Commons:Featured picture candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from Featured picture candidates)
Jump to: navigation, search
This project page in other languages:

Alemannisch | asturianu | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | English | فارسی | español | suomi | français | galego | हिन्दी | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lëtzebuergesch | молдовеняскэ | norsk bokmål | português | polski | română | русский | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | 粵語 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Shortcut
COM:FPC
Skip to current candidates Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates


FPCandiateicon.svg

Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures.

Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and current month.

For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election.

Formal things[edit]

Nominating[edit]

Guidelines for nominators[edit]

Please read the complete guidelines before nominating.

This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:

  • Licensing - Images licensed with solely "GFDL" or "GFDL and an NC-only license" are not acceptable due the restrictions placed on re-use by these licenses.
  • ResolutionImages (with the exception of animations, videos, and SVGs) of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are 'strong mitigating reasons'. Note that a 1600 × 1200 image has 1.92 Mpx, just less than the 2 million level. A 1920 × 1080 image, commonly known as Full HD, has 2.07 Mpx, just more than the 2 million level.
Graphics on Commons are not only viewed on conventional computer screens. They may be used in high-resolution print versions, and the images may be cropped to focus on portions of the image. See Commons:Why we need high resolution media for more information.
  • Scans – While not official policy, Help:Scanning provides advice on the preparation of various types of images that may be useful.
  • General quality – pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality.
  • Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer. Digital manipulation for the purpose of correcting flaws in an image is generally acceptable, provided it is limited, well-done, and not intended to deceive.
    • For photographs, typical acceptable manipulations include cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and colour/exposure correction. More extensive manipulations, such as removal of distracting background elements, should be clearly described in the image text, by means of the {{Retouched picture}} template. Undescribed or mis-described manipulations which cause the main subject to be misrepresented are never acceptable.
    • For historic images, acceptable manipulations might include digitally fixing rips, removal of stains, cleanup of dirt, and, for mass-produced artworks such as engravings, removal of flaws inherent to the particular reproduction, such as over-inking. Careful colour adjustments may be used to bring out the original work from the signs of ageing, though care should be taken to restore a natural appearance. The original artistic intent should be considered when deciding whether it is appropriate to make a change. Edits to historic material should be documented in detail within the file description, and an unedited version should be uploaded and cross linked for comparison.
  • Valueour main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that:
    • almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others,
    • night-shots are pretty but normally more details can be shown on pictures taken at daytime,
    • beautiful does not always mean valuable.


Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents

There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolours, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject.

Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the original painting are generally not considered featurable.

Works that may be scanned include most works created by processes that allow for mass distribution. For instance, illustrations published with novels. For these, it is generally accepted that a certain amount of extra manipulation is permissible to remove flaws inherent to one copy of the work, since the particular copy – of which hundreds, or even thousands of copies also exist – is not so important as the work itself.

Works created to serve a purpose include diagrams, scientific illustrations, and demonstrations of contemporary artistic styles. For these, the main requirement is that they serve their purpose well.

Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable:

  • Notable in its own right: Works by major artists, or works that are otherwise notable, such as the subjects of a controversy.
  • Of high artistic merit: Works which, while not particularly well known, are nonetheless wonderful examples of their particular type or school of art.
  • Of high historic merit: The historical method values very early illustrations of scenes and events over later ones. Hence, a work of poor quality depicting a contemporaneous historical event can be nonetheless important, even if the artistic merit is relatively low. Likewise, scans or photographs of important documents – which may not be at all artistic – nonetheless may be highly valuable if the documents are historically significant. The reason for the image's historical importance should be briefly stated in the nomination, for those reviewers unfamiliar with the subject.
  • Of high illustrative merit: Works that illustrate or help explain notable subjects, for instance, illustrations of books, scientific subjects, or technical processes. The amount of artistic merit required for these will vary by subject, but, for instance, an illustration that makes the working of a complicated piece of machinery very clear need not be notable as a piece of artwork as well, whereas an illustration for a book might well be expected to reach much higher artistic standards.

Digital restorations must also be well documented. An unedited version of the image should be uploaded locally, when possible, and cross-linked from the file hosting page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced."

Photographs

On the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.

  • Focus – every important object in the picture should normally be sharp.
  • Exposure refers to the shutter diaphragm combination that renders an image with a tonal curve that ideally is able to represent in acceptable detail shadows and highlights within the image. This is called latitude. Images can be on the low side of the tonal curve (low range), the middle (middle range) or high side (upper range). Digital cameras (or images) have a narrower latitude than film. Lack of shadow detail is not necessarily a negative characteristic. In fact, it can be part of the desired effect. Burned highlights in large areas are a distracting element.
  • Composition refers to the arrangement of the elements within the image. The "Rule of Thirds" is a good guideline for composition and is an inheritance from the painting school. The idea is to divide the image with two imaginary horizontal and two vertical lines, thus dividing the image into thirds horizontally and vertically. Centering the subject is often less interesting than placing the subject in one of the "interest points", the 4 intersection between these horizontal and vertical lines intersect. Horizons should almost never be placed in the middle, where they "cut" the image in half. The upper or lower horizontal line is often a good choice. The main idea is to use space to create a dynamic image.
    • Foreground and background – foreground and background objects may be distracting. You should check that something in front of the subject doesn't hide important elements and that something in background doesn't spoil the composition (for example that the streetlight doesn't "stand" on someone's head).
  • Movement control refers to the manner in which motion is represented in the image. Motion can be frozen or blurred. Neither one is better than the other. It is the intention of representation. Movement is relative within the objects of the image. For example, photographing a race car that appears frozen in relation to the background does not give us a sense of speed or motion, so technique dictates to represent the car in a frozen manner but with a blurred background, thus creating the sense of motion, this is called "panning". On the other hand, representing a basketball player in a high jump frozen in relation to everything else, due to the "unnatural" nature of the pose would be a good photograph.
  • Depth of field (DOF) refers to the area in focus in front of and beyond main subject. Depth of field is chosen according to the specific needs of every picture. Large or small DOF can either way add or subtract to the quality of the image. Low depth of field can be used to bring attention to the main subject, separating it from the general environment. High depth of field can be used to emphasize space. Short focal length lenses (wide angles) yield large DOF, and vice versa, long focal lenses (telephotos) have shallow DOF. Small apertures yield large DOF and conversely, large apertures yield shallow DOF.

On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, colour, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.

  • Shape refers to the contour of the main subjects.
  • Volume refers to the three dimensional quality of the object. This is accomplished using side light. Contrary to general belief, front lighting is not the best light. It tends to flatten subject. Best light of day is early morning or late afternoon.
  • Colour is important. Over saturated colours are not good.
  • Texture refers to the quality of the surface of the subject. It is enhanced by side lighting… it is the "feel" to the touch.
  • Perspective refers to the "angle" accompanied by lines that disappear into a vanishing point that may or may not be inside the image.
  • Balance refers to the arrangement of subjects within the image that can either give equal weight or appear to be heavier on one side.
  • Proportion refers to the relation of size of objects in picture. Generally, we tend to represent small objects small in relation to others, but a good technique is to represent small objects large contrary to natural size relationship. For example, a small flower is given preponderance over a large mountain…. This is called inversion of scales.
Not all elements must be present. Some photographs can be judged on individual characteristics, that is, an image can be about color or texture, or colour AND texture, etc.
  • Noise refers to unwanted corruption of colour brightness and quality and can be caused by underexposure. It is not a desirable quality and can be grounds for opposition.
  • Symbolic meaning or relevance … Opinion wars can begin here … A bad picture of a very difficult subject is a better picture than a good picture of an ordinary subject. A good picture of a difficult subject is an extraordinary photograph.
Images can be culturally biased by the photographer and/or the observer. The meaning of the image should be judged according to the cultural context of the image, not by the cultural context of the observer. An image "speaks" to people, and it has the capacity to evoke emotion such as tenderness, rage, rejection, happiness, sadness, etc. Good photographs are not limited to evoking pleasant sensations …

You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating.

Video and audio

Set nominations

If a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set. A set should fall under one of the following types:

  • Faithful digital reproductions of works notable in their own right, which the original author clearly intended to be viewed as a set. Examples: pages in a pamphlet, crops (puzzle pieces) of a prohibitively large scan, a pair of pendant paintings. Not acceptable: Arbitrary selection of sample works by an artist.
  • A sequence of images showing the passage of time. They could depict frames of a moving/changing object or a static object during different times of day or different seasons. Examples: diagrams illustrating a process, steps of a dance, metamorphosis of an insect, maps/drawings/photos of the same subject over the years (frame of view should be more or less the same).
  • A group of images depicting the same subject from different viewpoints, preferably taken under the same lighting conditions when possible. Examples: Exterior and interior of a building, different facades of a building, different interior views, obverse and inverse of a banknote/coin. Not acceptable: A selection of different rooms in a skyscraper, the facade of a church plus an organ, any images of fundamentally different scopes.
  • A group of images which show all possible variations of a particular class of object. Examples: Male and female versions of an animal (preferably in the same setting), all known species of a genus. Not acceptable: A few breeds of cats (unless they share a defining characteristic and represent all possible examples of that).

Adding a new nomination[edit]

If you believe that you have found or created an image that could be considered valuable, with appropriate image description and licensing, then do the following.

Step 1: copy the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg. Then click on the "create new nomination" button.

All single files:

For renominations, simply add /2 after the filename. For example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2



Step 2: follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save that page.

Step 3: manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list: Click here, and add the following line to the TOP of the nominations list:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg}}

Recommended: Please add a category from the list at COM:FP.

Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify him/her using {{subst:FPC-notice|Your image filename.jpg}} -- ~~~~.

Voting[edit]

Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for his/her own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed.

You may use following templates:

  • {{Support}} (Symbol support vote.svg Support),
  • {{Oppose}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose),
  • {{Neutral}} (Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral),
  • {{Comment}} (Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment),
  • {{Info}} (Pictogram voting info.svg Info),
  • {{Question}} (Pictogram voting question.svg Question),
  • {{Request}} (Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request).

You may indicate that the image has no chance of success with the template {{FPX|reason - ~~~~}}, where reason explains why the image is clearly unacceptable as a FP. The template can only be used when there are no support votes other than the one from the nominator.

A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above.

Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:

  • No reason
  • "I don't like it" and other empty assessments
  • "You can do better" and other criticisms of the author/nominator rather than the image

Remember also to put your signature (~~~~).

Featured picture delisting candidates[edit]

Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep It deserves to remain a featured picture
{{Delist}} Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist It does not deserve to be a featured picture anymore.

This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Do not replace the old image with the new image as an FP.
{{Delistandreplace}} Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace Replace the current FP with the proposed replacement.

If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box:


In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include:

  • Information on the origin of the image (creator, uploader);
  • A link to the original FP nomination (it will appear under "Links" on the image description page);
  • Your reasons for nominating the image and your username.

After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list.

As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the original creator, uploader(s), and nominator with a link to the delisting candidate. {{subst:FPC-notice-removal}} can be used for this purpose.

Featured picture candidate policy[edit]

General rules[edit]

  1. The voting period is 9 complete days counted from the nomination. After the end of this period the result will be determined. Votes added on day 10 and after are not counted.
  2. Nominations by anonymous contributors are welcome
  3. Contributions to discussion by anonymous contributors are welcome
  4. Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Exception: registered users can always vote in their own nominations no matter the account age and number of edits.
  5. Nominations do not count as votes. Support must be explicitly stated.
  6. Nominators and authors can withdraw their nominated pictures at any time. This is done by adding the following template: {{withdraw}} ~~~~
  7. Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project.
  8. Rules of the 5th day based on vote counts on day number 5 (day of nomination + 5)
    1. Pictures are speedy declined if they have no support (apart from the nominator).
    2. Pictures are speedy promoted if they have 10 support votes or more and no oppose votes. (Note that if it takes more than five days to reach this threshold, the picture can be promoted as soon as it is reached.)
    3. Once either speedy criterion is reached, the voting period is considered closed, and no more votes may be added.
  9. Pictures tagged {{FPX}} may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied, provided there are no support votes other than that of the nominator.
  10. Pictures tagged {{FPD}} (FP-Denied) may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied.
  11. Only two active nominations by the same user (that is, nominations under review and not yet closed) are allowed. The main purpose of this measure is to contribute to a better average quality of nominations, by driving nominators/creators to choose carefully the pictures presented to the forum.

Featuring and delisting rules[edit]

A candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:

  1. Appropriate license (of course)
  2. At least seven Symbol support vote.svg Support votes at the end of nine days
  3. Ratio of supporting/opposing votes at least 2/1 (a two-thirds majority); same for delist/keep votes
  4. Two different versions of the same picture cannot both be featured, but only the one with higher level of support, as determined by the closer. Whenever the closer is not sure which version has consensus to be featured, he/she should attempt to contact the voters to clarify their opinions if not clear from the nomination page.

The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5. There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations.

The FPCBot handles the vote counting and closing in most cases, current exceptions are candidates containing multiple versions of the image as well as FPXed and withdrawn nominations. Any experienced user may close the requests not handled by the bot. For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished. Also note that there is a manual review stage between the bot has counted the votes and before they are finally closed by the bot, this manual review can be done by any user that are familiar with the voting rules.

Above all, be polite[edit]

Please don't forget that the image you are judging is somebody's work. Avoid using phrases like "it looks terrible" and "I hate it". If you must oppose, please do so with consideration. Also remember that your command of English might not be the same as someone else's. Choose your words with care.

Happy judging… and remember... all rules can be broken.

See also[edit]

Table of contents[edit]

List may contain works considered Not Safe for Work (nudity).

Nominators are requested, out of courtesy, to include the {{nsfw}} template with such images. Users may select the gadget in user preferences "Deferred display of images tagged with {{nsfw}} on COM:FPC" to enable the template's effect of hiding the image until selected.

Contents

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Papio papio and juvenile Port Lympne Wild Animal Park.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 Jul 2015 at 07:51:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Guinea baboon (Papio papio) with juvenile at Port Lympne Wild Animal Park

File:Ravenna Park - birdcage 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 Jul 2015 at 01:52:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A birdcage seen in Ravenna Park, Seattle, Washington State, USA

File:USS Annapolis ICEX.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 Jul 2015 at 01:34:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"The US Navy attack submarine USS Annapolis (SSN 760) rests in the Arctic Ocean after surfacing through three feet of ice during Ice Exercise 2009 on March 21, 2009. The two-week training exercise, which is used to test submarine operability and war-fighting capability in Arctic conditions, also involved the USS Helena (SSN 725), the University of Washington and personnel from the Navy Arctic Submarine Laboratory."
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles#Ships
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Petty Officer 1st Class Tiffini M. Jones - uploaded by Cla68 - nominated by Pine -- Pine 01:34, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pine 01:34, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It could be better, but it is extraordinay anyway. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 02:30, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Should be croped. --Mile (talk) 06:26, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose yeap, for me the top creates a distraction and removes the infinity kind of look. But also this should be more white, very close to pure white, this is snow, wrong exposure creates this grey feeling. -- RTA 08:16, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Uncropped is better. --Kikos (talk) 08:59, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Titled, noisy, quite small. Yann (talk) 09:14, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

File:N.Odorata.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 Jul 2015 at 00:37:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nymphaea odorata blossom
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by SanctuaryX - uploaded by SanctuaryX - nominated by SanctuaryX -- SanctuaryX (talk) 00:37, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Well detailed image of the flower, making it easily identifiable, with good technical quality, and does not suffer from under or overexposure. It offers some scientific detail as well, with clear view to the reproductive organs, three of the four bracts, the top side and underside of the lily pads, developing lily pads, and venation on the underside of the lily pad is visible. A few stems of the lily pads are visible as well. SanctuaryX (talk) 00:37, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose too soft and unsharp. No details and halos around the petals visible. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 00:43, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • How are there "no details visible"? If you're being hyperbolic, I don't think a critique is an appropriate place for that. You can see venation clearly, the reproductive organs (as the flower is bisexual) and how they connect to the axis, and you can even see the circle in the axis where the stem attaches to the flower, the waxy leaf surface, and even wrinkles in the petals. Alchemist-hp -- SanctuaryX (talk) 03:50, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Quite good. Yann (talk) 09:16, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Mäetaguse Rosenite kabel sisevaade.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2015 at 18:19:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Inside the Rosen's funeral chapel in Mäetaguse, Estonia

File:Gevlekte orchis (Dactylorhiza maculata). Locatie. Nationaal Park Lauwersmeer 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2015 at 16:01:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dactylorhiza maculata

File:Pointe du Hoc May 2015.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2015 at 12:27:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pointe du Hoc nowadays
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 12:27, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The Pointe du Hoc, one of the major battle sites of the D-Day, june 6, 1944, as it is nowadays.-- Jebulon (talk) 12:27, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The bush or whatever in the foreground at the bottom is disturbing. Then the light situation is not that good - maybe a photo of this object taken on a sunny day could become FP. This one looks a little bit flat and dark. Sorry, but I can't support this nomination. --Code (talk) 13:00, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Dome of Church of the Gesù (Rome).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2015 at 11:59:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dome of Church of the Gesù (Rome)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Is this one shot photo or stitch ? I see left part much more unsharp compared to right wing, despite same distance, as it look like. --Mile (talk) 13:29, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 19:53, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent corrections, in addition of a wonderful image.--Jebulon (talk) 20:58, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 05:19, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:07, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Φαράγγι Σαμαριάς 3754.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2015 at 11:32:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Samaria Gorge during winter
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Greece
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by C messier - uploaded by C messier - nominated by C messier -- C messier (talk) 11:32, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Samaria gorge is the largest of the canyons of Crete, and of the largest in Europe, with 16 km length and nearly a mile deep. In this photo is visible less than the half of the gorge. It is open from May to Octomber, so this winter view is rather uncommon. Symbol support vote.svg Support -- C messier (talk) 11:32, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 11:43, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't know if it will be "ναι" or "οχί", but you should crop out the cars at left IMO.--Jebulon (talk) 12:38, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
lol! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:07, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done όχι, όχι οχί, I hope you say «ναι» --C messier (talk) 14:00, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support So... όχι... I hope Greece will return to the planet Earth and will pay its debts as any civilized people would do. Beautiful picture and country, though. -- Pofka (talk) 20:07, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks like a romanesque painting of the 1850s, or something japanese. I like it very much. Therefore, it is "ναι". For the rest, every expression of democracy is a victory, but no dream: the debt will never be paid completely, and Europe without Greece is a non sense. Let's play and live with that now, and long live Greece !💶💶💶--Jebulon (talk) 20:51, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ναι to your picture of Samaria gorge - and good luck to you in the difficult days and months to come --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:10, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Red rose with black background.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2015 at 11:25:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Red rose (Kardinal) with black background.
I think the sharpness is acceptable. --Laitche (talk) 13:04, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Of course ! You nominated it as a FP candidate !--Jebulon (talk) 21:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)😀
I just copied below Arion's nom comment :) --Laitche (talk) 21:36, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Dont see any problem with sharpness. Sometime flowers are done wide open for that. However, you could leave stem visible. --Mile (talk) 13:24, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:05, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good work. --Code (talk) 17:05, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 18:07, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 19:51, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer 05:10, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Oh no, I'm Britney judging... have some pure black in the main object, and this shadow not good for the photo, and this magenta thing on the edge of petals (see notes). Just changing whites, blacks and shadows most of this goes see here, and brings more a scarlet red to the photo. Water drops could increase the "wow factor", but I like the photo, for obvious reasons Clin... -- RTA 08:36, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sharpness is average, but I like the color and the contrast with dark background. --Yann (talk) 09:22, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Textura dos Lençois.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2015 at 10:45:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
I think the resolution is acceptable. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 12:59, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Excellent!!! but too small for this type of fotos... --Laitche (talk) 15:05, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose You should ask to the uploader a original size photo. D800 produces a away bigger ones. I think that he scale down the photo just because it's a contest and to kept the original "safe". The main point that I like on this photo is that he did not over processed as other photos that he shared. In the other hand, seeing the "winners" of this "contest"... heavy processing ftw!!! -- RTA 08:05, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Lena Delta B.Lyakhovsky Island 2010-09-28 Boris.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Jul 2015 at 09:11:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aerial photo of Malakatyn river at Bolshoy Lyakhovsky Island, part of Lena Delta Wildlife Reserve, Sakha, Russia

File:Rock Creek Park, Washington, D.C., 04259a.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2015 at 21:51:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rock Creek Park, Washington, D.C.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Carol M. Highsmith, uploaded and nominated by -- Yann (talk) 21:51, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Some freshness... -- Yann (talk) 21:51, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really a nice mood! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 02:04, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Good winter image. A little bit noisy. --XRay talk 07:38, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Seems good on first sight, but opened is like bad scan (noise-unsharp). --Mile (talk) 07:40, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Mile. --Laitche (talk) 09:23, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
    • Looking at it at 6 Mpx (3000 x 2000), it looks quite OK. At least not worse than your own picture with a similar resolution... Yann (talk) 11:47, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
      • I know you mean this, but this size for this kind of photos is no wow for me. This one is 18MP plus enough sharp and no noise, even that photo some voters opposed because of no wow... --Laitche (talk) 11:55, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No colour space metadata or embedded colour profile in EXIF. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:36, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Pleasant in low resolution, but way too unsharp for a FP. -- Pofka (talk) 19:50, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent composition. Sharpness is fine at 6 MP. --King of ♠ 23:00, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Pops Restaurant, Route 66, Arcadia, Oklahoma, 04404a.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2015 at 21:49:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pops Restaurant, Route 66, Arcadia, Oklahoma
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Carol M. Highsmith, uploaded and nominated by -- Yann (talk) 21:49, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the composition and the colors. -- Yann (talk) 21:49, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Several dust spots, noisy and IMO too unsharp. --XRay talk 07:39, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per XRay. --Laitche (talk) 10:04, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
    • @Laitche: Same as above. Looking at it at 6 Mpx (3000 x 2000), it looks quite OK. At least not worse than your own picture with a similar resolution... I will correct the dust spots. Yann (talk) 11:49, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
      • @Yann: Even this zise (3000 x 1888) this photo is not sharp and noisy and distorted. I think importance of resolution is depend on the subject :) --Laitche (talk) 12:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
        • I agree, I think it looks bad even at even smaller resolutions than 6 megapixels. The top 'straw' is obviously very out of focus and the rest is soft too. It's a great subject and great composition but I'm surprised that a photographer of her supposed calibre released such a technically poor image. Diliff (talk) 23:15, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Even if Mrs Highsmith is obviously a "sacred cow", I'm afraid this pic is far from our FP standards here, per Xray arguments. A pity, it looks appealing as thumbnail.--Jebulon (talk) 12:47, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As other. --Mile (talk) 13:28, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No color-space metadata and no embedded color profile. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:38, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. -- Pofka (talk) 19:49, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because Well, no more chance, a lot of opposers...--Jebulon (talk) 21:08, 5 July 2015 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Menyanthes trifoliata Spechtensee 01.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2015 at 16:54:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Menyanthes trifoliata

File:Taraxacum seed or Dandelions.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2015 at 16:20:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Added a fresher version which contains the exif data. The full exif data is now visible on the image page. Thanks.--TripWire (talk) 20:08, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Rome panorama from Altare della Patria.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2015 at 16:12:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rome panorama from Altare della Patria
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Rome panorama from Altare della Patria. All by --Mile (talk) 16:12, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mile (talk) 16:12, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This picture seems to be quite chaotic to me. I fail to see its main subject. It doesn't really look like a panorama shot because many buildings are covered by various objects. Just my thoughts. -- Pofka (talk) 18:51, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Maybe i should put "A view on Rome from Altare della Patria". Cat cityscape is OK. There is no main subject here, that various things are part of Rome. I think photo is fine, no disturbing element.--Mile (talk) 20:13, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Fits much more as a cityscape. -- Pofka (talk) 08:57, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment, it's a little bit dark for me, see this. -- RTA 21:30, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done +EV --Mile (talk) 06:57, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctos ssp.).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 13 Jul 2015 at 03:30:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctos ssp.)
You talk like this is a studio, you forget that this is a picture of a deadly animal in natural environment. --The Photographer (talk) 19:03, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
You talk like this is not FPC page... pictures here should be beyond good, planned, carefully edited, not random pictures.
This image not even was edited properly, see the difference...
For THE Photographer you should learn something before be rude... -- RTA 20:35, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Please Rodrigo, do not take this to a personal matter. I appreciate your comments --The Photographer (talk) 21:57, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The RTA's version is really better. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 01:40, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
@ArionEstar: Your vote is based on a photo that has not been uploaded to commons. Additionally, the photo created by RTA is not superior, he is creating a before and after efect with a version that is not currently being evaluated here. --The Photographer (talk) 02:18, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Crazy talk... bye... -- RTA 08:10, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Glory of St. Catherine.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2015 at 11:51:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Glory of St. Catherine
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question The image page could give more information: in which church is this, who is the artist? --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:02, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Lizard on the rock.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2015 at 10:40:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lizard on the Gobustan rocks, Gobustan State Reserve

File:Günəbaxan.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2015 at 10:42:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kangarli, Arazboyu State Nature Sanctuary)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Orxanr89 - uploaded by Orxanr89 - nominated by Interfase -- Interfase (talk) 10:42, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Interfase (talk) 10:42, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too many blurred parts. Especially those in the lower part of the picture tend to disturb the viewer. --Tremonist (talk) 12:54, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Tremonist. --Cayambe (talk) 07:11, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interfase, the author should be closer to the subject in order to create a better result, and fill the frame with the subject, I suggested a crop in image note. However, even if you crop, the image is not sharp, mainly because the equipment (and not use heavy technique, as staking images, to overcame this issue). -- RTA 08:10, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. -- Pofka (talk) 18:58, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Кучерлинское озеро, Горный Алтай.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2015 at 08:31:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mountain Altai, Kucherla lake.

File:Amalfi BW 2013-05-15 10-09-21 1 DxO.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2015 at 07:56:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Amalfi, cathedral
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by Berthold Werner
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Berthold Werner (talk) 07:56, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's nice, but morning light isn't good here, all facade is in shadow. Evening light would have been better for this building imo, because it's facing west. --Kadellar (talk) 09:59, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per Kadellar. A little too unsharp in parts, too, it appears. --Tremonist (talk) 13:10, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I like the mood here, wish fountain wasnt choped. But you have some echo lines at the castle above, some blue-kind edge. You could clone that bird in the air, probably affected with denoising. I wouldnt mind to support afterwards. --Mile (talk) 14:11, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support I really doubt if the quality really meets FP standards, but the capture was so brilliant that I was unable to oppose. -- Pofka (talk) 19:07, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Color space tagged as sRGB, without an embedded color profile: Windows and Mac browsers and apps treat the colors randomly. Please adjust your workflow such that you embed the colour profile data. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:47, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor lighting. --King of ♠ 22:35, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Mähu kivid II.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Jul 2015 at 05:39:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mähu boulders in Lahemaa, Estonia
✓ Done Kruusamägi (talk) 18:12, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Imelda May en Madgarden Festival 2015 - 13.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2015 at 19:29:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:2015 Kłodzko, ul. Dusznicka, myjnia samochodowa 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2015 at 17:41:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Car wash at Dusznicka Street in Kłodzko
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:41, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:41, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting action picture. :) --Tremonist (talk) 13:03, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thumb up. --Johann Jaritz Sämtlich(talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 19:09, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 02:05, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Interesting shot but front face of the car is in shadow even if this light was necessary for this shot. --Laitche (talk) 09:35, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Laitche. Backlight is necessary for the water, but some kind of flash from the front would have made it really better, sorry. --Kadellar (talk) 14:39, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Wrong light, subject uninteresting to me, too trivial, no 'wow'.--Jebulon (talk) 21:13, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Berdorf (LU), Werschrummschloeff -- 2015 -- 6230-4.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2015 at 16:00:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Labyrinth “Werschrummschloeff” in Berdorf, Luxembourg
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created , uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay talk 16:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 16:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gorgeous gorge! :) --Tremonist (talk) 13:02, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good idea, good "eye", good achievement !--Jebulon (talk) 17:15, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 18:09, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A little bit overexposed sky, but nice anyway. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:14, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very beutiful images, I dont mind the overexposed sky here but I think the highlights settings (-82) actually make the sky look worse.--ArildV (talk) 19:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your explanation. I will check this. If this improves the image, I'll upload the better one. --XRay talk 19:50, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice HDR image, I like this green and brown. Would you remove the strange borders on the four edges, probably 2 or 3 pixels each. --Laitche (talk) 20:21, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • ✓ Fixed I just removed the green and red borders. Thanks for your hint, Laitche. The overexposed sky was improved too. Thanks, ArildV, ArionEstar. And only one additional improvement: A better resolution.--XRay talk 04:38, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yep. --Johann Jaritz Sämtlich(talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:04, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:19, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 19:09, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:59, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I know the place :-) --Cayambe (talk) 08:36, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Xylocopa virginica male face.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2015 at 11:35:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
I would rate it as scary --The Photographer (talk) 14:08, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--LivioAndronico talk 15:40, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 16:02, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:09, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 18:08, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:01, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose We have some its kind of, in much higher standard. I put notations, some strange stuff-mistakes. I cant get rid of feeling this bug was killed to make a photo, can anyone correct me ? --Mile (talk) 14:16, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
If you look at the technique of the author, this was taken in a sleeping animal, what you call mistake is really a insect hair gold color in the shadown. --The Photographer (talk) 18:03, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The same author could create a better result, as this. I fixed the main correctable issues, wrong license, black areas, and centralized. But the lack of the quality, in general, is not appealing to me. -- RTA 07:59, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Please do not compare animals and different nominations. I revert your version, I am sorry, its adding more problems that fixing something (like tilt), I invite you to create a alternative nomination, upload it like another version. Thanks for your help --The Photographer (talk) 18:45, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
For THE Photographer you should study away more about photography. You reverted a background cleaning that you was not capable to do. I dedicate my time to improve a image, and you through the edition away just to impose yourself; this behaviour do not below to this Movement.
Why would I create another bad quality image? Just to not hurt your ego? No one can edit a photo that you only uploaded (with several errors)? Cleaning background is not a alternative, is improvement of the image...
And I'm not comparing "animals" I'm comparing technique... the author already showed domain of a better technique, if you did not get that, is better be quite, for you not embarrass yourself. -- RTA 20:54, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
Please Rodrigo, do not take this to a personal matter. I appreciate your comments --The Photographer (talk) 21:48, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As some already said, there already are better examples of this. -- Pofka (talk) 19:11, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
We have many buildings, however, each has its peculiarities. In this case this is not the same animal. --The Photographer (talk) 19:27, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:26, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I know him. His face is very reflective in nature and difficult to capture as it is contrasting to his wings and body colour. Well done. (I saw an argument about "killing". Hmm, Carl Linnaeus and Frederic Charles Fraser may killed a lot of insects as part of their study. Otherwise we have no IDs; everything is just a bug or plant. I don't encourage every hobbyist like me start killing them; but see nothing wrong if a serous researcher or a serous organisation like USGS killed a few for the sake of research and studies.) Jee 02:46, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wow! but off center antennae are not even. --Laitche (talk) 13:46, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Conditional oppose No color-space metadata and no embedded color profile in current version. The original upload from flickr had an AdoberRGB color profile (which is not recommended for web use, sRGB is better). But in the subsequent edit by THE (Smile) Rodrigo.Argenton uploaded here, the color space metadata were stripped off. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:59, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Then it is better to revert boldly than "kill a nom" with an oppose. :) Jee 01:21, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Baby talk about colour-profile again... I brought back the metadata, as you can see on the File page (how about the next time you do that, it takes the same time as to come here to cry for it). I should let it in that away, because it's a bad photo, if several mistakes, but your only reason to you say no is the colour-profile... for God's sake.
I'll assume "revert" as "fix", to not be more disappointed... -- RTA 07:51, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Saint Francis Xavier Cathedral Interior.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2015 at 09:31:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saint Francis Xavier Cathedral Interior
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because global lack of quality, many opposers.--Jebulon (talk) 21:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Opera house Opernplatz Mitte Hannover Germany.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 11 Jul 2015 at 09:28:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Opera house and Opernplatz square located at --Alchemist-hp (talk) 23:19, 2 July 2015 (UTC)Georgsstrasse in Mitte quarter of Hannover, Germany.
"In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not." --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:58, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
@Martin: I think they need reading glasses. --Laitche (talk) 06:46, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
@Alchemist-hp: IIII instead of IV for 4 (see clocks), XXXX instead of XL for 40, CCCC instead of CD for 400 are rather common in modern roman numeration...💐--Jebulon (talk) 00:22, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Safety Car side 2015 Malaysia.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2015 at 19:47:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Safety Car side 2015 Malaysia
The other nomination has expired by rules of the 5th day at 15:39:24, 2nd Jul 2015 (UTC). --Laitche (talk) 19:22, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support cool car. Photo is good but could be better. --Pine 01:56, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's better for the hard conditions. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:17, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 16:00, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 19:13, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The classic safety and not the virtual --LivioAndronico talk 06:42, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Вечерний Дус-Холь.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2015 at 17:28:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Amsterdam - Beer House - 0289.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2015 at 17:24:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Per Code. --Tremonist (talk) 13:00, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Carl Nielsen c. 1908 - Restoration.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2015 at 15:25:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Carl Nielsen, c. 1908

File:Fromental Halévy, L'Éclair score cover - Restoration.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2015 at 15:22:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Title page to an early vocal score of Fromental Halévy's L'éclair

File:2014 Rochas da praia das Furnas Porto do Son. Galiza-F3.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2015 at 14:23:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Porto do Son in Galicia, Spain.

File:Laokoon by Adriaan Korteweg.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2015 at 12:45:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

1914 painting of Laokoon by Adriaan Korteweg (1890-1917). Photo shot at the Pinakothek der Moderne Munich, in context of the El Greco Expressiv temporary exhibition. Normally in the collection of the Lehnbachhaus, Munich.

File:櫻川札.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2015 at 12:55:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sakuragawa-Fuda
Thank you, Laitche. And do you like the way they are depicted here? You are familiar with the subject. --Tremonist (talk) 15:47, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
@Tremonist: No, I am not familiar with this subject, before this nomination I didn't know what is this but I recognized some Japanese in this image so I checked this with ja Wikipedia... --Laitche (talk) 15:56, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
@Laitche: Thank you. Could have been you had to do with such cards before. Might have helped understanding the importance of this picture. :) --Tremonist (talk) 16:23, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Gyumri haxtanaki aygi.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2015 at 12:48:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"Haghtanak" park in Gyumri city at night, Armenia

File:Saint-Séverin Ambulatory, Paris, France - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2015 at 11:32:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saint-Séverin Ambulatory
'~'

--The Photographer (talk) 11:47, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Haha, well it could be nice to code buttons that could automate a vote anyway, a bit like POTY voting maybe. Diliff (talk) 11:54, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • @The Photographer: you forgot '~' .--Laitche (talk) 11:59, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like this mood :) --Laitche (talk) 12:06, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per the others. --Tremonist (talk) 12:20, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lilitik22 (talk) 13:06, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:33, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 17:44, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 18:45, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:09, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 10:08, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, sorry for Tomascastelazo.--Jebulon (talk) 13:56, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
    • Well, he hasn't voted yet, so nothing to be sorry for here. I'm still expecting his oppose vote for 'too much distortion' or something similar though! Diliff (talk) 15:07, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Every nomination of mine, he opposes. No exceptions. Diliff (talk) 17:06, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Yes, ever since I had an argument with him on the FPC talk page, he has opposed every nomination (in which he votes). Sometimes he doesn't vote, but if he does, it is 100% oppose. I asked him to stop voting on my nominations because I don't trust his motives, but he refused. Diliff (talk) 18:18, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question And who de hell do you think you are to ask someone to not vote in this process? An infalable gifted guru or some crap like that? Or do you enjoy special privileges around here? As far as my motives, your are absolutely clueless. I think, however, as you venture to distrust my motives without reason, that you are a tantrum prone crybaby when someone calls you out on your not so top of the line photographs. ;) --Tomascastelazo (talk) 18:47, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Do we have to go around in circles calling each other names again? It's pointless. I wasn't talking to you. I only mentioned it to explain to Livio the issue I have with you. It wasn't an invitation to start a fight again. Diliff (talk) 22:36, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 14:56, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ... but what a bunch of silly crybabies including Jebulon and Diliff. @ Jebulon your comment is a crude attempt at trolling and baiting and is completely out of line. @ Diliff I do not oppose every single nomination of yours, while I have opposed some of your images on the same grounds that many other oppose your or somebodyelse´s nominations and even on the same grounds that you oppose others, that does not constitute "every nomination" or "Every nomination of mine, he opposes. No exceptions." So basically you are lying, and someone who lies, is a liar. A good photographer, and a liar. All it takes is one single example to prove your lies. The truth is that I abstain most of the time because while I think that your craftsmanship is absolutely top of the line, your themes get a little boring for me. I was going to support this image when it came out because it is a different approach and it is pretty neat in my opinion, but did not get around to do it. I am glad I did not! I find your ego trip quite amusing. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 18:32, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
    • You have opposed every nomination of mine in which you have voted, which I clarified in my next reply to Livio. Show me a single vote on my nominations that isn't an oppose and I'll take it all back. I said already that you haven't voted in all of them (abstaining, in other words). Nothing I said is in disagreement with you on that. Diliff (talk) 21:32, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • You are parsing your words. Abstaining is a way of voting anyway, just as neutral. Is voting support the only option for your images? And in any case, this vote proves you wrong. And this vote is consistent with my views. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 23:20, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • An abstain is a conscious decision not to vote either on the affirmative or negative. Your version of abstaining is not a 'vote'. It's the absence of a vote. According to the dictionary: Synonyms: not vote, decline/refuse to vote. Do I abstain from every nomination that I don't vote in? No. Most of them I don't even pay enough attention to consider voting. I have no idea what your thought processes are on nominations that you don't vote on and I don't claim to. All I know is that (until now anyway) you always voted oppose if you voted on my nominations. Your support vote here doesn't 'prove me wrong' because my claim was correct at the time I said it. I never made a prediction about your future voting patterns. Your logic is terrible. Diliff (talk) 23:50, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Today I have better things to do than to engage in useless prose and rethorical bs... ;) --Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:15, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Why did you even bother engaging in the first place then? Ah yes, because you enjoy stirring things up and calling people names but you're not interested in actually separating truth from false. Diliff (talk) 08:54, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Well, let´s see if you a man true to his word, and let me quote you "Show me a single vote on my nominations that isn't an oppose and I'll take it all back." Your words above... well, here it is #D is gonna have to eat a little something [[1]]. ;) I am waiting... --Tomascastelazo (talk) 04:31, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • OK then I take it back. You supported one nomination. I must have missed that because I honestly didn't remember you supporting any. Diliff (talk) 17:37, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

File:London Skyline from Waterloo Bridge, London, UK - Diliff.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2015 at 11:25:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

London from Waterloo Bridge
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It may not be a church, but I like it anyway. --Pine 01:59, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as per Kadellar. ;oD Yann (talk) 06:47, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Professional. --Johann Jaritz Sämtlich(talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 16:00, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Supporting your pictures is a waste of time. They should go directly to FP category after upload. lol -- Pofka (talk) 19:21, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 22:08, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Pont de Chancia02 2015-05-10.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2015 at 09:43:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Chancia and river Bienne
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Panoramas
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by KlausFoehl -- KlausFoehl (talk) 09:43, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as nominator -- KlausFoehl (talk) 09:43, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose 180° panos look so strange. Clouds are forming bands around the mountain. Definately unnatrual looking. I would try just one half. --Mile (talk) 09:55, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's an exciting projection this way or the other. And let the clouds form bands if they like, this is surely due to the kind of projection and does not really disturb me. :) --Tremonist (talk) 12:23, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Are there CAs along the shadow of the right balustrade? The same problem also in the alternative. --Llez (talk) 10:13, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting info.svg Info Yes there are. For panoramic images I usually use only image information from near the centre, but each balustrade comes from one photo (to avoid parallax errors) and hence the stronger CA from the image corner shows. -- KlausFoehl (talk) 13:20, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting info.svg Info Probably hugin cannot add a colour profile where files from camera (see File:Chancia02 2015-05-10.jpg) come without. I thought that for cameras gamma=2.2 has been the de facto standard for quite a while. The Canon G12 does gamma=2.2 as I have checked, how to add this best to the file? -- KlausFoehl (talk) 08:26, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great composition. --King of ♠ 22:08, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

Pont de Chancia02crop 2015-05-10.jpg

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The alternative doesn't provide this great panoramic view what is regrettable. --Tremonist (talk) 12:25, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Xanthoria parietina 02.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Jul 2015 at 06:19:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Common orange lichen (Xanthoria parietina)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Fungi
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Common orange lichen (Xanthoria parietina) on the bark of a fruit tree. Close-up image with approx. 3 cm diagonal. All by me --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:19, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 06:19, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 06:40, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 11:38, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:25, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It's curious! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:35, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 10:15, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 06:48, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting subject, I like this... yellow? --Laitche (talk) 21:48, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice hues. --Johann Jaritz Sämtlich(talk)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 19:23, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

File:По гротам пещеры 1.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2015 at 17:13:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Kungur Ice Cave, Perm Krai, Russia / Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Владимир Чуприков - uploaded by Владимир Чуприков - nominated by JukoFF -- JukoFF (talk) 17:13, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- JukoFF (talk) 17:13, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry but no wow (I cannot support this orange and blue artificial light for tourist), oversharpened and noisy. --Laitche (talk) 22:39, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dэя-Бøяg 01:51, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Love it. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:03, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The colours are ok for me, but Laitche is right that the image is oversharpened. Could you provide an alternative? --Tremonist (talk) 12:27, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noisy. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 18:21, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It would be better if it wasn't so oversharpened. I like the lighting of the cave, many caves don't have proper and or artistic lights. This is a long exposure, you can see it as nightly light painting. --Kadellar (talk) 19:24, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Noisy but wow (the artificial light does not remove the wow IMHO). 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:20, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 06:49, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I saw comments about noise, but when i see EXIF it is obviously tripod shot. On ISO 200 is hard to get noise. Just ice has some noise kind of looking, but no noise around, so probably even that on ice isnt noise but natural shape. --Mile (talk) 14:25, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I have a question. This orange and blue colors are natural phenomena? And the white ice on the right side is also illuminated by artificial white light so this white is not trustworthy as well, I want to see the real colors... --Laitche (talk) 14:33, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Caves have temperatures above zero (some 4-8°C), so forming of ice there is phenomena. I havent saw it so far. --Mile (talk) 15:44, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Alternative version with much less noise/artefacts: File:По гротам пещеры 1 reprocessed.jpg current version overwritten (made of RAW data provided by the photographer via e-mail), not candidating yet, just wishing some feedback (maybe @Laitche: @Jacek Halicki: @Tremonist: @Kadellar:), because of course some nice "HDR-ish" effects on the ice formations are gone now; should, however, the new version still be preferred, I would upload it above the old one in order to have it taking part on the international WLE round. Thanks --A.Savin 18:56, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
@A.Savin: Looks very nice! Probably I can support that, Thanks :) --Laitche (talk) 19:37, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
This new version is better, so OK to overload. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:44, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Both are fine. Why is there a change in perspective? --Kadellar (talk) 12:01, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
There must be several intentional distortions in the photographer's version, whereas all I did was some perspective corrections on the verticals, so therefore the differences and also a slight change in crop. Still waiting for an answer by Vladimir Chuprikov if he likes my version and likes to have his one overwritten. --A.Savin 12:29, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 19:24, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 09:05, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support new version The flaws are fixed, I can recognize the real colors with new version :) --Laitche (talk) 09:42, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Айсберг в районе ЗФИ.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2015 at 17:01:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 21:04, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Yellow Jesus.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2015 at 16:06:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Christ the Redeemer statue on the Corcovado mountain during warm yellow sunset.

*Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it with birds. Some too artsy colors but very good mood. Maybe with crop to zoom-in would be even better. --Mile (talk) 17:33, 30 June 2015 (UTC) Opted for bottom version. --Mile (talk) 07:46, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@Tremonist: @PetarM: Maybe without crop. This one is a typical example that the clouds are nice at the composition and helps in the wow factor. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:54, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The Christ is not centred, not in the thirds, all this deformed objects, by the lack of the quality of the lens, decreases the final result. RTA 23:45, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like this Christ. And the "deformed objects" seem to be birds by the way. ArionEstar, why do you think I would be opposed to clouds? Pls lemme know. :) --Tremonist (talk) 12:31, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
    @Tremonist: Opps! Wrong reply! Sorry! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 11:20, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
    @ArionEstar: Never mind! :-) --Tremonist (talk) 12:48, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lilitik22 (talk) 13:07, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Basik07 (talk) 12:03, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose See the rules above: almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others... By the way, it's oversaturated. Not even a QI. --ViseMoD (talk) 08:08, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above.--Jebulon (talk) 21:27, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Alternative 1[edit]

Yellow Jesus - Edited.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Cloned stamped towers, birds, and other things, cropped to centralized Christ, and raised the black, and white, to give more contrast. -- RTA 23:45, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 07:17, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:33, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose over-processed. unnatural colours. --ViseMoD (talk) 08:09, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Embedded ProPhoto RGB color profile is not recommended for web use. Some popular web browsers ignore embedded color profiles, meaning users of those browsers see the wrong colors for this image. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:26, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Dawn with the "alternatives"! This one does not add anything.--Jebulon (talk) 21:29, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Alternative 2[edit]

Yellow Jesus - Edited and croped.jpg
Pictogram voting info.svg Info Cloned stamped towers, birds, and other things, cropped to thirds, giving more focus on Christ watching the right side, and raised the black, and white, to give more contrast. -- RTA 23:45, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- RTA 23:45, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
    A Rodrigo Argenton's support! It really has wow! Anyway, thanks for your support and your contribution. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 00:19, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
    Actually ArionEstar, I have a mixed feelings with this photo, Jesus there pass the idea of peace, and the clouds brings another mood, this should be calm, a slower shutter speed would be better. -- RTA 21:25, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Also great (although most of the clouds were cut out, this crop is still nice for my support). 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 00:43, 1 July 2015 (UTC) 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 00:37, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This one. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:13, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support small picture but great mood! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:03, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 06:26, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As good as Alternative 1. --Code (talk) 07:17, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good composition, RTA style :) --Laitche (talk) 08:23, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 12:32, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Saffron Blaze (talk) 18:53, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice textures and forms. --Pine 02:03, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Basik07 (talk) 12:02, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The same reason as for File:Yellow Jesus.jpg --ViseMoD (talk) 08:10, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment ProPhoto RGB color profile not recommended for web use. Use sRGB instead. Some popular web browsers ignore embedded color profiles, meaning users of those browsers see the wrong colors for this image. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:28, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
@Slaunger: Can you fix? 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:59, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
@ArionEstar:: I do not know. I have not tried it before, but maybe. Not tonight though. I will have a look tomorrow. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:08, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose does not look like an "alternative", and this different picture is not better to me. Maybe a third, or a fourth, or a fifth "alternative"?--Jebulon (talk) 21:33, 5 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 22:07, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Egg fruit DS.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2015 at 15:59:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Egg fruit
@Tremonist: I think colors are OK and natural, I mean no wow factor in this colors. e.g. this red is wow for me, and also this color is wow (remarkable to me) :) --Laitche (talk) 13:41, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
@Laitche: I agree with you! There is no "wow" in the colours. But it's sufficient to depict natural colours here, I think. :) Greetings, --Tremonist (talk) 14:15, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
@Tremonist: Yes, that's your opinion, my opinion is if the creator fix the bottom cut as RTA mentioned, this image is good QI but not FP (since no wow for me). But probably I change my vote to neutral. I think there are lots of varieties in opinions, it's ok :) --Laitche (talk) 14:32, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
@Laitche: Oh yes, people can have different opinions, that's pluralism in all its ways. It's ok for me, too. :) --Tremonist (talk) 15:33, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Baptistry of Neon ceiling mosaic (Ravenna).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2015 at 13:59:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The ceiling mosaic in the Baptistry of Neon. Ravenna, Italy. Built around 6th century A.D. UNESCO World heritage site.


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 21:04, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Enrique Simonet - La autopsia - 1890.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Jul 2015 at 09:58:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Anatomía del corazón; ¡Y tenía corazón!; La autopsia
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Good queston Jebulon. As far i see they dont have obligation to name autor of photo, but original author (creator) or the art made. So no credit to photographer in this case, i suppose. I whish this could be made clear. Acceptable, probably yes, moral, no. --Mile (talk) 17:48, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Certainly .... the developer of the framework is reported ... in this case is sufficient for me--LivioAndronico talk 17:54, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I just have to oppose to a submitted photograph without named author.--Jebulon (talk) 21:12, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I must say that a worst reason for voting against I do not think you could find--LivioAndronico talk 21:54, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In this case the authorship should go to the painter. Just about any competent photographer can and should produce this quality or reproduction. There is no "signature" to the photographer, just a plain old photographic reproduction of a work of art. --Tomascastelazo (talk) 03:18, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 10:21, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pugilist (talk) 10:59, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 18:25, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 06:50, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Smnt (talk) 04:25, 4 July 2015‎ (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Conditional oppose No color-space metadata and no embedded color profile: Windows and Mac browsers and apps treat colors randomly (even on a calibrated monitor). -- Slaunger (talk) 20:32, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Small bird perching on a branch.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Jul 2015 at 21:48:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Siberian blue robin taken at Tennōji Park.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Laitche -- Laitche (talk) 21:48, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Laitche (talk) 21:48, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Like here... On a branch! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:15, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support focus not on eye - but still...! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:17, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- H. Krisp (talk) 11:07, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:34, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 16:00, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral nice but that branch blurred in the foreground just do not like--LivioAndronico talk 17:18, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Dэя-Бøяg 01:53, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice composition. --Pugilist (talk) 11:05, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Laitche, noise reduction has gone much too far here, you've lost a lot of detail, look at the feathers! --Kadellar (talk) 20:53, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
    • @Kadellar: Thanks for the comment. The source image is not so detailed unfortunately... Yes, I executed a bit NR and a bit sharp but I think differences are not so much. Here, pre NR and sharp feathers, Regards. --Laitche (talk) 21:37, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Not sure, but have you got any noise reduction activated directly on camera? 1Dx + 300f4 w/2x should be much sharper imo (well, maybe it's the multiplier, which seems to be the old first edition, isn't it?). I've gone birding and I could get finer detail with a bit better lens but worse body, so I don't really know how similar is your case. These: 1, 2 are crops, they are fine but there were some sharper pictures as well. --Kadellar (talk) 21:55, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • @Kadellar: I think the subject distance is much farther than your samples, I didn't downscale at all, crop only. Here, pre-crop version. And maybe caused by my skill... Of course I couldn't use tripod and lens-shake compensation is not capable in this case, I hope I can do more well next time :) --Laitche (talk) 22:22, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
p.s. I processed from the raw so camera NR is not involved. --Laitche (talk) 22:30, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Ok, thanks! Yes, it seems my birds were much closer. The tripod also helps! --Kadellar (talk) 22:33, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • @Kadellar: Partially I don't get your comment "the multiplier" means extender? What does "the old first edition" mean? --Laitche (talk) 10:49, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • @Laitche: Yes, extender, sorry. With first edition I mean that there is now the 2x Mark III (2x III), which is much better. --Kadellar (talk) 12:11, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Pyramids of the Giza Necropolis.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Jul 2015 at 20:30:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pyramids of the Giza Necropolis
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by KennyOMG. For some reason there's a real shortage of decent images of the Pyramids. Current FP is much lower quality and also missing the 3 queens' tombs on the right side. -- KennyOMG (talk) 20:30, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support KennyOMG (talk) 20:30, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:53, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Current FP, File:All Gizah Pyramids.jpg. --Laitche (talk) 23:28, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
    Yes, much better. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 00:44, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice, Thanks KennyOMG :) --Laitche (talk) 23:28, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:16, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pugilist (talk) 06:18, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose right side too bright, unfavorable light. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:00, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think we can keep both of two in this case. --Laitche (talk) 10:38, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agree with Alchemist, overexposed, hard light. --Mile (talk) 14:03, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per others --Tremonist (talk) 14:36, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Light might really require improvement, but still it looks great due its angle. -- Pofka (talk) 16:02, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry,too bright --LivioAndronico talk 17:08, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great composition and quality. High educational value. Very good. --Code (talk) 10:25, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kadellar (talk) 12:12, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Conditional oppose No color-space metadata and no embedded color profile: Windows and Mac browsers and apps treat colors randomly (even on a calibrated monitor).

File:Berdorf (LU), Werschrummschloeff -- 2015 -- 6314.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Jul 2015 at 18:13:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Stairs in the labyrinth “Werschrummschloeff” in Berdorf, Luxembourg
  • I don't beleive Jebulon. The picture is not impressively for me, it does not lack a signature ...--LivioAndronico talk 16:01, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose missing colors. --Laitche (talk) 17:40, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Red, green, blue? Sorry, I found just all kinds of brown. ;-) IMO that's special for this picture. A wooden stair and brown leafs. --XRay talk 17:45, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • I got what this photo is aiming (I guess) so I think the target is not enough for FP, means missing something... I think most easy to plus something is colors :) --Laitche (talk) 18:09, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Cygnus olor cygnet Hampton Court.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Jul 2015 at 13:53:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mute swan (Cygnus olor) cygnet at Hampton Court

File:Gherkin Cheesegrater Abstract.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Jul 2015 at 08:44:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gherkin Cheesegrater Abstract

File:Iglesia de la Sagrada Trinidad, Gniezno, Polonia, 2014-09-17, DD 30-32 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2015 at 21:08:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the main nave of the Holy Trinity church, Gniezno, first capital of Poland. The gothic church was built in 1430 and rebuilt after a fire in 1613. The interior furnishing of the temple mostly dates from the 18th century.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info View of the main nave of the Holy Trinity church, Gniezno, first capital of Poland. The gothic church was built in 1430 and rebuilt after a fire in 1613. The interior furnishing of the temple mostly dates from the 18th century. All by me, Poco2 21:08, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 21:08, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:52, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support a bit too shadowed but well done Dili・・・ --Laitche (talk) 13:50, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unsahrp on some places, need to use tripod and stack. Geometry is somehow "twisted". Bad light and not so rich interior we are used to see here. --Mile (talk) 14:10, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
    Actually I used a tripod. Othwerise there would be no way to manage a HDR like this. Poco2 15:29, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks ok to me. --Tremonist (talk) 14:41, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It actually looks twisted, just like Mile already said. -- Pofka (talk) 16:17, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry,per Mile --LivioAndronico talk 17:12, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
    Guys, it doesn't look twisted, it is twisted (assuming that under "twisted" you mean that it isn't symmetric) Poco2 18:58, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
    Poco, seems you should avoid twisted subject... --Laitche (talk) 14:05, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 18:32, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Basik07 (talk) 23:02, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition doesn't convince me. It looks like some space is missing at the bottom. --Code (talk) 09:14, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Туманний світанок на нарцисовому полі.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2015 at 19:32:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Valley of Narcissus, Ukraine

File:Kapelle der Versöhnung.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2015 at 18:23:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Chapel of Reconciliation on the grounds of the Berlin Wall Memorial on Bernauer Strasse in Berlin.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The Chapel of Reconciliation on the grounds of the Berlin Wall Memorial on Bernauer Strasse in Berlin. The chapel was designed by the architects Peter Sassenroth and Rudolf Reitermann and inaugurated on 9 November 2000. Why do I think this is more than just QI? Maybe it doesn’t have the WOW of a sunset mountain panorama, but I still think this could be FP. Taking this photo was significantly more difficult than it might seem. The chapel has a very unfavorable location. It is oriented to the north and that’s why there’s only a very short time window each day in which some morning sunbeams touch the chapel. I went there a hundred times to get a good light situation. Even when the light is good the chapel is not easy to photograph because the dynamic range is very large. It is hardly possible to get both the wooden poles and the interior well exposed. Therefore I used HDR in this case. Additionally it is quite difficult to get a picture of the chapel without people in front of it. The memorial site is very busy and normally dozens of school classes are running through the picture. The only thing I’m not sure about is the perspective. I'm not sure whether this is better? I’m looking forward to your opinions. All by me -- Code (talk) 18:23, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Code (talk) 18:23, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Unusual chapel. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:10, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I appreciate your effort taking this photo (north facades are really bad as I know myself) and I also appreciate the detailed background information. The transparent architecture of the building is impressive, the photographic quality very high. For me there is one shortcoming: The distracting element at the left foreground destroying the inner silence of the photo. From this stance the other photo is better (but take a careful look, you've forgotten to crop a tiny element at the top left) --Tuxyso (talk) 19:16, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Tuxyso: Thank you very much for your detailed review which helped me a lot for my photographic formation. Do you think I should nominate the other picture instead or as an alternative? --Code (talk) 18:49, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
I would suggest it as alternative. Both photos are too similiar. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:50, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, I nominated it as an alternative. I will follow your suggestion and crop the tiny object on the left corner this evening when I'm back at my computer with Photoshop installed. --Code (talk) 07:55, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @Tuxyso: I cropped the tiny element out now (in the alternative). Thanks again for your hint. --Code (talk) 19:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Extraordinary building indeed, but the capture of it is completely ordinary. There is nothing stunning in it which would make this picture different from the others. I think everyone could take such picture being there. That's why I think it would fit as QP much more. Pictures like this or this aren't worse in any way. Both of them are QP. -- Pofka (talk) 19:38, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I think I explained why the capture is anything but ordinary. Which different composition would you recommend? --Code (talk) 18:49, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I think that FP must have some kind of phenomena in it, which would cause WOW feeling and would be difficult to capture for others. Detailed and high resolution ordinary picture of a building doesn't have this, at least for me. Probably the main problem is the picture's subject/location as it doesn't seem to be worth more than QP: no mountains, no nature, no outstanding/luxurious/decorated architecture, etc. It is just a simple wooden chapel which at first might look exotic, but actually it isn't so. -- Pofka (talk) 16:09, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Original --LivioAndronico talk 08:09, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The subject is interesting but the composition is sort of ordinary and front face (I think the right side is front face) is not illuminated in shadow. --Laitche (talk) 13:41, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Thank you, Laitche. As I said - unfortunately the front is always in shadow. I don't know how one could make a better picture of the chapel - maybe with a big external flash or something. Do you have an idea? --Code (talk) 18:49, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I don't have any idea... I only can say, It can't be helped. If I were you, would give up this subject... --Laitche (talk) 19:01, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:40, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Something strange and unnatural in the sky at left. "Bandings" looks like a manual attempt to try to correct an overexposition...--Jebulon (talk) 14:13, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
    • Jebulon, I have looked at this closely with Photoshop, altering the gamma which can often emphasise any banding, and I think these are just wispy clouds. -- Colin (talk) 20:17, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm afraid the exterior of this building isn't doing anything for me. Makes me think of these, sorry. However, this photo suggests there are better photographic opportunities inside. -- Colin (talk) 20:17, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • @Colin: Are you telling me the chapel looks like a toilet? Is this some kind of insult or what? --Code (talk) 15:34, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
@Colin:: Please take a careful look on the chapel. IMHO the transparent architecture is really remarkable. It is not friendly to link a picture of a toilet for comparison. --Tuxyso (talk) 18:31, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Alternative[edit]

The Chapel of Reconciliation on the grounds of the Berlin Wall Memorial on Bernauer Strasse in Berlin.

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 07:55, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 14:40, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico talk 17:18, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good, the "hair light" at the top right of the building is the dot on the i :) --Tuxyso (talk) 19:42, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Also great. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:33, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Same as above, the sky at left is disturbing.--Jebulon (talk) 14:40, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per my comment above. -- Colin (talk) 20:17, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Solar Dynamics Observatory Sees M7.9-Class Solar Flare.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2015 at 14:31:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sees M7.9-Class Solar Flare
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by NASA/SDO - uploaded & nominated by Originalwana (talk) 14:31, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As nominator Originalwana (talk) 14:31, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Resolution is a little bit small but acceptable, no problem about this. IMHO, the main problems are the very unreal colors and the blur. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:14, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 19:31, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per others --Tremonist (talk) 14:37, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Lilitik22 (talk) 13:09, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I have uploaded a higher resolution version of the image. The colours are artificial as this is actually a blended image of light with wavelengths of 131 and 171 Angstroms (UV). I have added this info to the image notes. Originalwana (talk) 21:23, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support with the higher resolution. --Yann (talk) 06:53, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Basik07 (talk)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Conditional oppose No color-space metadata and no embedded color profile: Windows and Mac browsers and apps treat colors randomly (even on a calibrated monitor). -- Slaunger (talk) 20:42, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Polling machine Vouli tôn Hellinôn Hellenic parliament Athens.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2015 at 13:45:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Voting machine hellenic parliament
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 13:45, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support One of the most important symbolic tools for the future of Europe, and maybe for the world during the days to come: an electronic polling machine at the seat of a Member of the Hellenic Parliament in Athens, Greece. Of course this picture is unique, and was very difficult to take. The words on the screen mean: "Assembly of the Hellenes", with the symbol of the Parliament. I was very lucky to be able to take this picture, and of course, this is to be shared in "Commons" !!-- Jebulon (talk) 13:45, 28 June 2015 (UTC)Funny (or not...), notice the german brand name...)
    • The German brand name on the polling machine is a constant reminder to the Greeks who their true overlords are, I suppose. ;-) Diliff (talk) 08:20, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The screen is dirty and I added some recomendation (notes), however, this work is wow for me --The Photographer (talk) 14:05, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for review and support. The screen is not really dirty (not very clean neither...), but there are just some little "holes" on the glass.--Jebulon (talk) 16:15, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Focus is a little bit small at the bottom of the picture, but wow for me too. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:09, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It certainly has high educational value but the corners are blurry and there's blue CA all around. The bottom should be cropped. Not one of the best pictures here on Commons, I'm afraid. --Code (talk) 16:49, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for review and comment. Yes, this is the best we have on "Commons", because there is no other ! Please take the same in the Bundestag or in the House of Representatives ! Yes I agree it is not technically excellent, but I claim for mitigating circumstances... About the frieze: no, I won't crop it out, this kind of motive is named Greek key ! It seems accurate, isn't it ? Smile--Jebulon (talk) 22:35, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Hm. Some years ago I worked in the Bundestag but I can't remember that they had polling machines and I believe they still don't have. In the TV news we see the members of parliament only use ballot boxes. Concerning the picture I think it should be VI but not QI or FP. For me, FP is always something like a QI with either a great WOW or a great educational value. Your picture has the latter, but it doesn't meet the quality standards. And the educational value / WOW-effect is not that great that I would accept mitigating circumstances. Just to explain my vote. I hope you understand. --Code (talk) 18:57, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
Yes I do, thanks.--Jebulon (talk) 09:39, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment ✓ Done CA corrected, thanks. --Jebulon (talk) 16:15, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Content and the story might be interesting, but solely reduced to the photographic quality I see nothing special here. --Tuxyso (talk) 19:10, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
    • For "solely reduced to the photographic quality", please go to Quality Images Candidates page.--Jebulon (talk) 19:50, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
      • Go to the Valued Images page :) The "photograpic quality" is not equivalent with quality image but also includes mood, light, compositon, eye-catching effect. For me (it might be seen differently by others) nothing else but the photographic aspects (better term) matter for FP, not the historical relevance. --Tuxyso (talk) 20:35, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
    • Fine with me. Old discussion about what is/should/could/would be a FP. Not my opinion, but I can understand yours. Thanks for sharing yours.--Jebulon (talk) 08:57, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others --Tremonist (talk) 14:38, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment New version uploaded.--Jebulon (talk) 16:15, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

File:2014 Nysa, zespół kościoła św. Jakuba Starszego i św. Agnieszki.JPG[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Jul 2015 at 09:20:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saints James and Agnes Basilica in Nysa
@Code:✓ DoneI don't want to cut from the bottom more, the reason the tree. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 18:54, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Hm. I don't know. The distortion on the left is still there. I stay Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral here. --Code (talk) 18:31, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looks too chaotic and it's difficult to find the main subject of it. That street with modern cars doesn't work with the old town buildings for me. QP, maybe? But not FP. -- Pofka (talk) 19:42, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Christian Ferrer 04:39, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice view. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 07:03, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 13:05, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looks overexposed although it shouldn't ... was too much brightening applied during processing? Daniel Case (talk) 22:57, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
    @Daniel Case: The picture was correctly exposed. If you want I can send you a raw file. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 06:01, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Basik07 (talk) 22:43, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Озеро Фролиха, Вид со скалы на губе Аяя.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Jul 2015 at 20:45:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lake Frolikha in Buryatia, Russia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Mousesanya - nominated by A.Savin --A.Savin 20:45, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 20:45, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Very nice mood and composition, I like this lighting, clouds and the water colors. --Laitche (talk) 20:52, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 21:23, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per others. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:21, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow indeed. Jee 03:08, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Voted too fast on this. Clouds are problem. --Mile (talk) 08:50, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Overprocessed, artificial colors. --DXR (talk) 08:00, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per DXR. It looks too unnatural. -- Pofka (talk) 08:43, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The water in shadows is also problem, I knew when I voted though I think it's an unusual and nice photo :) --Laitche (talk) 09:31, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Badly processed HDR. Very unnatural.--Nino Verde (talk) 10:13, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think HDR looks unnatural is normal (night sky of HDR is blue and the moon looks like the sun...) and FP is not QI :) --Laitche (talk) 10:33, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Overprocessed. --Xicotencatl (talk) 15:41, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Umm, I am guessing this water colors are natural phenomenon but if that colors are caused by HDR, I will change my vote to oppose. Would someone be able to confirm that? --Laitche (talk) 16:31, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
I am not even sure that the image is an HDR. But the clouds are really odd: normally clouds have a blueish hue (that is more blue than green and red), but here they are perfect gray (eg. 193-193-193), imho the result of active desaturation. Only the small part above the lake is purple, which is quite sloppy editing. I am not saying that it is wrong to like the result visually, but EV is certainly badly impaired by - for documentary purposes - inappropriate editing. --DXR (talk) 17:18, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
I don't think it's a HDR, I think the sky and the mountains in the upper part were too blue in the opinion of the author and he tried to desaturate the 30% top of the image. -- Christian Ferrer 18:00, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Hmm, maybe Christian is right, means this image is not HDR and not overprocessed but just under-saturated, in any case I change my vote to neutral for now. --Laitche (talk) 18:09, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
And if the creator purposely change the colors but I have no idea what is the purpose? ... --Laitche (talk) 18:12, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Artificial and overocessed. Especially the sky.--Jebulon (talk) 22:43, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unnatural-looking, per other opposers. Daniel Case (talk) 06:48, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others --Tremonist (talk) 13:04, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

File:Dýrafjörður, Vestfirðir, Islandia, 2014-08-15, DD 037 PAN.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 6 Jul 2015 at 12:32:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

4-frames panorama of Dýrafjörður, one of the fjords comprising the Westfjords and situated between the fjords Arnarfjörður, in the South and Önundarfjörður, in the North. Dýrafjörður belongs to the municipality of Ísafjarðarbær and the fjord is 9 km wide and stretches 32 km into the land.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info 4-frames panorama of Dýrafjörður, one of the fjords comprising the Westfjords and situated between the fjords Arnarfjörður, in the South and Önundarfjörður, in the North. Dýrafjörður belongs to the municipality of Ísafjarðarbær and the fjord is 9 km wide and stretches 32 km into the land. All by me, Poco2 12:32, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 12:32, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice view, I like this colors, reflections and the mood :) --Laitche (talk) 12:39, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Laitche: ✓ CA removed, thanks for the note Poco2 15:00, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I like it also but please see notes. --ArildV (talk) 12:47, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
ArildV: ✓ stitching issues solved, thanks for the notes Poco2 15:00, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support now--ArildV (talk) 14:41, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose It's a nice view, but the technical execution is imo not good enough to clear the FP threshold: Upper left corner is very close to blown (perhaps recovered from white) and the sharpness in the center part is not good enough for the size of the image (looking at the white buildings/tents). Sorry. --DXR (talk) 13:11, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
DXR: ✓ Overexposure issue solved, about the sharpness I am not sure, I couldn't see a noticeable drop of sharpness, could you add a note? Poco2 15:00, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Oh, that's much better regarding the clouds! I think your second frame from the left is shaky-blurred, which is quite unfortunate. I'm going Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral because that version certainly improves a lot. The sharpness issue can be seen quite easily when you follow the close side of the fjord.--DXR (talk) 15:26, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support I had a bit of doubt about the colors in remote targets here. It reminds me a bit of my personal pictures I've taken during my holidays where the main subject is located in a far distance (just like in this picture). I was strongly disappointed when I saw my pictures as they were just incomparable with the real view I saw. I think this picture has just the same issue, because colors depth is just incomparable with those around rocks and those behind the river, which looks quite toneless. Another picture nominated below with quite remote mountains as well doesn't have such issue, so I guess it is possible to solve this somehow. Still, despite this issue the picture is appealing and worth support. -- Pofka (talk) 16:31, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
    Pofka: I've played around with the WB and came to the conclusion that the current colors are quite loyal to reality. Can you give me a hint (bluish, greenish,...)? Poco2 17:21, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
    Added note where I think it is too pale. I think it should look much greener live. Only the remote (where I noted) parts have issues for me. All these rocks, bushes at the bottom are of a great tone. -- Pofka (talk) 20:39, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
    Thanks, but I am not sure whether there is an issue and whether I should do some local correction. I'd like to hear other opinions Poco2 17:31, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great composition! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:24, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Issues noted, but on balance I think it works. Daniel Case (talk) 06:37, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tremonist (talk) 13:03, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kadellar (talk) 12:06, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Smogorówka Dolistowska - rainbow.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Jul 2015 at 22:43:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rainbow in Smogorówka Dolistowska, Poland
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 22:43, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 22:43, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely --LivioAndronico talk 22:45, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:10, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Livio, miss the exif... --Laitche (talk) 03:56, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♠ 05:58, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pofka (talk) 09:55, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice but nothing that I'd call extraordinary. The buildings are just that, buildings without anything special and the partial rainbow is pretty but the result is not at FP level to me, sorry. Poco2 12:46, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Σπάρτακος (talk) 15:41, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Poco. Rainbow is not striking enough to offset ordinariness of buildings and flat land. Daniel Case (talk) 04:33, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per other opposers. --Cayambe (talk) 08:33, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think this is good landscape photo with nice light and the colors, the rainbow is also important factor in this photo but it's like kind of a garnish or decoration so partial rainbow is no problem for me :) --Laitche (talk) 10:03, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Laitche --Tremonist (talk) 13:02, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Conditional oppose No color-space metadata and no embedded color profile: Windows and Mac browsers and apps treat colors randomly (even on a calibrated monitor). -- Slaunger (talk) 20:48, 5 July 2015 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 05:00, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

File:Wroceń - wooden house.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Jul 2015 at 22:40:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Old house in Wroceń, Poland
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 22:40, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 22:40, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support. Lovely, though slightly unsharp. --King of ♠ 05:59, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support -- Pofka (talk) 09:56, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. It's nice, but I don't find it quite strong enough in the combination of composition, subject and quality for it to be at FP level. — Julian H. 11:43, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Julian, if the landscape in the sorroundings is nice you could have de-centered the subject Poco2 12:44, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Subject without much wow, usual small size, sorry. --DXR (talk) 13:12, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In addition to others, I would note the overly subdued color and apparently unsharp roof. I can see what you wanted to do, but this might be better in the summertime, with the leaves out in full and a clear blue sky in the background. Daniel Case (talk) 04:32, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Far too much empty bottom, a crop just below the first tree is more striking IMO. -- Christian Ferrer 04:46, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. --Tremonist (talk) 13:01, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Color space tagged as sRGB, without an embedded color profile: Windows and Mac browsers and apps treat the colors randomly (even on a calibrated monitor). -- Slaunger (talk) 20:51, 5 July 2015 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /FPCBot (talk) 05:00, 6 July 2015 (UTC)


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]

Wed 01 Jul → Mon 06 Jul
Thu 02 Jul → Tue 07 Jul
Fri 03 Jul → Wed 08 Jul
Sat 04 Jul → Thu 09 Jul
Sun 05 Jul → Fri 10 Jul
Mon 06 Jul → Sat 11 Jul

Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)[edit]

Sat 27 Jun → Mon 06 Jul
Sun 28 Jun → Tue 07 Jul
Mon 29 Jun → Wed 08 Jul
Tue 30 Jun → Thu 09 Jul
Wed 01 Jul → Fri 10 Jul
Thu 02 Jul → Sat 11 Jul
Fri 03 Jul → Sun 12 Jul
Sat 04 Jul → Mon 13 Jul
Sun 05 Jul → Tue 14 Jul
Mon 06 Jul → Wed 15 Jul

Closing a featured picture promotion request[edit]

The bot[edit]

Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below (except to add categories on the file page, because need a non-bot user to do it). However after the bot has counted the votes a manual review step is used to make sure the count is correct before the bot again picks up the work.

Manual procedure[edit]

Any experienced user may close requests.

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|category=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}}
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    featured or not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    becomes
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. If it is featured:
    • Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate category of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
    • Also add the picture to an appropriate subpage of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images.
    • Add the template {{Featured picture}} or {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
      • If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
      • If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessements template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
      • Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
      • The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
      • You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
    • Add == FP promotion ==
      {{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.
    • Add on the file page its respective categories for Featured pictures of... like Category:Featured pictures of objects, Category:Featured pictures of landscapes, of people, of Germany, of France, etc. This is the only part of the process that needs a user who is not a bot to complete it.
  5. As the last step (whether the image is featured or not; including {{FPX}}ed, {{FPD}}ed and withdrawn nominations), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/July 2015), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.

Closing a delisting request[edit]

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    '''Result:''' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg)
  2. Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
    delisted or not delisted
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted ===
  3. Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/July 2015.
  4. If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
    1. Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
    2. Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes). Also, remove the image from all categories like Featured pictures of ....
    3. Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.