Commons:Featured picture candidates
Other featured candidates:
Featured picture candidates 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, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and current month. For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Formal thingsNominatingGuidelines for nominatorsPlease read the complete guidelines before nominating. This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:
Artworks, illustrations, and historical documentsThere are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolors, 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:
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 description page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced." PhotographsOn the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.
On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, color, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.
You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating. Video and audioPlease nominate videos, sounds, music, etc. at Commons:Featured media candidates. Set nominationsIf 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:
Simple tutorial for new usersAdding a new nominationIf 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
All set nomination pages should begin "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/", e.g. "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/My Nomination".
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:
Galleries and FP categories: Please add a gallery page and section heading from the list at Commons FP galleries. Write the code as Page name#Section heading. For example: Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify them using Note: Do not add an 'Alternative' image when you create a nomination. Selecting the best image is part of the nomination process. Alternatives are for a different crop or post-processing of the original image, or a closely related image from the same photo session (limited to 1 per nomination), if they are suggested by voters. VotingEditors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for their own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed. You may use the following templates:
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:
Remember also to put your signature (~~~~). Featured picture delisting candidatesOver 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:
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:
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:
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 policyGeneral rules
Featuring and delisting rulesA candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:
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. 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 when the bot has counted the votes and before the nomination is finally closed by the bot; this manual review can be done by any user familiar with the voting rules. Above all, be politePlease 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
|
Table of contents
Featured picture candidates
Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2024 at 14:41:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Moldova
- Info Ceiling of the Căpriana monastery, Căpriana, Moldova. The Eastern Orthodoxy monastery, one of the oldest in the country, was founded in 1429. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 14:41, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 14:41, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Kadellar (talk) 16:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I think you overdose with light/saturation, i am used to their dark ambience. 2nd option was better. --Mile (talk) 16:25, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2024 at 05:40:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Italy
- Info A young man smoking a cigarette, a serene elderly man on a bicycle, an architecture enthusiast who photographs the Masini fountain sitted in Piazza del Popolo (Cesena) - Italy. All by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 05:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 05:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 12:41, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2024 at 22:08:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/People#Paintings
- Info created by Raimundo Madrazo - uploaded by Isha - restored/nominated by Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 22:08, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Ezarateesteban 22:08, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:53, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Looks like at least one error added in the restoration process. Added a note. In a couple other places it looks like a mark may have been modified rather than removed. — Rhododendrites talk | 12:45, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment @Rhododendrites: fixed the annotation you did and anothers I found, thanks!!! Ezarateesteban
Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2024 at 20:22:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Family : Ardeidae (Herons)
- Info created by El Golli Mohamed - uploaded by El Golli Mohamed - nominated by El Golli Mohamed -- El Golli Mohamed (talk) 20:22, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- El Golli Mohamed (talk) 20:22, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose sorry, the second bird isn't sharp and not in focus Ezarateesteban 22:15, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- And who told you that in photography everything must be in focus. When I posted the photo I knew that the second bird was not in focus. El Golli Mohamed (talk) 23:11, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support I agree – worst case be the second bird can be cropped. --SHB2000 (talk) 04:07, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Some px on both side would be helpfull, especially on right side since that bird is in focus. --Mile (talk) 08:05, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral Agree with Mile. And definitely don't crop -- the photo is about a confrontation. Regarding sharpness of the egret, it is in a middle-ground area where it would be better for it to be blurrier or sharper, but I enjoy the drama of the heron's pose. All-in-all that brings me to neutral. :) — Rhododendrites talk | 12:48, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Kadellar (talk) 16:07, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2024 at 17:27:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Poland
- Info created by XEvansGambitx - uploaded by XEvansGambitx - nominated by EUPBR -- EUPBR (talk) 17:27, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- EUPBR (talk) 17:27, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Nice, but the quality does not satisfy me, there is noise and oversaturation, sorry. --A.Savin 18:33, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per A.Savin plus perspective issues Ezarateesteban 22:16, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2024 at 15:57:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Russia
- Info Church of Saint Nicholas Wonderworker from the village of Glotovo in Suzdal, Suzdalsky District (Russia) - All created by me -- Pierre André Leclercq -- Pierre André (talk) 15:57, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Pierre André (talk) 15:57, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose not enough sharp, why 1/1000? Ezarateesteban 22:19, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2024 at 14:42:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Crassulaceae
- Info A focus-stacked close-up of an Echeveria succulent, the image is about 3.5 cm × 2.5 cm (1.38 in × 0.98 in) in size. There is only 1 FP of this genus and none at this magnification. Created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 14:42, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Tagooty (talk) 14:42, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 09:19, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:54, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2024 at 14:40:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Poland
- Info created by Emptywords - uploaded by Emptywords - nominated by EUPBR -- EUPBR (talk) 14:40, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- EUPBR (talk) 14:40, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 19:58, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support —Bruce1eetalk 00:50, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Wilfredor (talk) 03:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose It's undoubtedly a useful pic, but no FP for me. Because of chromatic aberrations and perspective distortion I would not even promote it as QI. And overall the composition seems a bit unbalanced, with the harsh shadow at the right, the scaffold-like structure at the bottom. Sorry --A.Savin 06:45, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Mile (talk) 16:29, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2024 at 10:00:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Photo_techniques/Styles_and_Techniques#Light_trails
- Info created by ThibautRe - uploaded by ThibautRe - nominated by ThibautRe -- ThibautRe (talk) 10:00, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Info Long exposure shot of a train on the Inverted Roller Coaster "Monster" as it passes through a 270° turn -- ThibautRe (talk) 10:00, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ThibautRe (talk) 10:00, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Impressive composition and nice color contrast in this long exposure. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:18, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Composition, lighting and visual effect - excellent! --BigDom (talk) 11:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great! Yann (talk) 15:20, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 19:57, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very impressive. Wolverine XI 20:24, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support It is. Charlesjsharp (talk) 23:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Wilfredor (talk) 23:05, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 04:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 11:46, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 12:49, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 13:42, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 14:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2024 at 06:29:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors/Germany#North_Rhine-Westphalia
- Info created by and uploaded by and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 06:29, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Info The ammunition depot is almost completely dark at night. A few buildings or parts of buildings (now) have some lighting. Here, the existing lighting in the bunker was switched on and the room in front of it was illuminated with two mobile lights. Nothing around the bunker is illuminated. --XRay 💬 06:29, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- XRay 💬 06:29, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 19:56, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 04:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 11:44, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2024 at 00:27:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Others
- Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 00:27, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 19:55, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice light! ★ 21:13, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2024 at 15:17:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Doors
- Info created, uploaded and nominated by BigDom -- BigDom (talk) 15:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- BigDom (talk) 15:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Wilfredor (talk) 15:38, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice find, from my favorite country. Composition and decay. Complementary colors, leaves on the ground and on the wall, beam above the door -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:43, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Striking composition; I like such close-ups. -- Radomianin (talk) 07:27, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ThibautRe (talk) 10:02, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Colours and composition work well together --Tagooty (talk) 16:03, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:39, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 19:54, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 04:08, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 11:43, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 13:43, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Mile (talk) 16:31, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2024 at 15:17:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Laos
- Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support This makes me miss SE Asia. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2024 at 08:28:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Space exploration#Telescopes
- Info created and uploaded by Christopher Michel, nominated by Yann
- Support High educational value and resolution, FP on English WP. -- Yann (talk) 08:28, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great image. I especially like the white snow. Wolverine XI 13:39, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 14:57, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Wilfredor (talk) 18:27, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:33, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:37, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:38, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 19:52, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 11:41, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2024 at 08:22:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1950-1959
- Info created by Associated Press, uploaded by Lemonreader, nominated by Yann
- Support Iconic picture, FP on English WP. -- Yann (talk) 08:22, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:04, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Haven't I seen this before? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolverine XI (talk • contribs) 14:01, 6 September 2024 (UTC) (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 14:57, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 21:19, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Is the most recent version really any higher resolution? It looks like it may have just had the size increased digitally? — Rhododendrites talk | 12:52, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- It was scrutinized and promoted on English WP, so it think it is OK. Lemonreader has not edited here since 2022, but I will let a message on enwiki. Yann (talk) 13:14, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I would love original to stay, one person went missing here. At least. But his shoes are there :==== --Mile (talk) 16:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- @PetarM: Sorry, but I don't understand what you mean. Yann (talk) 16:43, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Yann: see square --Mile (talk) 16:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- @PetarM: Would it be OK if the shoe is removed? Yann (talk) 16:58, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2024 at 07:01:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Moldova
- Info Interior of the Ciuflea monastery, Chișinău, Moldova. The Moldovan Orthodox monastery was financed by Anastasie Ciufli (1801 - 1870) to respect the last will of his brother Teodor Ciufli (1796 - 1854) and is dedicated to Saint Theodore of Amasea. The two brothers were Aromanian merchants who emigrated from Macedonia. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 07:01, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 07:01, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support I prefer the image with noise --Wilfredor (talk) 18:29, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --BigDom (talk) 14:50, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 11:40, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Kadellar (talk) 16:10, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2024 at 04:00:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family_:_Sciuridae (Squirrels)
- Info created by VJAnderson - uploaded by VJAnderson - nominated by Emdosis -- Emdosis (talk) 04:00, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Emdosis (talk) 04:00, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I'm sorry. Its an adorable photo with a great pose but the image is overexposed and while the front paws on are in sharp focus, the face is not. --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 04:53, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Needsmoreritalin --Tagooty (talk) 16:06, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2024 at 13:16:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family_:_Nymphalidae_(Brush-footed_Butterflies)
- Info Monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) caterpillar eating some milkweed. all by — Rhododendrites talk | 13:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 13:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 16:24, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Ermell (talk) 18:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Supportǃ Terragio67 (talk) 19:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support looks great. Nice color balance, well exposed and sharp. What kind of plant? --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 02:09, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! It's some kind of milkweed -- these caterpillars eat milkweed exclusively -- but I don't know the species. — Rhododendrites talk | 02:16, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice --Wilfredor (talk) 18:30, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support plante is Asclepias tuberosa --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:37, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Archaeodontosaurus: Thanks! Updated the file. Out of curiosity, how can you tell the species is A. tuberosa compared to the other Asclepias these butterflies are attracted to (like A. syriaca)? — Rhododendrites talk | 12:37, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Hi,
- For the genus I think I could have found it, but for the species I asked our specialists at the ''Toulouse Museum''. There are very sophisticated recognition programs that should soon arrive for the general public.
- Bonne journée et félicitations pour tes nombreux travaux que je vois souvent passer... Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:45, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you! Sometimes I use the iNaturalist Seek app. I didn't think to do so when the plant was in front of me, though, and it could not look past the caterpillar when I attempted to use it on my photo. :) If you remember, I'd be curious to test the software when it's available. — Rhododendrites talk | 16:50, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Archaeodontosaurus: Thanks! Updated the file. Out of curiosity, how can you tell the species is A. tuberosa compared to the other Asclepias these butterflies are attracted to (like A. syriaca)? — Rhododendrites talk | 12:37, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great pose! --Tagooty (talk) 16:04, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 17:21, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:36, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 10:21, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 11:38, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2024 at 04:41:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Pinaceae
- Info Schaopedobbe (Sheep Pond). Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) in a flowering heathland bathed in mild afternoon light. The use of a polarizing filter makes the green colors and the color of the heather appear fuller.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 04:41, 5 September 2024 (UTC) - Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 04:41, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment This tree was special, but that one??... not broken :-) Additionally, the shadow is oriented in our direction, meaning the sun is coming from in front, resulting in contrejour and unappealing light -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:01, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 11:29, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per above, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:12, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2024 at 02:20:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Laos
- Info The warm frames on the wall create an interesting impact with the light through the rectangular door, in my opinion. Created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:20, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:20, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The photo is technically good but I don't see anything special to make it FP El Golli Mohamed 16:47, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- 💡Lights? -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support The light is very good. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 08:59, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 14:57, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per El Golli Mohamed. -- Karelj (talk) 08:48, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 21:21, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The photo is visually pleasing, but upon closer inspection, I can't find any element that breaks the feeling of looking at a carefully crafted scene for a hotel advertisement. The atmosphere, though aesthetically perfect, seems almost too flawless, leaving me with the impression that everything has been arranged to sell --Wilfredor (talk) 23:09, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Info 100% free entrance (and welcoming team) -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:03, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2024 at 13:03:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Germany
- Info Ceiling painting in the nave of the UNESCO World Heritage Pilgrimage Church “Die Wies”, Steingaden, Bavaria, Germany; created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 13:03, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Llez (talk) 13:03, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:37, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment What is this gray embedding of the ceiling painting for? --Msb (talk) 21:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Info You are right, black is a better background for there is more contrast. I changed it. --Llez (talk) 05:03, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Much better now. Msb (talk) 16:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Info You are right, black is a better background for there is more contrast. I changed it. --Llez (talk) 05:03, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:04, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 16:52, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Ermell (talk) 05:24, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support A baroque heaven. – Aristeas (talk) 08:46, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Wilfredor (talk) 18:31, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:39, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:16, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2024 at 22:43:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Nyctanassa
- Info A juvenile yellow-crowned night heron at the Plumb Beach saltmarsh. Panorama (it stood still, so it seemed like a good opportunity to include context without sacrificing detail). all by — Rhododendrites talk | 22:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 22:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very good with DOF and some creativity with pano and same focal. Bird is sharp. --Mile (talk) 13:44, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Mile --Terragio67 (talk) 20:08, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Good photo of the bird in its habitat; I like the harmonious blue/yellow/brownish colours. – Aristeas (talk) 08:45, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 11:36, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 15:56, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Way too far, unappealing centered composition, dull light. The image is 8469 × 6355, why not crop it to a more interesting view? --Kadellar (talk) 16:13, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- If you look at my recent uploads, I uploaded several of this bird without all the space. But we so rarely get context/habitat in the photos we promote because, in part, we're concerned with subject detail. So here is a panorama to show subject detail *and* extra space to show habitat. Whether that's appealing to enough people, we'll see, but that's the idea. — Rhododendrites talk | 16:35, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2024 at 18:55:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Strigidae (True Owls)
- Info An Eurasian eagle-owl in captivity. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice shot even though the harsh background. --Terragio67 (talk) 20:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:04, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 11:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:19, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry, but I think the standard for captive animals is higher than this -- view from above on grass, with the bird's expression pointed down from the camera. (i.e. better if down at its level, or with a more interesting expression relative to the camera). — Rhododendrites talk | 13:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:47, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Wilfredor (talk) 03:57, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 11:35, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Rhododendrites. --Kadellar (talk) 16:15, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2024 at 13:33:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
- Info created by El Golli Mohamed - uploaded by El Golli Mohamed - nominated by El Golli Mohamed -- El Golli Mohamed (talk) 13:33, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- El Golli Mohamed (talk) 13:33, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:52, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support nice distribution with the bird on the right.--Famberhorst (talk) 12:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Famberhorst --Terragio67 (talk) 20:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 22:33, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Zzzs (talk) 23:03, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:05, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:17, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:47, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support The shadows are a bit unfortunate, but the high definition on the feathers, the soft background and the bird’s expressive posture/look make up for that. – Aristeas (talk) 08:43, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Excellent --Wilfredor (talk) 18:31, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:40, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Natural looking plumage detail without excessive sharpening – well done. -- Radomianin (talk) 17:25, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2024 at 13:00:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family : Curculionidae (Snout Beetles/Weevils)
- Info created by Gilles San Martin - uploaded by Iifar - nominated by Shizhao -- shizhao (talk) 13:00, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- shizhao (talk) 13:00, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Strange beetle, impressive quality. Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:00, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nasty animal --Wilfredor (talk) 21:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:54, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 12:07, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 12:26, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 21:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:47, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Alvesgaspar. – Aristeas (talk) 08:41, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:42, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --BigDom (talk) 14:49, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2024 at 12:01:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Brazil
- Info The image shows a street in an informal settlement in Serra da Cantareira, São Paulo. More than just a photograph, it's a window into a reality that is often overlooked. Despite the challenging conditions, with makeshift houses and narrow streets, the photo also captures everyday scenes like children playing, neighbors chatting, and clothes drying in the sun. This image encourages us to observe and understand these realities. All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 12:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment To make a great photo of an ordinary subject, you need to bring something special inside. Special light, special sky, special composition, or special something. Extraordinary subjects are easier to capture, but also rarer in everyday life -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:12, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Pic is likable, but as Basile Morin said. Try with + Light (not Exposure). We can recover to support. --Mile (talk) 13:41, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, Mile are very kind, I have applied the change you requested. Wilfredor (talk) 22:51, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, in my opinion it's not a problem of processing but of light at the beginning -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:09, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Good documentation image but midday sun (13:28 according to the exif) coming from left side (according to the orientation of the shadows), creating a dull light. This is not something you can change afterwards. My eyes are caught by the wastes and litter in the water, and look for something more exciting to compensate. Unfortunately the houses are not colorful (like in Manarola for example), and seem quite ordinary with the uniform red of their standard bricks. Slightly blurry foreground (perhaps fixable with AI tools). I think Commons has many photos of this kind, featuring banal architecture and taken in the middle of the day. Perhaps at sunrise, sunset, golden hour, blue hour, or under a special sky, a stormy weather for example, or colorful clouds, the subject would appear more special -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:09, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support I am fine with it. Its slum, aka mess, Manarola is Lux city. Midday sometime help to avoid shadow, unless godlen hours with sun behind. Foreground is not so sharp but if you cut it some info would be lost, like chanel and drying on balcony. --Mile (talk) 09:41, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Basile Morin. -- Karelj (talk) 10:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support For finding a composition that works in a chaotic urban landscape worth capturing. — Rhododendrites talk | 14:51, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Mile, Rhododendrites, your observations are acute and shareable. Thank you Wilfredor for your commitmentː Support Terragio67 (talk) 18:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, Terraglo67, although the photo does not show the reality of extreme poverty, nor the dangers associated with being in this environment, such as the insecurity faced by visitors and residents, taking this photo was not easy. The insecurity in these places is high, and I have already experienced being threatened with a gun in a favela. On this occasion, thank God, it didn’t happen, but it was a quick shot: I saw the place, had a few minutes, took the photo, and left calmly. Unlike photographing a tourist destination or a European landscape, this image carries a complex background full of social, economic, and personal factors that make it much more than just a simple capture. Wilfredor (talk) 22:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Mile, Rhododendrites, your observations are acute and shareable. Thank you Wilfredor for your commitmentː Support Terragio67 (talk) 18:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Agree with Basile’s statements, but the subject (a slum) relativizes our criticism; e.g., waste and litter in the water (which are normally a deficit) are an integral part of this photo. And Rhododendrites is right that the composition makes the photo special. – Aristeas (talk) 08:40, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:43, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Ю. Данилевский (talk) 08:34, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2024 at 09:41:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Serbia
- Info Temple of Saint Sava, Belgrade. My shot, from 2021. If you click on group above, we had similar night shot, just day is missing. --Mile (talk) 09:41, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Mile (talk) 09:41, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:13, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:56, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 12:08, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support The new version is better with the statue having a brighter and more normalized appearance. --Terragio67 (talk) 20:00, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:05, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 16:13, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 14:57, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:00, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2024 at 08:19:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Moldova
- Info Interior of the Căpriana monastery, Căpriana, Moldova. The Eastern Orthodoxy monastery, one of the oldest in the country, was founded in 1429. Note: we have no FPs from this country at all. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 08:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 08:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Come to Brazil! 🇧🇷 ★ 11:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--shizhao (talk) 13:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Crystal clear sharp, well done ! --Wilfredor (talk) 23:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:00, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support A very lavish interior, but beautifully captured symmetrically.--Famberhorst (talk) 12:12, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:57, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:06, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Famberhorst. – Aristeas (talk) 08:34, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Vivid colours and remarkable detail. --Tagooty (talk) 14:48, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 17:27, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
File:Cesenatico - Porto Canale Leonardesco - Tipiche imbarcazioni - 2024-09-02 20-33-08 001.jpg, featured
Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2024 at 19:05:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water_transport#Sailboats
- Typical sailboats in the canal port of Cesenatico, Emilia-Romagna, Italy. Info All by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 19:05, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 19:05, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - Great composition and lighting, but I see some haloing/oversharpening on the tower. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:47, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- The halo disappeared when I reduced sharpen and saturation (from raw). In my opinion now the image is less artificial and still beautiful, thanks for the advice. Terragio67 (talk) 07:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Info New version uploaded. --Terragio67 (talk) 07:32, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Looks good now! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:03, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:07, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:36, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support For me, the composition with the boats and their eye-catching sails is convincing. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:51, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Radomianin; good use of telephoto compression. – Aristeas (talk) 08:24, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:16, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:44, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 06:49, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2024 at 13:52:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#France
- Info created by Gzen92 - uploaded by y - nominated by Gzen92 -- Gzen92 (talk) 13:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Gzen92 (talk) 13:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Three times the cars were present and no more sea for the reflection. Gzen92 (talk) 13:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:39, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 21:10, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2024 at 12:52:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Historical#1940-1949
- Info created by Fotoafdrukken Koninklijke Luchtmacht / Photo Prints, Royal Netherlands Air Force - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Crisco 1492 -- — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 15:08, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Very old and extremely boring. Even waiting hours in traffic is more entertaining/interesting than this, and don't get me started about the quality. Wolverine XI 17:07, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Question I don’t think the second part of the above comment is appropriate. But maybe we can read its first part as a hint that the image would look rather lonely in the “Air transport” gallery. @Yann: and all others: Wouldn’t this image fit better into the “Historical” gallery? We have some similar photo there, e.g. this one. If you agree, we should change the gallery link above to Commons:Featured_pictures/Historical#1940-1949. Best, – Aristeas (talk) 15:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Whatever is standard for older aviation images. I don't mind history, given that this was taken in '42. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:34, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Changed. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:08, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, Chris! And sorry for not pinging you as the nominator – I wanted to ping you and Yann (because of a recent discussion about the “Historical” galleries), but somehow made a mistake and forgot your name. – Aristeas (talk) 10:40, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- No worries! I check my watchlist pretty frequently – I remember the days before pings were a thing, and old habits die hard. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:09, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Wilfredor (talk) 03:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Sharp and representative photo of the Mosquito against a beautiful background of clouds and picturesque landscape. – Aristeas (talk) 10:40, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:36, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 16:29, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 16:43, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:34, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2024 at 06:13:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Camelidae (Camelids)
- Info created and uploaded by MAGNET-foto - nominated by ★ -- ★ 06:13, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ★ 06:13, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Though I feel that a slightly tighter crop would benefit this image. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:54, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The crop is very bad, and the quality is...not so good. Wolverine XI 17:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support The crop is good, the quality enough. -- -donald- (talk) 10:11, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 18:11, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:15, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support but per Chris Woodrich.--Famberhorst (talk) 12:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support. --Gnosis (talk) 17:56, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:39, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice posture and expression. – Aristeas (talk) 08:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:45, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2024 at 04:22:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water_transport#Ships
- Info Cruise ship FM217 Croisi Europe Strasbourg f, MS Victor Hugo. Location Groote Brekken. Princess Margriet Canal.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:22, 2 September 2024 (UTC) - Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:22, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 18:10, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry, I'm not seeing the FP potential here. The colours are washed out from the harsh daytime light and there is a lot of noise where the shadows have been raised. The composition doesn't work for me either with the centred subject and abundance of foreground. BigDom (talk) 08:00, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Could you try to rework it? It seems like the blue/cyan is missing... -- Terragio67 20:16, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Terragio67: Done. New version. Thanks for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:36, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
OpposeWeak oppose Unexceptional light and sky, sorry. Standard industrial boat. Boring background and foreground with too much flat water and dull sky. Also I agree with BigDom about thewashed out colors-- Basile Morin (talk) 03:23, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- @El Golli Mohamed: @Llez: New version.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:35, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Improved, but my considerations about the framing and ordinary subject remain. Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:47, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Improved, better colors. El Golli Mohamed (talk) 16:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
NeutralThe image is good now. Unfortunately, noise came out in the shadowed parts of the ship and in the sky. I'm sorry, but I think this (fixable?) issue is objectively too evident at the moment. --Terragio67 (talk) 16:38, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Terragio67: Done. Noise reduction in the shadow parts. Thanks for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:05, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- I like this picture. IMHO it is now acceptable even if there is still a
veryslight noise.
Weak * Support Terragio67 (talk) 18:47, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- I like this picture. IMHO it is now acceptable even if there is still a
- @Terragio67: Done. Noise reduction in the shadow parts. Thanks for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:05, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:46, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 16:41, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
File:Litoměřice Sv Štěpán.jpg (delist)
Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2024 at 17:24:51
- Info The picture was certainly once a good, outstanding photo in the 2000s, but times change and this is especially true for this photo. Today it wouldn't even be a QI. The resolution is low and yet the image appears blurred. There are various image blurs and image errors and it is also tilted. What annoys me the most is the cropping of the houses at the bottom of the picture - to me it looks arbitrary. (Original nomination)
- Delist -- Fonzoyo (talk) 17:24, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delist - Excellent for the age, but I don't think it meets current standards. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:42, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep It would not be promoted today, but for 2008, sixteen years ago, it is a very standard quality. As the procedure for delisting is manual and long, I can't imagine nominating all the FPs promoted at this period for the reason they are not so good in 2024's. If you sharpen this picture with Topaz AI for example, it would be fine. Acceptable composition and light in my opinion.
- Look at the archives, the picture that was promoted just after this one by chronological order, is File:Lunar Crepuscular Rays 2.jpg, which is much worse, so... good luck to find them all :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:24, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Unless there’s a better photo with similar features, I would agree to delist it. However, the factor of time also plays a role. Unless we had a time machine to see how the place looked back then, I don’t think anyone can reasonably delist photos like this. --Wilfredor (talk) 03:38, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Light and composition are fine. The technical quality … well, is solid for the time of its creation. Digital photography – and especially digital cameras and lenses which are in the reach of Commons users – has come a long way since the 2000s. I don’t think we should replace our FPs repeatedly like a snake sheds its skin; let’s sort out the worst which were not great even in their time, and keep the rest which can thus serve also as a vivid history of respectable digital photography. – Aristeas (talk) 13:42, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep As an author of image firstly. But also there exist very great number ot Wikipedia pages, on them this image is presented for long time without any problems. -- Karelj 09:05, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delist Even back then, some reviewers cited technical deficiencies that are even more serious today. --Msb (talk) 17:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Aristeas and Basile. --SHB2000 (talk) 22:34, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2024 at 16:09:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Bovidae (Bovids)
- Info created by Giles Laurent - uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 16:09, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 16:09, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 17:50, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:43, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Zzzs (talk) 18:47, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 01:06, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very high resolution -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:48, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Excellent sharpness, but the pose is unexceptional and the gallery has many more interesting FPs. --Tagooty (talk) 03:15, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:00, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support If you look carefully, you'll notice a leopard laying in wait not too far from where this antelope is. Wolverine XI 17:16, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--shizhao (talk) 13:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:28, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 18:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support but too bad about the left front leg.--Famberhorst (talk) 12:26, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 22:35, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:08, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 10:44, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:36, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2024 at 13:49:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1970-1979
- Info created by Unknown - initially uploaded by Joalpe - restored by Wilfredor - nominated by ★ -- ★ 13:49, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support In memory of the greatest TV entertainer in Brazil, Silvio Santos, who recently died in August. -- ★ 13:49, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Thank you, Wilfredor and ArionStar. Silvio Santos's Wikipedia entry in Portuguese was the most viewed article during the last two weeks of August and may rank very high among the most viewed articles of 2024. I’m thrilled to see so many people collaborating on improving and disseminating this image! Thank you. --Joalpe (talk) 13:56, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Merci mon cher / Obrigado meu Wilfredor (talk) 03:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I would support the JPEG version: File:Tony Tornado e Sílvio Santos restored.jpg. Yann (talk) 14:20, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
JPEG version
- Info JPEG version added. ★ 14:50, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 16:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:43, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support I don't usually vote for my photos but this is not my authorship, I just did a restoration --Wilfredor (talk) 03:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:57, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--shizhao (talk) 13:03, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 15:43, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:08, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice photo with good posture and facial expression, solid restoration. – Aristeas (talk) 10:43, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Silvio Santos was known for his charismatic smile. ★ 11:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:37, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Good photo, convincing restoration, natural smile. – Terragio67 (talk) 14:21, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2024 at 04:37:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)
- Info created by Anitava Roy - uploaded by Anitava Roy - nominated by Atudu -- Atudu (talk) 04:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Atudu (talk) 04:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 06:59, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry man, but neither the composition nor the quality impress me. Wolverine XI 08:31, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- What's wrong about the quality? --A.Savin 10:23, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Nothing, this is the best image I've ever seen. Like there's no image that will top this. I'm very much impressed with the image quality. Wolverine XI 17:21, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Many thanks for this extremely enlightening response. --A.Savin 09:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- @A.Savin: In case you couldn't tell, that was sarcasm. I was aware that there was nothing exceptional about this picture, thus the revelation of the false background does not come as a huge surprise. Wolverine XI 13:22, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Quality ≠ wow. --A.Savin 18:40, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- @A.Savin: In case you couldn't tell, that was sarcasm. I was aware that there was nothing exceptional about this picture, thus the revelation of the false background does not come as a huge surprise. Wolverine XI 13:22, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Many thanks for this extremely enlightening response. --A.Savin 09:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Nothing, this is the best image I've ever seen. Like there's no image that will top this. I'm very much impressed with the image quality. Wolverine XI 17:21, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- What's wrong about the quality? --A.Savin 10:23, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 10:11, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)- Oppose Vulcan struck out his vote after reading others' observation Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 01:47, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very nice composition, part of grass was helpfull - like golden spiral curve. Colors combine. --Mile (talk) 16:04, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Support-- Giles Laurent (talk) 16:13, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Struck vote until clarified -- Giles Laurent (talk) 00:36, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 16:25, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Quality is fine, the delicate balanced composition is great, as said in the QIC page a good FP candidate. Poco a poco (talk) 16:48, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Support--Zzzs (talk) 18:43, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Strong oppose I thought its technical quality is good since it is a QI. Now that its been revealed to have been digitally manipulated to deceive viewers, this should definitely not be a featured picture. Maybe its QI should also be revoked. --Zzzs (talk) 22:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
SupportStunning! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:45, 1 September 2024 (UTC)Support-- Radomianin (talk) 19:13, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Oppose in line with the ongoing discussion about undocumented manipulation. Support removed and opposition vote placed.-- Radomianin (talk) 05:14, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Outstanding composition. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:04, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
SupportAgree. -- -donald- (talk) 07:39, 2 September 2024 (UTC)- Oppose Per others. -- -donald- (talk) 06:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
SupportAgree with Mile -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:47, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Fake background? Undeclared -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Support Striking composition--Tagooty (talk) 03:18, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose In view of the opinions of several experts and the absence of a response by the uploader/nominator, I have changed my support to oppose. --Tagooty (talk) 03:33, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:54, 2 September 2024 (UTC)Support --A.Savin 10:23, 2 September 2024 (UTC)- Oppose per others --A.Savin 00:16, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 18:47, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Support Excellent quality, outstanding composition. – Aristeas (talk) 15:29, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Agree with the discussion below that the background apparently has been replaced. We could allow the cut-out, but in any case such a substantial edit must (i) be explained and (ii) done in the best possible way – right now there are some rough edges and (at the bottom) some strange pixels which may be remnants of the original background. – Aristeas (talk) 07:40, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Update: Ah, now we know the background has not been replaced (the strange pixels at the bottom and some rough corners have misled me). So I’m sorry if my comment above was harsh; but I keep the oppose vote for now because the editing is still a bit unfortunate and does not do justice to this great photo. Radomianin’s new version is much better (thank you), I would be happy to support it. – Aristeas (talk) 09:17, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 12:29, 4 September 2024 (UTC)- Question Is this a cut-out background @Anitava Roy and Atudu: and doesn't this camera have a maximum resolution of 5184 × 3456 pixels? Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
supportUpdating per discussion below. Not opposing, but holding off on supporting until we can get the facts straight. — Rhododendrites talk | 03:38, 6 September 2024 (UTC) Almost perfect enough to be skeptical, but the quality of the uploader's work looks consistent with regard to this kind of composition. — Rhododendrites talk | 14:57, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Have you zoomed right in and examined the edges Rhododendrites? Doesn't look right to me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm. The flat speckling makes it look like this might be some sort of backdrop/cardstock placed behind the insect? — Rhododendrites talk | 15:49, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- As the uploader/nominator have not replied, could some experienced eyes have a very close look please @Poco a poco, Basile Morin, Llez, Giles Laurent, Crisco 1492, Tagooty, Frank Schulenburg, and XRay: Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- It does look like a cut-out. There is a slight halo (a darker blue/green) on the bottom of the butterfly, and no noise on the background. Well spotted! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:01, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Also, part of the wing is floating in green. Definite cut out. Struck my support - still great, but the cutout should be noted (and is a bit rough). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose This nomination should be withdrawn as it has misled voters. @Ermell, A.Savin, JukoFF, VulcanSphere, PetarM, Agnes Monkelbaan, Aristeas, Famberhorst, Rhododendrites, -donald-, and Zzzs: Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - @Charlesjsharp: , so you have asked the uploader to respond at 21:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC) and started rallying everyone at 15:49, 5 September 2024 (UTC) ans asked for withdrawal of nomination at 20:54, 5 September 2024, citing that they have not responded, which is less than 24 hours time for them. Isn't it too much to expect from volunteers from global south countries to respond then and there? I hope you understand that, people can have their own real life problems to deal with and not everyone might be in a super privileged position to respond in volunteer capacity on an emergency basis as and when asked. Personally, I don't have any issues if the FP nomination is rejected on technical grounds and if everyone changes the vote from support to reject but rallying and targeting without giving ample time to respond and not assuming good faith towards the editors, who have been contributing to Wikimedia sites in a significant way, can very well be demotivating to many people. Unlike you, I am not pinging anyone, who voted here, without any kind of expectation for them to change their votes or their minds, but I simply hope that everyone can at least assume good faith towards the uploader and provide him sufficient time to respond. -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 08:26, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- dear,this is not a cut out background.i am ready to show raw file also.please inform me where to upload the raw file . Anitava Roy (talk) 12:56, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your answer. You can upload it on swisstransfer for example (or any other site, like wetransfer for example) and then share the download link with us -- Giles Laurent (talk) 15:16, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- As implied by Giles, Commons does not support the upload of raw files so you'll need to upload it elsewhere and link to it here. Two other options are Google Drive or Dropbox. — Rhododendrites talk | 15:18, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- dear,this is not a cut out background.i am ready to show raw file also.please inform me where to upload the raw file . Anitava Roy (talk) 12:56, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment currently i am offline, from PC, but can people put some note where are problems, maybe we can solve them, and pic is still very good. I think we had many artificial bacground by now, even size biger than camera can make. erasing nomination because of that... ?! Only stuff here is to put templetate photoedited - artificial background.Some tolerance with quick-triggered acts, author maybe not online each day. --Mile (talk) 10:58, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Nine years ago, I uploaded a manipulated image to Commons. The reasons don't matter; the fact is that I did wrong, and I will carry this guilt for the rest of my days here on Commons. Unfortunately, there is no turning back once we haven't been honest. The modifications that are obvious to me may not be to others, so it is always important to list all the manipulations made, not only in the upload history to see the changes, but also in the (retouch) template. I deeply regret that this situation happened, and I hope it doesn't happen again in the future. --Wilfredor (talk) 18:46, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Oppose--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:48, 7 September 2024 (UTC)- CommentHello all, the uploader has sent me the raw file, which I have uploaded in this link for your refences https://www.swisstransfer.com/d/2cbe8615-f8ed-4ded-8f43-6db1f0189007. --Atudu (talk) 07:06, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Thanks Atudu. Now is clear what the issue is: background is genuine, just an unnecessarily overprocessed image and upscaled from 18 mpix to 20 for unknown reasons. That said, I would advice to redevelop and nominate again. --A.Savin 07:18, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- New version proposed Dear reviewers @Anitava Roy, Atudu, Wolverine XI, A.Savin, VulcanSphere, Giles Laurent, Zzzs, Crisco 1492, -donald-, Basile Morin, Tagooty, Agnes Monkelbaan, Aristeas, Famberhorst, Rhododendrites, Charlesjsharp, Wilfredor, Bodhisattwa, and Archaeodontosaurus: I took the liberty of redeveloping the file and making it available as a 16-bit Tiff under this SwissTransfer link. Feel free to upload it as an update, or even better as an alternative version if you like the result. The only strange thing I noticed is that the nominated version was interpolated after developing. Based on the new version and the cropping I noticed this indication. String interpolations should not be made. Sorry for the mass pinging of at least the active users in this discussion. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 09:45, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Nice job Radomianin, there's just a few dark green pixels left at the bottom (but less than this nomination) in 3-4 small areas -- Giles Laurent (talk) 09:54, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the tip, Giles. I'm not sure if I found the pixels you mentioned, but I have updated the SwissTransfer link with a new file. If there are still problems, please feel free to make a change. Many thanks and best regards :) -- Radomianin (talk) 10:10, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Nice job Radomianin, there's just a few dark green pixels left at the bottom (but less than this nomination) in 3-4 small areas -- Giles Laurent (talk) 09:54, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- New version proposed Dear reviewers @Anitava Roy, Atudu, Wolverine XI, A.Savin, VulcanSphere, Giles Laurent, Zzzs, Crisco 1492, -donald-, Basile Morin, Tagooty, Agnes Monkelbaan, Aristeas, Famberhorst, Rhododendrites, Charlesjsharp, Wilfredor, Bodhisattwa, and Archaeodontosaurus: I took the liberty of redeveloping the file and making it available as a 16-bit Tiff under this SwissTransfer link. Feel free to upload it as an update, or even better as an alternative version if you like the result. The only strange thing I noticed is that the nominated version was interpolated after developing. Based on the new version and the cropping I noticed this indication. String interpolations should not be made. Sorry for the mass pinging of at least the active users in this discussion. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 09:45, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment This is great. I waited if someone will put note, saw none yesterday night. Now i checked with original, picture was rotated and scalled-up (yes, up. Not down.) to 6×4 k, and a part was covered (left-bottom corner). I think our community screw up a big. Yesterday night i went with 200-300% to check mistakes, could find'em. Here you can see https://www.flickr.com/photos/mile_risto/53977382740/in/dateposted/ --Mile (talk) 10:17, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- The mistakes are that there's dark green pixels at the bottom of the butterfly that didn't benefit from the exposure + color change. There is also dark pixels at the bottom right of the picture, probably originating from upscaling or sharpening. The dark green pixels at the bottom of the butterfly led some people to think that the original background was cut-out and it turned out it's not true. I think people should have assumed good faith and let time to the author explain because for me there was three possibilities : 1) fake background; 2) mask that was not extended enough to apply color and exposure change (=what happened here); or 3) remains of chromatic aberration -- Giles Laurent (talk) 11:15, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Thanks Atudu. Now is clear what the issue is: background is genuine, just an unnecessarily overprocessed image and upscaled from 18 mpix to 20 for unknown reasons. That said, I would advice to redevelop and nominate again. --A.Savin 07:18, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- I dare say we owe Anitava Roy an apology for calling this image a fake background, and thanks all for looking into it. I revert to my Support comment above. — Rhododendrites talk | 12:34, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Tangential discussion - boldly collapsing as this page is already confusing :) — Rhododendrites talk | 20:53, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
|
---|
|
- +1 as per Rhododendrites. I have removed my dissenting vote. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:12, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment New version by Randomian I would support, once uploaded as JPEG over the original. --A.Savin 13:01, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I cleared dots in 2 options, same size : 1, 2. Dots were part of original as i see, and some dots are left. Author can download and replace. @Giles Laurent dots arent mistake, just came biger with edits. --Mile (talk) 13:31, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The RAW file submitted indicates that the FPC was submitted with a heavily manipulated background. I never said it was a cut-out or fake background; I opposed the nomination as it had misled voters. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:58, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- SwissTransfer link updated Dear reviewers @Anitava Roy, Atudu, A.Savin, Giles Laurent, Rhododendrites, Charlesjsharp, and PetarM: From the new tiff, developed from the raw, I have provided a jpg ready for upload under the updated SwissTransfer link above. Perhaps the nomination can be rescued with an update. I have now only pinged the most active discussants, as well as the author and nominator. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 16:20, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Just be bold and upload it. --A.Savin 16:25, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your encouragement, A.Savin. Because of the different time zones, I would like to wait for the opinions of the involved discussants, especially the author and the nominator. Especially if the author is satisfied with my version, he is welcome to use it for an update. Personally, I also wouldn't like it if someone updates my photos without consent. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 16:39, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- I would not oppose Radomianin's edited version. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:00, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - This nomination will be a good test of FPCbot's counting abilities. :) — Rhododendrites talk | 16:53, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Good, now author can choose any option to replace original and can put support vote too, (Anitava Roy). --Mile (talk) 16:54, 7 September 2024 (UTC) p.S. @Giles Laurent I removed CA on both options: 1, 2
- Support Ok now for me... you have friends! --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:56, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 20:06, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 21:09, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2024 at 19:54:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/Russia#Far Eastern Federal District
- Info The aurora borealis in Chukotka / Created by Ted.ns - uploaded by Ted.ns - nominated by JukoFF -- JukoFF (talk) 19:54, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- JukoFF (talk) 19:54, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 16:20, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:45, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Zzzs (talk) 21:31, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 21:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 01:06, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Small resolution. Only 2,300 × 1,535 pixels. And blown highlights -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:38, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- @JukoFF, any chance you can fix this? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:00, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral Unfortunately a small image for the enormous potential of this camera, probably not the full version --Wilfredor (talk) 03:36, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per above, a pity. --A.Savin 10:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 22:36, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 16:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2024 at 10:55:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Austria#Tyrol
- Info Informative and high resolution view of the Tribulaun-Group in the Stubai Alps. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 10:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Milseburg (talk) 10:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Sharp image with good depth of field. Interesting to see the peak in the foreground has trees and presumably grasses, and the peak behind is bare. Great glacial striations on the central peak in the background too. --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 15:16, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The sharpness is good in the top part, but could be better in the lower part --Llez (talk) 16:19, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Is the suggestion to crop the lower part? I really don't think it is that unsharp. Milseburg (talk) 13:11, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Splendid view, clear and educative. – Aristeas (talk) 15:28, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Aristeas (nice view). – Terragio67 (talk) 20:25, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 21:42, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 16:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:50, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:30, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2024 at 20:44:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements
- Info All by me. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:44, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:44, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I don't see at first what is extraordinary here. The apse looks indeed renovated recently so that the historical value is probably limited. Lighting or detail are not compensating that, either. --Poco a poco (talk) 07:31, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Moral support for the Kiril's potential. ★ 18:36, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 14:05, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2024 at 15:04:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Order_:_Rodentia_(Rodents)
- Info There is no gallery for the family Dasyproctidae.
- Info created, uploaded and nominated by Chuck Homler -- Needsmoreritalin (talk) 15:04, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Yes, I know its a PNG. I have pledged to upload future images as .JPG -- Needsmoreritalin (talk) 15:04, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Please upload the jpg version, This is better rendered by mediawiki than png --Wilfredor (talk) 20:01, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Great sharpness (I'm in fact counting the days to get a R5 Mark II) in spite of high ISO, but tricky lighting (the subject is underexposed). Why do you add "All right reserved" to your EXIF if you publish with CC BY-SA 4.0? that looks contradictory --Poco a poco (talk) 07:26, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The photographer may change his mind and release the picture any time later. For us, the Commons license is what finally counts, not the EXIF info. --A.Savin 08:36, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, when I got the Camera I set t he EXIF data like that. But when I upload to Wikipedia I have to release the rights. It remains in the EXIF, but its Creative Commons Share Alike With Attribution now. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 14:01, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, by the way, congrats on getting the R5 Mk II. I hope it brings you much joy! Needsmoreritalin (talk) 17:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your feedback and to Alex for the coherent explanation. It will still take time until the camera is in my hands but thank you! :) Poco a poco (talk) 18:55, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose One of those rare photos that looks better when viewed at full resolution with some very nice detail. But overall the lighting situation is just far too distracting; the subject is in deep shadow and the eye is drawn to the bright patches in the background. BigDom (talk) 06:46, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Would the image benefit from a tighter crop? The subject was under tree cover and you can see there was a gap in the canopy leading to that bright spot above and to the right of the subject. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 14:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Very detailed at full resolution but at first sight unappealing light (animal and background) -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comments from you and BigDom led me to upload an alternative, if this addresses your concerns, please let me know. If not, I can withdraw nomination. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 04:14, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Alternative
- Info Re-cropped (back to 2:3) and made adjustments in Photoshop to bring shadows up by 5 and highlights down by 5, with a neutral density gradient in the upper right to address concerns about the bright spot.
- Comment Now the crop is tight at the right in my opinion. And still not sure about the light -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:40, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the update. Last version (at 18:10) is better in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:08, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Let me know if this helps. If not, I can always withdraw nomination. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 00:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- I would suggest not to withdraw and wait for other feedbacks. I'm between neutral and weak support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the update. Last version (at 18:10) is better in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:08, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Right crop to tight. Add few pixles. But light is much better and supportable. --Mile (talk) 17:42, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Updated, thanks! Needsmoreritalin (talk) 00:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support They dont vote, hard to open it, too big. --Mile (talk) 07:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:27, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Works for me. – Aristeas (talk) 15:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral Better IMO but I still think backlighting is not ideal for this kind of shot. BigDom (talk) 15:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 03:44, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 20:53, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support better --Wilfredor (talk) 16:41, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Zzzs (talk) 04:16, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:33, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
Timetable (day 5 after nomination)
Tue 03 Sep → Sun 08 Sep Wed 04 Sep → Mon 09 Sep Thu 05 Sep → Tue 10 Sep Fri 06 Sep → Wed 11 Sep Sat 07 Sep → Thu 12 Sep Sun 08 Sep → Fri 13 Sep
Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)
Fri 30 Aug → Sun 08 Sep Sat 31 Aug → Mon 09 Sep Sun 01 Sep → Tue 10 Sep Mon 02 Sep → Wed 11 Sep Tue 03 Sep → Thu 12 Sep Wed 04 Sep → Fri 13 Sep Thu 05 Sep → Sat 14 Sep Fri 06 Sep → Sun 15 Sep Sat 07 Sep → Mon 16 Sep Sun 08 Sep → Tue 17 Sep
Closing a featured picture promotion request
The bot
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. 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
Any experienced user may close requests.
- 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)
(for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
{{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|gallery=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}} - 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 === - Save your edit.
- If it is featured:
- Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate gallery 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 the appropriate gallery and section of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images. An image should only appear ONE time in the galleries. After a successful nomination, the image can be placed in several of the Featured pictures categories.
- Add the template {{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 Assessments 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.
- 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/September 2024), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.
Closing a delisting request
- 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) - 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 === - 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/September 2024.
- If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
- Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
- Edit the picture's description as follows:
- 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).
- Remove the image from all categories beginning with "Featured [pictures]" (example: Featured night photography, Featured pictures from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, Featured pictures of Paris).
- Remove the "Commons quality assessment" claim (d:Property:P6731) "Wikimedia Commons featured picture" from the picture's Structured data.
- 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.
- If this is a Delist and Replace, the delisting and promotion must both be done manually. To do the promotion, follow the steps in the above section. Note that the assessment tag on the file page and the promotion tag on the nominator's talk page won't pick up the /replace subpage that these nominations use.
Manual archiving of a withdrawn nomination
- In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
In the occasion that the FPCbot will not mark withdrawn nominations with a "to be reviewed" template and put them in Category:Featured picture candidates awaiting closure review just like if they were on the usual list, put the following "no" template:
{{FPC-results-reviewed|support=X|oppose=X|neutral=X|featured=no|gallery=|sig=--~~~~}} - Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
not featured
For example:
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
becomes
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], not featured === - Save your edit.
- Open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination. It will be of the form:
{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/September 2024), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.