User:Lvova/qi

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Принято

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Columba white.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good --Korall 19:42, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! WConf-ru3-42.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments OK --Mbdortmund 16:35, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fridrih I, Summer garden.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good --Mbdortmund 22:39, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Caesar, Summer garden.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments good --Mbdortmund 22:39, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Woman in pink, summer garden (cropped).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment Good quality, but I'd crop it to focus more on the statue. -- H005 00:40, 8 November 2009 (UTC)  DoneI've uploaded the cropped version of this file. Lvova 10:28, 8 November 2009 (UTC) That was a bit too tight, I've made it a litle wider. -- H005 23:48, 8 November 2009 (UTC) Thank you :) Lvova 06:34, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 850th anniversary of Moscow.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Minor fluff on background which could be removed but otherwise good. --Iotatau 21:15, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 850th anniversary of Moscow - revers.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Again minor fluff but otherwise good. --Iotatau 21:15, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 30th anniversary of Victory in Patriotic War.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Cayambe 21:50, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 30th anniversary of Victory in Patriotic War - revers.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Also good. --Cayambe 21:52, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 20th anniversary of Victory in Patriotic War.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Also good. --Cayambe 21:50, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 40th anniversary of Victory in Patriotic War.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Cayambe 09:33, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 40th anniversary of Victory in Patriotic War - revers.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Cayambe 09:33, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 60th anniversary Armed Forces of USSR.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Cayambe 19:29, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 60th anniversary Armed Forces of USSR - revers.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good. --Cayambe 19:29, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! 20th anniversary of Victory in Patriotic War - Revers.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Would benefit from a top crop. --Iotatau 11:26, 1 March 2010 (UTC) ok,  Done Lvova 12:10, 1 March 2010 (UTC) Thanks, QI now. --Iotatau 12:15, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! PushkinMskVblizi.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI. Geocode would be very useful! --Jovianeye 17:38, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

File:Surikov na Prechistenke.JPG

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Surikov na Prechistenke.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI. --Jovianeye 02:14, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

File:Statue of Lermontov in Moscow zoom.jpg

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Statue of Lermontov in Moscow zoom.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments QI IMO.--Jebulon 15:58, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Three kozuli.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Seems good. Mattbuck 13:39, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! T-34-85 at Mound of Glory (machine-gun left).jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments ok --Ianare 20:16, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Slaski tydzien 5047.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice symmetry, detail, color --Daniel Case 02:01, 27 March 2011 (UTC)  Question Grand-Master of what, please ?--Jebulon 21:49, 28 March 2011 (UTC)  Info Count Palatine Francis Louis of Neuburg, bishop of Breslau since 1683, archbishop of several dioceses, Hochmeister of the Teutonic Order (1694-1732). --Rave 09:23, 29 March 2011 (UTC) very interesting, thank you very much.--Jebulon 11:39, 30 March 2011 (UTC).

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Slaski tydzien 5004.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments IMO, such a circle needs a better (symmetric, like a nice square) framing. The crops, then the composition, are not good...--Jebulon 00:01, 27 March 2011 (UTC) cropped. --Lvova 09:16, 27 March 2011 (UTC) Better, thank you, even if the crop is too tight a bit, now... --Jebulon 21:59, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Slaski tydzien 5072.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI for me --Archaeodontosaurus 09:44, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Slaski tydzien 5062.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Carschten 09:44, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Slaski tydzien 5070.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Carschten 09:44, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люк в Красногвардейском районе.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Why not rotate it counterclockwise? From the writing it seems that this would be the correct orientation. --Plozessor 04:26, 18 May 2024 (UTC)  Done Rotated CCW --Екатерина Борисова 15:56, 19 May 2024 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --Plozessor 16:49, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люк Малодетскосельского проспекта.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Tagooty 03:18, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Летний сад WLM 043.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --MB-one 12:26, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люки и лючки 31.05.24 СПб 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Plozessor 03:56, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Fisheye Woodgrain.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --TOUMOU 10:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люки и лючки 31.05.24 СПб 11.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:45, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Октябрьская набережная 22 СПб Точная нивелировка.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 23:55, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люки и лючки 31.05.24 СПб 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Plozessor 04:16, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Куклы-неразлучники 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --MB-one 09:16, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люки 11.06.24 СПб 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Tagooty 00:44, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Поликлиника 37, Правды 18, интерьеры 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality (more categories would be welcomed). --C messier 19:27, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Монтессори-рамка для обучения завязыванию бантиков 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --C messier 19:27, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ворота на Лахтинской улице.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Berthold Werner 14:14, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Schwinn Scarlet.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Berthold Werner 14:14, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люк ЛМЗ 13.06.24.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Юрий Д.К. 13:50, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люки и лючки 31.05.24 СПб 12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Jakubhal 04:58, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люки 11.06.24 СПб 06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Thi 09:11, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люк на Большой Морской.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --MB-one 08:48, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люки и лючки 31.05.24 СПб 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --F. Riedelio 17:45, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Узорчатый люк.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Kritzolina 10:50, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люки и лючки 31.05.24 СПб 03.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Ermell 13:40, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люки 11.06.24 СПб 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Ermell 13:35, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люк 5.06.24 СПб.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --GoldenArtists 08:04, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Летний сад WLM 019.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Nice composition. But I think there is too much chroma noise. Fixable? --Augustgeyler 11:39, 19 June 2024 (UTC) Tried to fix with some help, take a look now, please. Lvova 19:39, 19 June 2024 (UTC)  Support You did change the white balance as well but the result is very good. Even some overexposed stone parts got some texture back. --Augustgeyler 19:48, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люк на Почтамтской улице СПб.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Jakubhal 04:09, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люки 11.06.24 СПб 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 10:26, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люк СПб Керчь 1981.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Jakubhal 04:07, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Building in Tyumen 045.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Why so dark? This uses only 60 % of the available brightness range. --Plozessor 03:58, 22 June 2024 (UTC) You're right, check now, please. Lvova 03:56, 23 June 2024 (UTC)  Support Yeah! --Plozessor 16:01, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! BA Necropolis 2012-05-24 p2 014.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Tilted, otherwise good --Plozessor 03:58, 22 June 2024 (UTC) Fixed. Lvova 03:56, 23 June 2024 (UTC)  Support Good quality. --Plozessor 16:01, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Летний сад WLM 061.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --ReneeWrites 14:55, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Лючок на Галерной 05.06.24 СПб.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --MB-one 14:36, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люки 25.06.24 СПб 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support A centered crop would be better, but still ok, I guess --Poco a poco 06:23, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Волжский переулок СПб 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 06:23, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Улица Красина, руина.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 23:19, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люки 11.06.24 СПб 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Comment  Overexposed fixable? --Augustgeyler 13:45, 25 June 2024 (UTC) Please, check this version. Lvova 06:30, 26 June 2024 (UTC)  Support Good quality now. --Augustgeyler 08:13, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Масленичные блины.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments White balance looks off and the blini appear underexposed. --C messier 21:47, 24 June 2024 (UTC) Please, check this version. Lvova 06:30, 26 June 2024 (UTC)  Support Good quality now. Please don't overcategorize. Fixed it --MB-one 07:36, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Улица Связи, Зеленогорск 14.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments MAy be good enough for QI, but the leaning out trees are disturbing. Please try to fix. --XRay 06:34, 1 May 2024 (UTC)  Done Tried to fix it as much as I can. --Екатерина Борисова 23:26, 1 May 2024 (UTC)  Support IMO it's acceptable. --XRay 06:57, 3 May 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люк voda СПб.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 16:17, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люки 11.07.24 СПб 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 16:48, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Ливневая канализация 11.07.24.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 08:59, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люки 10.07.24 СПб-Петергоф 07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:26, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люки 10.07.24 СПб-Петергоф 06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 08:59, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люки 10.07.24 СПб-Петергоф 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:26, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люк-менажница на территории Мечниковской больницы 01.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Plozessor 04:37, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люк-менажница на территории Мечниковской больницы 10.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 18:48, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люк-менажница на территории Мечниковской больницы 08.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:53, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люк-менажница на территории Мечниковской больницы 04.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:53, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люк-менажница на территории Мечниковской больницы 12.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 07:24, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люки 26.06.24 СПб 02.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Юрий Д.К. 19:40, 15 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люк-менажница на территории Мечниковской больницы 06.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 07:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люк-менажница на территории Мечниковской больницы 05.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Люк-менажница на территории Мечниковской больницы 07.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 09:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

File:Aleja Solidarnosci.jpg

• Nomination Aleja Solidarnosci in Warsaw --Lvova 21:23, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
• Promotion  Oppose because of the strange "triangle" in the left bottom corner of the picture.----Jebulon 22:56, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
   Question How about now? --Rave 07:36, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
• Thanks for removing the "triangle". I do  Support now, because of the very nice light.---Jebulon 20:47, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   George Chernilevsky 07:34, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

File:Man statue in Lazenki.JPG

• Nomination Zeus, Łazienki Królewskie in Warsaw --Lvova 21:23, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
• Promotion *Oppose: Would be better without the people in the background, and the description, translated from Russian, just says "Statue in Royal Baths Park". I've added in a little more clarification in an English version, but we don't know who made the statue, and, while I'm willing to buy this may well be Zeus, I'd like to know how that conclusion was reached. Adam Cuerden 18:45, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
   Comment I think, that full description is not necessary for this nomination. And sign up, please. --Rave 18:19, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
  Sorry, forgot to sign. But I do think that we need to at least credit the sculptor, if only to allow the image to be effectively used. Adam Cuerden 18:45, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
  It is Bachus, probably; I'm looking for description. Lvova 04:17, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
  I've found and added description. If anybody want to see how old conclusions were reached - here, in russian. In fact it is (polska) Alegoria rzeki Bug, posąg na tarasie przed Pałacem na Wyspie w Łazienkach Królewskich w Warszawie. Rzeźba autorstwa Ludwika Kaufmanna z 1855 r. Lvova 10:22, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
   Support Accurate identification makes this special: It can now be used in articles on the Bug River, or Ludwig Kaufmann. Adam Cuerden 13:42, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

  I admit that I was wrong. Correct description increased the value of picture. --Rave 19:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

•  Comment Yes, but I'm not sure it is a QI : noise reduction seems to be too strong. But picture not so bad though... well... Neutral--Jebulon 22:14, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   George Chernilevsky 07:40, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

File:Castle in Malbork, stained-glass window in the church02.jpg

• Nomination Castle in Malbork, stained-glass window in the church. --Lvova 20:32, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
• Promotion
• Needs to be straightened. --King of Hearts 04:03, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

• Straightened. Check again, please. --Rave 16:58, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

•  Support Good now -- George Chernilevsky 14:29, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment Too wide In my opinion. The correction is not enough. Look at the helm, very "fat", isn't it ?--Jebulon 23:01, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment Please add to the description the approximate date of fabrication of the stained-glass window to avoid questions regarding copyright infringement. Wsiegmund 01:17, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Info Width fixd. --Rave 20:17, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Comment I think the copyright tag should be {{PD-Art}}. Please see Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag.
•  Support good to me now.--Jebulon 08:36, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
•  Support Wsiegmund 23:56, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Jebulon 08:36, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

File:Castle_in_Malbork,_sculpture_in_the_church02.jpg

• Nomination A sculpture in Malbork Castle --Lvova 04:02, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
• Promotion
• It looks tilted cw. --Augustgeyler 08:48, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
• Looks ok to me --Kritzolina 20:13, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

•  Oppose @Kritzolina: I just made a comment on this nomination. Please be so kind and wait until the first reviewer got into contact with the nominator before voting against it. --Augustgeyler 22:54, 28 June 2024 (UTC)

•  Comment It was corrected anyway, so what to wait? Lvova 04:00, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

•  Support It is always helpful to leave a comment after you made an edit so that reviewers can check again.  Thank you. Good quality now. --Augustgeyler 07:32, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Augustgeyler 18:29, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Вторая попытка и да

• 
  • Nomination: Lomocamera Fisheye Woodgrain. --Lvova 09:33, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: The part of monument of John of Nepomuk in Wrocław --Lvova 14:17, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: The part of monument of John of Nepomuk in Wrocław --Lvova 14:17, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: The part of monument of John of Nepomuk in Wrocław --Lvova 14:17, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Frederick I of Prussia (bust in Summer Garden), Saint Petersburg, Russia. By User:Lvova --Екатерина Борисова 01:35, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
  • Review
    A bit too much chroma noise --MB-one 11:19, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

VI

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Monument to Alexander Pushkin by Alexander Opekushin (Moscow).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment - I wonder if the so named scope is too broad or not because while browsing the categories under this scope name I found some other interesting monuments to Pushkin. I don't say that every statue needs own scope but what if we narrow a bit the area and call it Statues of Pushkin in Moscow. Let's see what others think.--MrPanyGoff 20:34, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
•  Comment Sorry, I beg to disagree : in my opinion, a scope "Statue of [any poet]" is not a too narrow, unless it is masterpiece work of art. Same argument as in this other former VIC. If we consider the statue as a piece of art by itself, the sculptor must be know then and noted in the description -isn't it Alexander Mikhailovich Opekushin here?- and the scope adjusted, for instance "Statue of xxx by yyy" -> an example there.--Myrabella (talk) 12:42, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

• That's right. To summarize - we have three possibilities of interpretation when it comes to a statue, depending on the relation of the scope with the topic lists (galeries): 1) If we refer the scope to section People considering the statue as a portrait then the scope should be named after the man it represents - in this case: Alexander Pushkin. (we already have photos of statues as portraits) 2) If we refer the scope to section Works of art considering the statue as a piece of art (meaning sculpture or architecture) then the scope should be named: Statue of Pushkin by XXX. 3) If we refer the scope to section Places considering the statue as a memorial-monument (meaning a landmark of some place) then the scope should be named: Statue of Pushkin, Town or better Monument to Pushkin, Town . Of course when some image obtain own scope in 2) or 3) it has to be a notable sculpture and respectively notable monument. I think that the nominator here doesn't mean 1) so the question here is: a Place or Work of art. Both are OK, imo.--MrPanyGoff 16:49, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

•  Request We could mix 2) and 3) in that precise case, with a scope worded like this : "Monument to Alexander Pushkin by Alexander Opekushin (Moscow)". There is an article on Ukrainian Wikipedia and on Russian WP. Then I invite the nominator to change the scope, and to complete the description, mentioning the sculptor and the date of the sculpture. --Myrabella (talk) 20:26, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

•  Info Done. --Rave (talk) 07:22, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

•  Support OK to me for this QI giving a good view of this nonument nowadays. Best in scope, all criteria met. --Myrabella (talk) 21:34, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. MrPanyGoff 09:12, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Kozuli.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment Please link the scope to a category or gallery on Commons. Yann (talk) 07:31, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 Done Анастасия Львова^ru (ru-n, en-2) 08:15, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

•  Support Well, since there is a homemade cloudberry jam VI ;) and considering the info that I understood from the article in the Russian Wikipedia, I support it. As for the photo in itself, it is of very good quality, highly informative and is best in its category.--MrPanyGoff 08:56, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:11, 13 January 2011 (UTC)

Отклонено

• 
  • Nomination View at Gulf of Finland from Krestovskiy Island, Saint-Petersburg. -- Lvova 15:51, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Decline Over- and underexposed. --Lestath 17:36, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Pulsatilla patens; May, Russia. --Lvova 18:49, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Decline What a pity, the flower is beautiful, but suffers from oversaturation and strong chromatic abberation (CA). Could you try again next year? Lycaon 22:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Brass claddagh ring on the sphere --Lvova 13:33, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Decline Insufficient quality. --Eusebius 13:50, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Adonis, Summer Garden, Saint-Petersburg --Lvova 21:14, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline not sharp enough in full solution --Mbdortmund 22:40, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Friedrich I, Summer Garden, Saint-Petersburg --Lvova 21:14, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline Basically good, but there is chromatic aberration (in violet} mainly on the chin and neck. --Cayambe 16:42, 12 November 2009 (UTC) Because of what Cayambe said and because the black-green background is disturbing. --Ikiwaner 14:09, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination ZiS-2 at Mound of Glory. --Lvova 07:32, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Decline last piece is cut off, sorry --Ianare 20:16, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: ZiS-3 at Mound of Glory. --Lvova 07:32, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: The part of monument of John of Nepomuk in Wrocław --Lvova 14:17, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination The part of monument of John of Nepomuk in Wrocław. --Lvova 12:21, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Decline Composition is not QI. --Elekhh 20:57, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Remains of wall decoration in the abandoned Stieglitz manor, a cultural heritage site --Lvova 22:49, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination A statue in the Recoleta Cemetery --Lvova 03:58, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline  Comment The compo, the crop and the focus are not very good. --Sebring12Hrs 12:12, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
     Oppose Exposure are fixable, composition ok imo. But the lion is slightly blurred. --ArildV 16:48, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Bremen Cathedral's beast: Lion with a man, a gambler --Lvova 03:58, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Oppose Too soft --MB-one 20:10, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination ь-2012 steam locomotive --Lvova 03:58, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline  Oppose Purple fringes and CAs. --Sebring12Hrs 13:09, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Bust of Scribonia, Summer Garden --Lvova 09:04, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Oppose Nice composition! But there is very much chroma noise and the main object looks out of focus. --Augustgeyler 10:26, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Plate with an Eagle carrying a woman --Lvova 08:30, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Oppose Blown highlights. Sorry. --Ermell 13:39, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination A gopatshah, a lid of a vessel in the Oriental Museum --Lvova 04:32, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline  Oppose Not sharp enough. --Sebring12Hrs 20:49, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination A small manhole in Vyazemsky garden --Lvova 04:32, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline  Oppose Motion blur. --Sebring12Hrs 20:33, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination P.A. Fedotov's apartment building --Lvova 06:39, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline  Oppose Prrspective and cropping issues. --Sebring12Hrs 22:30, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Peskovsky Lane in Saint Petersburg, Russia. By User:Lvova --Екатерина Борисова 21:06, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Oppose Weird rendering (not so sharp, like some noise or weird post-treatment), typically a picture taken with a phone. Not eligible for a QI imho. --Remontees 17:31, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

File:Люки_25.06.24_СПб_01.jpg

• Nomination A manhole cover at 28 lane of VI --Lvova 05:48, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
• Decline
•  Comment I'd suggest a tighter 1:1 crop to get rid of the sunspot. --Augustgeyler 08:48, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

•  Comment I would prefer not to do this to preserve the sprouts and cobblestones around. Lvova 19:45, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

•  Oppose I am sorry to oppose but additionally the angle is not good. It should have been taken straight downwards. --Augustgeyler 22:51, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
•  Support The overall quality is good enough and I don't think that the reason to decline this image is fair --Екатерина Борисова 02:54, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

 Comment. I'm always surprised at what some people present as a quality image. But I'm also surprised that others confirm an image like this one as QI. -- Spurzem 11:06, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

 Comment So am I. -- Екатерина Борисова 16:20, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

 Comment This page looked like a very friendly place with very gentle behaviour even during a refusal, but I'm not surprised anymore. Lvova 23:59, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

•  Oppose The object is rotated, text should be horizontal and the two notches should be in line. Also the sunspot is unfortunate. --Plozessor 15:18, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

 Comment Text may be tilted, but in general it is horizontal. Look at ВД and СССР letters and at 1979 date. -- Екатерина Борисова 16:20, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

 Comment Yeah but tilted, that's what I meant. This is an object that clearly has a correct orientation (so that the text is completely horizontal and the upper notch is directly above the lower notch). --Plozessor 04:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

•  Oppose very unfortunate lighting, image corners unsharp. --Smial 22:17, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Augustgeyler 22:22, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

File:Malo-Konushenny_Bridge,_опора_фонаря.jpg

• Nomination Malo-Konushenny Bridge --Lvova 04:02, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
• Decline
•  Oppose Good composition, but the main object is not in focus and some highlights are burned out. --Augustgeyler 23:19, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
•  Comment I absolutely sure that the head is in focus. --Lvova 21:35, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
•  Oppose Not sure about the focus, but the golden part is definitely burned out. In general it seems to be an overprocessed smartphone picture. --Plozessor 16:37, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Augustgeyler 18:32, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

File:Dzerzhinskogo_Street_32,_Tyumen_01.jpg

• Nomination A wooden house, Dzerzhinskogo Street 32, Tyumen, Russia. The corner house with Khokhryakova Street (numbered as #28). --Lvova 03:58, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
• Decline
•  Support Good quality. --MB-one 20:10, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
•  Weak oppose Horizontal perspective is not good here. The image was taken slightly form the side. --Augustgeyler 16:35, 30 June 2024 (UTC)

 Comment. Is this green the real color of the probably white frame of the window? -- Spurzem 11:09, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

It is natural. In the category it is possible to see white ones, but they are not original and the photos are much more late. Lvova 17:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

•  Weak oppose Per Augustgeyler, this can be fixed probably. About Spurzem's question, let the photographer answer but to me it seems that the green is natural and the white balance is correct. --Plozessor 15:20, 1 July 2024 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Augustgeyler 22:20, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Вторая попытка

• 
  • Nomination Allegory 'Winter'. Summer garden, Saint-Petersburg --Lvova 20:11, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Decline Inadequate lighting, dull sky would make the statue brighter. --Ikiwaner 20:33, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Alexandr Makedonsky, Summer Garden, Saint-Petersburg --Lvova 12:38, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Review Did you try to put a little bit more sharpnes and contrast on the face? --Mbdortmund 12:33, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
    I'll try tonight. --Lvova 08:34, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Lomographic ActionSampler --Lvova 22:14, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: The part of monument of John of Nepomuk in Wrocław. --Lvova 07:32, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination The part of monument of John of Nepomuk in Wrocław --Lvova 03:37, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Oppose Not in focus. --Augustgeyler 13:45, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

File:Actionsampler_backside.jpg

• Nomination Lomocamera Fisheye, backside --Lvova 09:14, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
• Decline
•  Support Good quality. --Ermell 13:28, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
•  Oppose Too low detail for a studio photo --Poco a poco 13:33, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

• Nice to hear, it is not from a studio :) Lvova 14:01, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

 Comment In this context, ‘studio’ does not mean the equipment of a professional photo studio, but only that the lighting, background and arrangement can be controlled by the photographer. This can also be a kitchen table, a camera tripod, a background cardboard and a white cardboard as a brightener. --Smial 09:47, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

•  Oppose Per Poco a poco, borderline resolution (the actual subject is way less than 2 MP}, not fully sharp, underexposed shadows. --Plozessor 04:16, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
•  Oppose per others. --Smial 23:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 07:00, 7 June 2024 (UTC)

File:Alexandr_Makedonsky,_Summer_Garden.jpg

• Nomination Bust of Alexander the Great, Summer Garden, Saint-Petersburg --Lvova 14:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
• Decline
•  Oppose Very nice but unfortunately too soft. --Augustgeyler 16:17, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
•  Support Disagree, let's discuss it. --ReneeWrites 22:29, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
•  Oppose Sorry but I agree, the face is to soft with low level of details imo.--ArildV 06:53, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
•  Neutral Undecided, DoF is borderline. --Plozessor 10:02, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per others, not enough details for a QI taken outside in good lighting conditions. --Benjism89 11:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Augustgeyler 12:36, 16 July 2024 (UTC)