Commons talk:Featured picture candidates

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to Commons:Featured picture candidates.

• This is not a forum for general discussion of the page’s subject.
• Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
• Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~).
• New to Commons? Check out the project scope. Ask questions, get answers.

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24
candidate list

Likely Livioandronico2013 sock being considered for unblock

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Check new user for possible LTA activity. Comment there if you have an opinion. (Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Livioandronico2013 fyi) -- Colin (talk) 14:13, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Global ban for Livioandronico2013

Please share your opinion on meta:Requests for comment/Global ban for Livioandronico2013 (not started by me). Thanks --A.Savin 15:21, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

New FP gallery page “Places/Cemeteries”

On the base of an idea suggested by Ikan and Charles (see here), I have created a new Featured Pictures gallery page Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Cemeteries and collected on it the FPs of cemeteries and graveyards which were previously scattered over the gallery pages Places/Other, Places/Settlements, Architecture/Religious buildings and others. I hope this is OK for all of you. I have added only photos which show larger views of several graves; for pictures showing individual monuments and memorials (including solitary graves), we will continue to use the Monuments and memorials section, and for details of grave sculptures the different sections of the Objects/Sculptures gallery page.

The icon on top of the new gallery page is not distinct enough, I will exchange it soon by a more specific one. If you find other problems or errors, just tell me about them or correct them yourself ;–). Best, --Aristeas (talk) 16:56, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Confusing template

On a current nomination I incorrectly assumed  Oversaturated was an oppose vote by Basile Morin. If it confused me (been here for years) it will likely confuse others. Should we eliminate this template? Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:41, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

 No, because it's currently used in a bunch of (previous) nominations.

This template is like  Overprocessed. The color is different from  Oppose -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:49, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

the colour is only slightly different - but it is the minus sign that I think is wrong. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:22, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

No worry, the FPC bot counts well at the end of the voting period. Possibly we can discuss the icon/pictogram on the talk page of the template (but please don't choose {{Flower}}'s ) -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:38, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Given the file name and description of File:Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg, was indeed originally intended as an oppose vote. We don't use it like that, which is confusing because is very similar to the icon used in  Strong oppose (which is recognized as a vote by the bot). I think we should have consistent icons for comment templates like  Oversaturated,  Overprocessed and whatever else we have. How about File:Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg, which is used by  Comment (recently changed from the grey File:Pictogram voting comment.svg). El Grafo (talk) 14:59, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

It makes sens to me. There's also File:Symbol problem vote.svg. Tests added in Template talk:Oversaturated#Icon -- Basile Morin (talk) 16:02, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

 Delist  :-) Basile Morin (talk) 12:40, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Wouldn't it address all concerns to simply replace the image the template uses to be the same as {{Overprocessed}}? If it's not supposed to be counted as an oppose vote, it probably shouldn't be nearly identical to an oppose vote, and its usage seems to be more similar to {{Overexposed}} than {{Oppose}} anyway. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  16:39, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Replied here -- Basile Morin (talk) 17:34, 21 March 2023 (UTC)