or other exhibition, then there would be no privacy issues in English Law. Charles (talk) 18:12, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment, @Charlesjsharp: the issue isn't a legal one, it's a moral one. I am respecting the owner's privacy, not because I am legally obliged to, but because I choose to. Additionally, I don't want to give criminals a valid number to clone - whether it's on a private car or on a concours one. Please reconsider your objection to faked plates. DeFacto (talk). 18:31, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:33, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support It is absolutely useful to modify licence plates for the above-mentioned reason. Besides, it looks much better than just blanking or pixeling. --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:45, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is misleading though, which is not a good moral thing either! People can copy your image from Commons and then no one can find out that it is a fake. I suppose it might be OK if you put a small disclaimer on the photo. But surely better just to nominate any one of the dozens of equally good 'public' photos. Should there be a VI policy on this as dozens of images have been promoted VI with visible registation plates? Charles (talk) 10:40, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I too prefer a fake number than a blurred one. But I guess it'd be perfect for everyone if, instead of promoting your nickname, you'd use a simple "1234ABCD". --Mathieu MD (talk) 18:32, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This is not a promotion of his nickname is of English humor. I find this very funny item. Humor is a valuable element, we must cultivate Face-smile.svg. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:03, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Open for review.
Greater Kudu (Tragelaphus strepsiceros) (11802253775).jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Martinvl (talk) on 2016-08-19 20:14 (UTC)
Scope:
Tragelaphus strepsiceros (Greater kudu) bull
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This is the best picture but the scope is not formatted properly. The binomial name should be in italics followed by the english vernacular name in parenthesis. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:57, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Pictogram voting info.svg Scope changed from Kudu bull in the Kruger National Park to Tragelaphus strepsiceros (Greater kudu) bull in the Kruger National Park. --Martinvl (talk) 06:25, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

  • Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".

@Archaeodontosaurus: Scope changed. Martinvl (talk) 06:25, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:33, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't think we should have VI in this scope. Otherwise we will have scopes of animals in every national park in every country (not to mention zoos). Adds no value. Charles (talk) 11:12, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment@Charlesjsharp:I checcked the VI rules and you are quite right. If I dropped the words "in the Kruger National Park" from the scope, would you be happy to support htis as a VI?
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment No sorry; when I thought of nominating one of my photos in this scope I concluded that there were many which could be considered the most valuable. The background on your nomination is not ideal though it is a sharp image. Charles (talk) 10:51, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Pictogram voting info.svg Scope changed from Tragelaphus strepsiceros (Greater kudu) bull in the Kruger National Park. to Tragelaphus strepsiceros (Greater kudu) bull --Martinvl (talk) 13:32, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

  • Please notify previous voters of this change. Remember: "A support vote that was made before a change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn".

@Archaeodontosaurus, Charlesjsharp: I have dropped the text "in the Kruger National Park" from the scope. If Charles Sharp feels strongly about the background to the impage that I am proposing (which is not my own image, but the one that I felt was currently the best in Commons), he is welcome to make an MVR counter-proposal. Martinvl (talk) 13:32, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Small red damselfly (Ceriagrion tenellum) immature male.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Charles (talk) on 2016-08-20 11:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Ceriagrion tenellum (Small red damselfly) immature male, lateral view

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Difficult to recognize the immaturity --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:47, 21 August 2016 (UTC) Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I used eye colour and wing spots (referring to my Smallshire and Swash reference book) but for sure it is not a newly emerged specimen. Charles (talk) 10:42, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Parliament at Sunset.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Mgimelfarb (talk) on 2016-08-21 04:11 (UTC)
Scope:
Exterior of the Palace of Westminster (view SW)
Used in:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palace_of_Westminster
Reason:
While there are better images in terms of technical and/or artistic content, this image shows the important features of the building even at the smallest resolutions, making it useful in articles -- Mgimelfarb (talk)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Must connect the scope to the category that contains the image --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:51, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Linked it to the category on Commons -- thank you. --Mgimelfarb (talk) 16:31, 21 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment For buildings, You should add the orientation. Moreover, I'm afraid that if the main interest of this photo is to show the bridge, then the scope is not the good one. And, sorry but, if it's the bridge, then there are other photos which are more useful, for me. --Mathieu MD (talk) 17:09, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The main interest of this photo is to show the building, rather than the bridge. --Mgimelfarb (talk) 05:26, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
      • Sorry, I was really tired: I read "important features of the bridge" when you actually wrote "building"... --Mathieu MD (talk) 05:46, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done If this is what you suggest, then I have added the orientation -- thanks. --Mgimelfarb (talk) 05:26, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment OK. Now I understand than the main subject is not the bridge, I find your other photo more descriptive (too bad, though, for the ISO 1000 noise :-(). But this one is beautiful (except for the ISO noise and the bridge "blue thinks") and used on many Wikipedias. Other advices would be helpful. --Mathieu MD (talk) 05:46, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Open for review. May be closed as Declined if the last vote was added no later than 21:52, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Infectional Diseases Hospital, Rajshahi 18.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Nahid Hossain (talk) on 2016-08-21 11:39 (UTC)
Scope:
Infectional Diseases Hospital, Rajshahi (seen from SE)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Just add the orientation to the scope and it'll be OK. --Mathieu MD (talk) 17:18, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment How to do it. I am new for valued image submission. Can you help me on that? -- Nahid Hossain (talk) 00:14, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Open for review.
Rohanpur Octagonal Tomb.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nahid Hossain (talk) on 2016-08-21 12:12 (UTC)
Scope:
Rohanpur Octagonal Tomb
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Perspective correction necessary. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:50, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Can anyone help to correct if it requires minor changes. This photo is really valuable and I think this should be in the valued image list. Thanks is advance. --Nahid Hossain (talk) 09:21, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info in fact i hesitate about the respect of the 3rd criterion Olivier LPB (talk) 17:29, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for nominating my image. This is the first built octagonal architecture by Bengali Muslim Rulers. It was built around 1700 ad. This is important place and being maintained by the governments archeological department. --নাজমুল হক (talk) 19:28, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I am not sure that we can vote for our own photo, an answer Archaeodontosaurus ? Olivier LPB (talk) 20:45, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done The correction is made. Indeed we do not vote for his own image. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support useful.--Masum-al-hasan Rocky (talk) 12:45, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Seems useful and historic. --Koniiica (talk) 14:35, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose usefull yes, but the quality is not enough, the last version of the photo is worst than the first. Olivier LPB (talk) 17:47, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Open for review.
Paul Poupard par Claude Truong-Ngoc août 2015.jpg
View promotion
Nominated by:
Olivier LPB (talk) on 2016-08-21 15:28 (UTC)
Scope:
Paul Poupard portrait in clergyman

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:52, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Olivier LPB (talk) 20:28, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
Golden Temple night view - IMG 6323-2.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Bijay chaurasia-- Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 04:32, 22 August 2016 (UTC) on 2016-08-22 04:32 (UTC)
Scope:
Golden Temple (Harmandir Sahib) illuminated Gurdwara of Sikhism...

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Golden Temple (Harmandir Sahib) illuminated is the good category ‎--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:00, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment ✓ Done -- Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 11:29, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Polyptychus trilineatus javanicus MHNT CUT 2010 0 60 Doi Inthanon Chiang Mai - Male dorsal.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2016-08-22 05:03 (UTC)
Scope:
Polyptychus trilineatus javanicus male dorsal

Symbol support vote.svg Support useful --Llez (talk) 05:56, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Verfeil (Haute-Garonne) - église Saint-Sernin-des-Rais.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2016-08-22 05:06 (UTC)
Scope:
Church Saint-Sernin-des-Rais, Verfeil, France. East exposure.

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Please check the link to the category --Llez (talk) 05:58, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Ponte dell'Abazia (Cannaregio).jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2016-08-22 05:09 (UTC)
Scope:
Ponte dell'Abazia in Venice - SE exposure

Symbol support vote.svg Support Best in scope --Llez (talk) 06:01, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Fuchsia 'Twinny' 03.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Famberhorst (talk) on 2016-08-22 05:20 (UTC)
Scope:
Fuchsia 'Twinny' Flower.

Symbol support vote.svg Support useful. Charles (talk) 09:25, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Hanomag SR45 (1936).jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2016-08-22 07:29 (UTC)
Scope:
Hanomag SR45 (1936)

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:15, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Small red damselflies (Ceriagrion tenellum) in tandem female typica.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charles (talk) on 2016-08-22 09:21 (UTC)
Scope:
Ceriagrion tenellum (Small red damselflies) in tandem, female form typica

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:18, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Small red damselflies (Ceriagrion tenellum) mating female typica.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charles (talk) on 2016-08-22 09:22 (UTC)
Scope:
Ceriagrion tenellum (Small red damselflies) mating, female form typica

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:19, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Lanz D 3506 All-purpose version.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2016-08-22 15:13 (UTC)
Scope:
Lanz D 3506, All-purpose version (1950)

Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Lanz D3506 was built 1936 - 1942 and 1950 - 1952. During the second period (1950 - 1952) Lanz offered two versions of the D 3506: The "Ackerluft" with smaller rear wheels and the "All purpose version" in which the rear wheels are larger.
Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 20:55, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Nénuphars géants jardin de Pamplemousses.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Martinvl (talk) on 2016-08-19 19:09 (UTC)
Scope:
Giant waterlilly pond,Sir Seewoosagur Ramgoolam Botanical Garden, Pamplemousses, Mauritius
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not a best in scope, this seems to have better quality--Grtek (talk) 14:17, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Open for review. May be closed as Declined if the last vote was added no later than 21:52, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Babylonia lutosa 01.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2016-08-22 18:11 (UTC)
Scope:
Babylonia lutosa (Lutose Babylon), Shell

Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 20:54, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Polyptychus trilineatus javanicus MHNT CUT 2010 0 60 Doi Inthanon Chiang Mai - Male ventral.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2016-08-23 05:21 (UTC)
Scope:
Polyptychus trilineatus javanicus mounted specimen, male, ventral

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Llez (talk) 08:51, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Verfeil (Haute-Garonne) - église Saint-Sernin-des-Rais- vue aérienne.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2016-08-23 05:23 (UTC)
Scope:
Aerial view of Church Saint-Sernin-des-Rais, Verfeil, France.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 06:06, 23 August 2016 (UTC)
Open for review.
Frari (Venice) interior facade - Monument to Girolamo Garzoni.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2016-08-23 05:26 (UTC)
Scope:
Basilica di Santa Maria Gloriosa dei Frari- Venezia - Monument to Girolamo Garzoni

Symbol support vote.svg Support useful. Charles (talk) 08:55, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Anthyllis vulneraria rubriflora 001.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2016-08-23 10:21 (UTC)
Scope:
Anthyllis vulneraria ssp. rubriflora (Red-flowering common kidneyvetch), Habitus

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:11, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Nieuwkerke Eglise Onze-Lieve-Vrouwkerk (1).jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
--Pierre André (talk) 10:58, 23 August 2016 (UTC) on 2016-08-23 10:58 (UTC)
Scope:
Onze-Lieve-Vrouwkerk NE Church of Our Lady in Nieuwkerke, Heuvelland
Used in:
Global usage

Symbol support vote.svg Support ok pour me, the photo is usefull Olivier LPB (talk) 12:53, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Pihtsusköngäs canyon in winter.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Grtek (talk) on 2016-08-23 14:01 (UTC)
Scope:
Pihtsusköngäs canyon in winter
Open for review.
Pihtsusköngäs waterfall in winter.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Grtek (talk) on 2016-08-23 14:03 (UTC)
Scope:
Pihtsusköngäs waterfall in winter

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:12, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Fendt Dieselross F 18 (1939).jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2016-08-23 14:23 (UTC)
Scope:
Fendt Dieselross F 18 (1939)

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:13, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Polype nasal.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Mathieu MD (talk) on 2016-08-23 16:32 (UTC)
Scope:
Nasal polyp
Used in:
10 wikipedias

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Mgr-Aupetit veillée pour la vie 2015.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Olivier LPB (talk) on 2016-08-23 23:17 (UTC)
Scope:
Portrait of Michel Aupetit with Zucchetto
Used in:
Global usage

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:26, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Mgr-Aumonier veillée pour la vie 2015.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Olivier LPB (talk) on 2016-08-23 23:21 (UTC)
Scope:
Portrait of Éric Aumonier with Zucchetto
Used in:
Global usage

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:27, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Pachylia ficus MHNT CUT 2010 0 46 Espírito Santo (Rio Grande do Norte) Brasil female dorsal.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2016-08-24 05:02 (UTC)
Scope:
Pachylia ficus mounted specimen, female, dorsal

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Llez (talk) 05:20, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Verfeil (Haute-Garonne) - L’église Saint-Sernin-des-Rais enclos des Petites Filles modèles.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2016-08-24 05:05 (UTC)
Scope:
Church Saint-Sernin-des-Rais, Verfeil, France. Graves of the Model granddaughters.

Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:17, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Campo dei Gesuiti (Venice).jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2016-08-24 05:08 (UTC)
Scope:
Campo dei Gesuiti (Venice), southern exposure

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Llez (talk) 05:20, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Anthyllis vulneraria rubriflora 002.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2016-08-24 10:37 (UTC)
Scope:
Anthyllis vulneraria ssp. rubriflora (Red-flowering common kidneyvetch), Inflorescence

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:08, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Arun kumar basak (cropped).JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Masum-al-hasan Rocky (talk) on 2016-08-24 13:07 (UTC)
Scope:
Arun Kumar Basak

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
SLM-Loki LM (1938).jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2016-08-24 14:09 (UTC)
Scope:
SLM-Loki LM (1938)
Reason:
Pictogram voting info.svg Info A tractor with only 1 front wheel --Llez (talk) 14:09, 24 August 2016 (UTC) -- Llez (talk)

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Emile HENNEQUIN Directeur de la Police Municipale de Paris organisateur rafle vel'd'hiv.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jebulon (talk) on 2016-08-24 15:17 (UTC)
Scope:
Émile Hennequin, photographic portrait
Used in:
Émile Hennequin (Policier), Rafle du Vélodrome d'Hiver
Reason:
New character in "Commons" ! This sympathetic guy is Emile Hennequin, Director of the Paris City Police at the Prefecture de Police in 1942. He signed the order to the parisian policemen to arrest all the foreign jews in the city of Paris (and surroundings) in july 1942. This shame is called the Vel' d'Hiv Roundup, in french "la Rafle du Vel' d'Hiv". He was sentenced to 8 years of jail in 1947 for that, but pardoned in 1948...In use of course, but not geocoded as it is a studio shot. "Never forget". -- Jebulon (talk)

Time2wait.svg On hold there is a procedure for verification ot the licence. Olivier LPB (talk) 17:59, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done. But this has nothing to do here.--Jebulon (talk) 19:06, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
not ✓ Done i ask you another question on your talk page. And yes there is a place here, because we can't nominate a photo, if it doesn't have his place on commons. Olivier LPB (talk) 19:51, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done. J'ai répondu.--Jebulon (talk) 20:47, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I have a strong disagreement with the user above about the licenses. I've decided to stop any further useless discussion with this user, and I pursue this candidacy, which is technically and historicaly valuable, according to my more than 600 previous successfull candidacies, and following the rules of VIC. Thanks.--Jebulon (talk) 22:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Open for review.
Cymbula compressa 01.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2016-08-24 17:31 (UTC)
Scope:
Cymbula compressa (Compressed Limpet), Shell

Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 21:18, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
2012-09-08T16-55-14 img 0307 v1.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Mathieu MD (talk) on 2016-08-24 18:23 (UTC)
Scope:
Lac Vert, Castillon-de-Larboust, France, from E
Open for review.
Pachylia ficus MHNT CUT 2010 0 46 Espírito Santo (Rio Grande do Norte) Brasil female ventral.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2016-08-25 05:16 (UTC)
Scope:
Pachylia ficus mounted specimen, female, ventral

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Llez (talk) 10:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Open for review.
Verfeil (Haute-Garonne) - L’église Saint-Blaise - le plafond.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2016-08-25 05:19 (UTC)
Scope:
Verfeil (Haute-Garonne) - Church Saint Blaise Ceiling by Céroni.
Open for review.
Frari (Venice) nave left - Statue of St.Antony by Girolamo Campagna 1609.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2016-08-25 05:22 (UTC)
Scope:
Basilica di Santa Maria Gloriosa dei Frari- Venezia - Statue of St.Antony by Girolamo Campagna
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 21:25, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Open for review.
Penthorum sedoides 003.JPG
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2016-08-25 10:39 (UTC)
Scope:
Penthorum sedoides (Virginian Stonecrop), Flower
Open for review.
Vögele stone crusher.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2016-08-25 16:10 (UTC)
Scope:
Vögele stone crusher (1932)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, best in scope. DeFacto (talk). 21:23, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Open for review.
Vitrail de Sainte Geneviève - Église Saint-Jean-Baptiste-de-la-Salle (Paris).jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Olivier LPB (talk) on 2016-08-25 20:24 (UTC)
Scope:
Stain glass of Santa Elizabeth on Église Saint-Jean-Baptiste-de-la-Salle (Paris)
Used in:
fr:Église Saint-Jean-Baptiste-de-la-Salle (Paris)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment, the category linked to the scope needs to contain the image. DeFacto (talk). 21:21, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Open for review.
Guignonville - Église Saint-Félix - 3.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Olivier LPB (talk) on 2016-08-25 20:50 (UTC)
Scope:
Église Saint-Félix de Guignonville SW exposure
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment, needs a bit of perspective correction I think. DeFacto (talk). 21:19, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Open for review.
De Havilland (Australia) DH-82A Tiger Moth AN2319882.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Martinvl (talk) on 2016-08-25 21:15 (UTC)
Scope:
De Havilland DH 82 Tiger Moth
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment please change scope to be more precise : because for the category of the actual scope it is this photo which is the best. Olivier LPB (talk) 21:50, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
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]

New valued image set nominations[edit]

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

Closed valued image set candidates[edit]