Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives September 01 2020

Consensual review edit

File:Pfingsttreffen_Puetnitz_2018,_Ribnitz-Damgarten_(1X7A2856).jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Mercedes-Benz E 200 Kompressor Classic ("accountant's specification") at Pfingsttreffen Pütnitz 2018 --MB-one 16:05, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Oppose Not a good surrounding for the car, as well as unfavorable lighting. Further the care seems a bitt dusty. -- Spurzem 16:50, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose not a good background / scenery, shadows at the front of the car --Augustgeyler 17:03, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
  • I disagree. IMO lighting and background are sufficient for QI --MB-one 18:32, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. --Smial 23:47, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose →   Declined   --Peulle 09:10, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

File:Burwood_Anglican_Cemetery,_Christchurch,_New_Zealand_03.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Burwood Anglican Cemetery, Christchurch --Podzemnik 06:21, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Oppose sharp und good resolution. but the composition does not work. --Augustgeyler 08:03, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support I disagree. IMO the composition is good enough for QI. --XRay 08:19, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support per XRay. Good quality, composition is perfectly OK. -- Ikan Kekek 06:18, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Good perspective, pleasant and unsaturated colors, good contrasts, fine details. No, I think it's a very nice photo. --Elryck 13:25, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Good for me -- Spurzem 09:08, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Promoted   --Peulle 09:10, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

File:Radlseehütte.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Reflection of the Radlsee Hut in the Sarntal Alps --Milseburg 14:54, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Support Good quality. --Zcebeci 18:08, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I think it hast to be croppt a little. The house is to much centered --Augustgeyler 21:21, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
  •   Info @Augustgeyler: Don't reset "Promotion" into "Nomination", if you disagree. Change "Nomination" into "Discuss" to sent it into CR. I made it so now, to hear other opinions. But next time make it yourself. --Milseburg 14:19, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support I guess disqualify a centered composition is a bit too picky for QI --Moroder 01:17, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality --Michielverbeek 05:37, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Palauenc05 09:34, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Promoted XRay 09:18, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

File:Banco_conmemorativo,_plaza_de_San_Francisco,_Badajoz,_España,_2020-07-22,_DD_81.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Commemorative bench, San Francisco square, Badajoz, Spain --Poco a poco 10:23, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Support Good quality. --Ermell 21:07, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Good picture, but it looks a bit tilted to me or its not the perfect 90 degree angle... --Augustgeyler 21:59, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
  •   Comment The bottom is level but the top has a slight rise from left to right. The image is centred, so it's not warp from the lens. @Poco a poco: Did you run perspective correction on this, and get it a bit wrong on the right? Or is the monument not completely straight, perhaps? --Peulle 08:09, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
  •   Comment I have uploaded a new version with slight perspective adjustments Poco a poco 17:55, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Both versions look fine to me. -- Ikan Kekek 01:14, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Promoted   --Peulle 09:09, 31 August 2020 (UTC)