Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives March 04 2021

• 
  • Nomination Red Hook Grain Terminal (panorama) --Rhododendrites 04:31, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --XRay 04:38, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Tufted titmouse in Green-Wood Cemetery --Rhododendrites 04:31, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --XRay 04:38, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Black-capped chickadee in Green-Wood Cemetery --Rhododendrites 04:31, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --XRay 04:38, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Light boxes on Werzerpromenade #8, Pörtschach, Carinthia, Austria -- Johann Jaritz 03:46, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --XRay 04:41, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination North view of Werzer`s boathouse on Johannes-Brahms-Promenade, Pörtschach, Carinthia, Austria -- Johann Jaritz 03:46, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --XRay 04:42, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Hotel Astoria, former Villa Holbein, designed 1896 by architect Josef Victor Fuchs, Anna Street #43, Pörtschach, Carinthia, Austria -- Johann Jaritz 03:46, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --XRay 04:42, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Cabins at the shoreline along the Johannes Brahms Promenade, Pörtschach, Carinthia, Austria -- Johann Jaritz 03:46, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --XRay 04:42, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Jetty on Johannes-Brahms-Promenade, Pörtschach, Carinthia, Austria -- Johann Jaritz 03:46, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --XRay 04:43, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Portal of the building at 17 Grand Rue in Nîmes, Gard, France. (By Tournasol7) --Sebring12Hrs 03:33, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --XRay 04:43, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination View of Cartagena and Castle San Felipe de Barajas from Convent of Santa Cruz de la Popa, Colombia --Bgag 00:34, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 03:48, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Church of Santo Toribio, Cartagena, Colombia --Bgag 00:34, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 03:48, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination City walls of Cartagena, Colombia --Bgag 00:34, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 03:48, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Door knocker in Cartagena, Colombia --Bgag 00:34, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 03:48, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Door knocker in Cartagena, Colombia --Bgag 00:34, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 03:48, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Almond bloom near Chico, February 2021 --Frank Schulenburg 19:40, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Aristeas 19:50, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Deutschland, Erden an der Mosel, Hauptstraße 56 --Berthold Werner 18:38, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality. --Palauenc05 21:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination The Fontana della Pallata fountain, allegory of river Mella --Moroder 17:48, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Berthold Werner 18:38, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Starkstromleitungsmast A 65 Nähe Neustadt/Weinstrasse, Rheinland-Pfalz. --Fischer.H 17:41, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality --Michielverbeek 18:42, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination The Colegio San Lorenzo in Cienfuegos in Cuba, 2014. --Mosbatho 16:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality.--Horst J. Meuter 16:42, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination The Fontana della Pallata fountain. --Moroder 15:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality.--Horst J. Meuter 16:46, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Hohndorf in "Erzgebirge", Saxony, Germany, in snow (Winter 2020-2021). (By Kora27) --Geoprofi Lars 15:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 16:57, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion {{{2}}}
• 
  • Nomination Cross in Pfaffenheim (Haut-Rhin, France). --Gzen92 11:35, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Berthold Werner 18:38, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Town hall in Pfaffenheim (Haut-Rhin, France). --Gzen92 11:35, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Berthold Werner 18:38, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Portal of the building at 4 Rue Dorée in Nîmes, Gard, France. (by Tournasol7) --Sebring12Hrs 10:35, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --LexKurochkin 12:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination La belle caselle près de Saint-Pierre-Toirac (Lot) - Septembre 2015.jpg (by Erwan Corre) --Sebring12Hrs 10:31, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. Nice tower, I like it :) --LexKurochkin 12:30, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Workshop, Rue Molière 8, Lille, France --Velvet 08:02, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality --Michielverbeek 10:25, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination War memorial in Wiesentheid --Ermell 07:42, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Tournasol7 08:02, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Bridge in Höchstadt an der Aisch --Ermell 07:42, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Aristeas 08:41, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Stork's nest on the town tower in Höchstadt an der Aisch. --Ermell 07:42, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Tournasol7 08:02, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination White stork in its nest on the north-west tower of the town wall in Seßlach --Ermell 07:42, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Tournasol7 08:02, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Gennep-NL, townhall --Michielverbeek 07:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Tournasol7 07:42, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Mook-NL, church: the Sint-Antoniuskerk --Michielverbeek 07:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Tournasol7 07:42, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Dieren-NL, the Dierensche Hank --Michielverbeek 07:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 07:52, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Portal of the Saint Blaise church in Meljac, Aveyron, France. --Tournasol7 07:14, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 07:51, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Pipe organ of the Saint Martin church in Naucelle, Aveyron, France. --Tournasol7 07:14, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 07:50, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Stained-glass window of the church of the Assumption of Our Lady in Centres, Aveyron, France. --Tournasol7 07:14, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 07:51, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Tour du Portalet de cotes in Lodeve, Hérault, France. --Tournasol7 07:14, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality --Michielverbeek 07:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Moat in Sauveterre-de-Rouergue, Aveyron, France. --Tournasol7 07:14, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Aristeas 08:58, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Push unit ENI 02334768 "Panerai" with ENI 02337531 "Panerai II" --Llez 05:37, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. The file name should be ENI for the second ship. --Ermell 07:07, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
     Info The motorized part (left) is the "Panerai", the non-motorized (right) is the Panerai II; see here --Llez 07:47, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Tillandsia ionantha Air plant. Focus stack of 11 photos.
    --Agnes Monkelbaan 05:18, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality --Llez 05:38, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Quintana street near Nuestras Malvinas street, Pinamar, Argentina --Ezarate 22:16, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Oppose Sorry, sharpness missing. There is nothing really black or white. --XRay 04:45, 1 March 2021 (UTC) reprocessed Ezarate 16:47, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Cataratas Foz de Iguazú -- EduWiki
  • Decline 21:39, 28 February 2021 (UTC) Oppose Too far to be a QI, plus copyvio --Ezarate 16:50, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Louis-Anschütz-Straße in Zella-Mehlis, Thüringen, Deutschland. (By A.Savin) --Geoprofi Lars 10:24, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Aristeas 09:06, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Meerssen, basilica: the basiliek van het Heilig Sacrament --Michielverbeek 08:11, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality. --Palauenc05 21:07, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Ulestraten, church: the Sint-Catharinakerk --Michielverbeek 08:11, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality. --Palauenc05 21:07, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Saint Peter church in Flavin, Aveyron, France. --Tournasol7 07:00, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Aristeas 09:08, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Savio rail tunnel entrance in Länsisalmi, Finland --Ximonic 20:30, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Aristeas 09:09, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Yellow Gladiolus cultivated in Bangladesh --ShohagS 04:49, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Red Gladiolus cultivated in Bangladesh --ShohagS 04:49, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Kobylá nad Vidnavkou (Jungferndorf), Czech Silesia - small chapel. --Pudelek 20:24, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Review
    Good image but more categories needed --MB-one 21:54, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: COVID-19 vaccination sign in GUM department store (Moscow, Russia). The sign was neither horizontal, nor exactly rectangular, so I aligned verticals for the stripes on the wall. --LexKurochkin 19:57, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Less people in the old town of Hof while the pandemic with church in the background. --PantheraLeo1359531 16:08, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Less people in the old town of Hof while the pandemic. --PantheraLeo1359531 15:56, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Snow in Vosges --Commonists 11:50, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Boudhanath Stupa --Bijay chaurasia 08:22, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Review Really striking and a good composition. It's pretty dark, though, and are the reds and greens somewhat oversaturated? That's a genuine question, and I would take "no" for an answer; just let me know what you think. -- Ikan Kekek 18:57, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Beach in Miramar, Buenos Aires province, Argentina --Ezarate 19:36, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Moroder 07:23, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Keizersgracht, featuring the Oktober flower shop on the right and a DPD delivery truck on the left. Eindhoven, NL --Trougnouf 18:16, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Moroder 17:50, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Eclectic houses, Boulevard Vauban 38 to 42, Lille, France --Velvet 18:02, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Moroder 15:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Exhibit in the Jordan Schnitzer Museum of Art, University of Oregon - Eugene, Oregon, U.S. By User:Daderot --Another Believer 05:27, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Moroder 17:52, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: L'église Saint-Didier de Neyron (février 2021). --Benoît Prieur 18:22, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Review The top is very narrow, can you add some space? --PantheraLeo1359531 16:59, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Farmers'_protest_at_Singhu_Border --Satdeep Gill 16:04, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Review There are areas of magenta chromatic aberration that need to be fixed on the left and right. Let me know if you'd like me to mark them. Otherwise good. -- Ikan Kekek 17:41, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
    @Satdeep Gill: Good quality. Pl. fix the magenta CA along the vertical supports on left and right. --Tagooty 04:44, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Consensual review

File:Mar_del_Plata_City.jpg

• Nomination User:EduWiki 19:38, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
• Decline
•  Support Good quality. --Alan Turin 22:41, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose I disagree. Too far to be a QI --Ezarate 22:48, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose Obviously tilted. -- Ikan Kekek 23:35, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment Hold it: You nominated the same photo twice in the same day. I hope that's just an unintentional mistake. Don't renominate photos while they're being reviewed, nor after they're declined unless you edit them to address the reasons for the decline. -- Ikan Kekek 23:47, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Ikan Kekek, perspective... --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 12:49, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment I think the proponent created the others accounts. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 20:18, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose An interesting view, of course! But sorry, the photo is tilted, has too much contrast which the camera was not able to handle (the shadows have become pure black), and the details suffer from a combination of missing resolution, oversharpening and artefacts. --Aristeas 08:08, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --A.Savin 01:08, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Southwest_side_of_St_Nicholas'_fountain,_Blundellsands.jpg

• Nomination South west side of the Grade II listed drinking fountain at the north end of Blundellsands. --Rodhullandemu 16:12, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Oppose Too unsharp, sorry. --Geoprofi Lars 17:38, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment Seriously? f8 at 1/320? Rodhullandemu 17:03, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Question Is it dust to the right from the top of the main object? --LexKurochkin 18:40, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

•  Done Looked like texture to me, but it's gone. Rodhullandemu 20:09, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support IMO it is OK --LexKurochkin 10:55, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Support OK for me. --Aristeas (talk) 08:37, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 11:13, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Het_Park,_Rotterdam_(DSC_0442).jpg

• Nomination Het Park, Rotterdam, with "De Verloren Parel" interactive artwork by Madeleine Berkhemer in the background. --Trougnouf 17:33, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Support OK for me --PantheraLeo1359531 18:02, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose I have to disagree. The fore- and background were not in focus. It is to unsharp for me. --Geoprofi Lars 19:11, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Very nice composition. The sharpness is acceptable. --CaptainOlimar42 16:19, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose Sorry, the composition is nice, but even central elements are not sharp enough. --LexKurochkin 17:45, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Excellent composition and light --Moroder 18:58, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Maybe the green is slightly oversaturated? I'm not sure. But on the whole, I think this is a solid photo. -- Ikan Kekek 23:50, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support per CaptainOlimar42. --Aristeas 08:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 11:12, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Bad Rappenau - Bonfeld - Mühlberg - Baum-Silhouetten an L 1107 mit Schnee.jpg

• Nomination Silhouettes of trees in winter near Bonfeld, Germany. --Aristeas 10:17, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Support Good quality. --Milseburg 11:08, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose I have to disagree. The trees in the middle are to unsharp for me. Nice view but not good enough i think! --Geoprofi Lars 17:54, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Nothing wrong with it. Rodhullandemu 17:13, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Info This is going to be an interesting discussion. Please consider that we are looking at a photo which has (after cropping still) 30 megapixels, therefore please do not compare this to scaled-down photos nor to the (massively processed and sharpend) output of a smartphone camera or similar ;–). --Aristeas 17:19, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Nothing to discuss for me: certainly a QI. --Palauenc05 17:46, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment It would be nice to categorize the trees, could be useful also in biology. The tall ones are probably Fraxinus excelsior… --Nefronus 18:28, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment Good idea! I have to confess that I am not that good in identifying the species of trees in the winter (without the leaves). Therefore I would offer to add categories for the species of the trees later when there are leaves again, then I can identify them better. --Aristeas 08:33, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

•  Support I have checked it thoroughly, IMO it is a QI --LexKurochkin 22:47, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support I don't understand how anyone could find anything remotely unsharp, even at full size. Good photo. -- Ikan Kekek 05:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Wonderful image --PantheraLeo1359531 11:04, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Good composition. IMO a FPC too. --XRay 18:00, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Congratulations. A very nicely proportioned image with exactly 4 pairs of trees. Tall and stunted; straight and crooked; branches striving upwards, sideways, downwards. Every twig and every branch is well-defined from left to right margin, no colour fringing even at 500% magnification, a perfectly level horizon, a lively snow-swept foreground and a sky with a spotless, pleasing, and harmonic vertical colour gradient. No sensor spots detected either. Imho one of the very best quality image entries I have seen recently. -- Franz van Duns 20:58, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment @Rodhullandemu, Palauenc05, LexKurochkin, Ikan Kekek, PantheraLeo1359531, XRay, and Franz van Duns: I would like to thank you all for your kind words! --Aristeas 08:14, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Support Tournasol7 06:25, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support To find something to complain about after all: The photo is a bit over-sharpened. During the interpolation of the raw data, numerous small color spots were created, especially between fine structures at high contrast. However, these can only be found via pixel peeping and are not noticeable at normal viewing distances and also when printing. --Smial 11:02, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Total: 10 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 01:07, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Покровський_собор_зимового_вечора.jpg

• Nomination Intercession Cathedral, Kharkiv, Ukraine. By User:Ekaterina Polischuk --Pavlo1 09:26, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
• Decline
•  Support Good quality. --JoachimKohler-HB 09:42, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose I am very sorry as this is a very impressive photo, but IMHO the noise reduction has gone too far here: at full size the church looks as if it was made from plastic or rubber, all edges are soft and rounded, the walls show no structure/texture at all. Sorry again! --Aristeas 10:21, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Aristeas --LexKurochkin 10:59, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --A.Savin 11:11, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Drohobych_-_church.jpg

• Nomination St. George's Church, Drohobych, Lviv Oblast, Ukraine. By User:ElenaLive (Elena Kurylo) --Pavlo1 07:28, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
• Decline
•  Support Good quality. --Ermell 08:58, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose I find the shape too irregular and would like to see some perspective correction. -- Ikan Kekek 10:17, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose I agree with the perspective correction. --Nefronus 18:35, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose The photo is beautiful but I agree with Ikan Kekek about the perspective problem and I would add that the lower part of the church is not sharp enough. Sorry. --LexKurochkin 10:52, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --A.Savin 11:10, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Saint_Peter_church_in_Flavin_(1).jpg

• Nomination Saint Peter church in Flavin, Aveyron, France. --Tournasol7 06:55, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Oppose Tower is out of focus. Its not good enough for me. Sorry. --Geoprofi Lars 18:01, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Let’s discuss this one. I would regard the tower as sufficiently sharp; only the topmost part is a bit soft, but still OK. The photographer has used a common technique: he has focussed a bit before the tower to get both the building at the left and the tower sufficiently sharp (see hyperfocal distance). --Aristeas 21:52, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support I'm not fond of the red car (maybe in 50 years ;-)) --Moroder 20:01, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support per Moroder--Ermell 17:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support per Moroder --LexKurochkin 13:51, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 01:06, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Hohenhörn,_Fähre_Nobiskrug_NIK_2496.jpg

• Nomination Rettungsmittel auf der Fähre "Nobiskrug" auf dem Nord-Ostsee-Kanal. --Nightflyer 20:45, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Oppose The water in the background is in focus, not the stuff on the ship. --Geoprofi Lars 18:22, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support I disagree, I don't see any problem with focus or level of detail. --LexKurochkin 19:44, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Good enough, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek 05:41, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support It's OK for me. --Bgag 14:18, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support per LexKurochkin. --Aristeas (talk) 08:35, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 11:09, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

File:View_from_Castillo_San_Felipe_de_Barajas,_Cartagena_01.jpg

• Nomination View from Castillo San Felipe de Barajas, Cartagena, Colombia --Bgag 00:55, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Support Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 04:00, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose The composition isn't really convincing. It's lacking sharpness and the horizon isn't straight. No QI in my eyes. --Milseburg 09:15, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support The image is sharp enough to identify individuals. And the earth is round, so the horizon cannot be as straight as a ruler in a wide-angle shot. In any case, it is not wavy, as is often the case with panoramic photos. --Smial 13:25, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support QI for me.--Ermell 17:07, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 01:05, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

File:2021-01-31_Women's_at_the_FIL_World_Luge_Championships_Königssee_2021_by_Sandro_Halank–066.jpg

• Nomination Emily Sweeney (USA) at the FIL World Luge Championships Königssee 2021 --Sandro Halank 20:04, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Oppose A little bit overprocessed, lack of detail --Cvmontuy 12:20, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
  
•  Support I disagree. For a sled with more than 100 km/h it is very sharp. On the other hand I am quite shure this pic is not overprocessed. --Stepro 22:23, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Good quality per Stepro. Any votes, guys? -- Ikan Kekek 10:20, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Well, one could possibly criticise that the impression of high speed is not represented, but that might not be easy in the case of an almost featureless background in the shape of an ice rink. The halos around some of the sports suit decorations seem to me to be intentional and not image errors due to over-processing. --Smial 13:37, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Weak support IMO some overprocesing artefacts are visible on the face and on the helmet, but not too much. --LexKurochkin 18:21, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 11:08, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Bamberg_Hain_Erpel-RM-2148413.jpg

• Nomination Drake of a mallard in the Bamberg grove --Ermell 06:40, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Support Good quality. --Palauenc05 08:11, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose I'm not convinced by the composition here. The duck is cramped in the upper left edge. The beautiful colored speculum lies hugely in the shadow. @Charlesjsharp: --Etaped 11:54, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Where there is light, there is also shadow. The photographer has managed the high contrast caused by the natural lighting very well. I can't find any flaws that would be essential for QIC. --Smial 11:16, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Very good shot, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek 12:24, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support I think different crop might make it slightly better, but IMO it is already QI --LexKurochkin 17:40, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support per others. --Aristeas 09:50, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support I absolutely agree, this is a very good shot. The well-chosen exposure time of 1/1250 second at highly aceptable ISO 500 provides for both time-frozen droplets, well-defined feathers, and pleasingly distorted reflections. Not very conspicuous at screen size, but astoundingly attractive at 100% resolution are the orange webbed feet just visible through the upwelling water surface. One suggestion, though, just consider cropping the slightly distracting lower 8-10% of the image where a part of the reflection is disconnected and also maximally off-focus. This would result in a compact reflection area, thus reducing distraction from the main motif. -- Franz van Duns 21:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Total: 6 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 11:08, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Exterior_of_the_Castle_of_Valencay_21.jpg

• Nomination Exterior of the Castle of Valençay, Indre, France. (By Tournasol7) --Sebring12Hrs 07:32, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Comment Something strange with the closest dome and small tower above it. Looks like a combination of distortion and perspective correction problem. Probably, might be corrected by raw reprocessing. (It was my comment, I have noticed it was not signed only formatting it for the discussion --LexKurochkin 08:46, 24 February 2021 (UTC) )
•  Comment Sorry, but I don't see a problem with the perspective... --Tournasol7 22:18, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment The verticals are vertical, but the horizontal lines of small tower above the left dome to me look too inclined right-down direction. IMO, if we see the image as two-point perspective, the vanishing point of the building main horizontal lines is far right, while horizontal lines of the left small tower give vanishing point closer to the building. --LexKurochkin 17:28, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment Sorry, but for me it looks good. Others opinions? --Tournasol7 22:59, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment It's good for me too, sorry ! --Sebring12Hrs 00:52, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment OK, let's discuss --LexKurochkin 09:19, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support OK, a crisp take of the buildung and surroundings, despite the sky being overcast, only disregarding the rather irrelevant blur on the very left of the image.
  As to the leaning turret. This is obviously a "normal" distortion caused by wide angle lenses. According to the EXIF data this image was taken with a focal length of 18mm, equivalent to 27mm on a full frame sensor. Here's an image of another tower of the same building taken with a 24mm lens on a full frame sensor Château de Valençay, tour Sud which displays a similar effect of the topmost turret seemingly leaning a trifle too much towards the centre of the image. -- Franz van Duns 08:55, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support I don't have the expertise Franz does about photos, but good quality to me. -- Ikan Kekek 12:34, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Neutral Franz, thank you for the review, I do agree with it. For me the question was if it is acceptable for QI criteria or not. That's why I did not use the "oppose" mark in this discussion. Looks like I was not clear enough in this case. Sorry. --LexKurochkin 21:49, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
•  Support per Franz. This kind of distortion is just normal perspective, necessary and unavoidable given the point of view and distance to the building. --Aristeas 09:48, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 11:06, 3 March 2021 (UTC)