Last modified on 8 October 2014, at 13:15

Commons:Valued image candidates

This project page in other languages:

English | français | polski | русский | +/−

Skip to image nominations Skip to image nominations Most valued reviews Skip to most valued reviews Skip to set nominations Skip to set nominations
Valued image seal.svg

These are the candidates to become valued images. Please note that this is not the same as featured pictures or quality images. If you simply want some feedback on your pictures you can get that at photography critiques.

Single images can be proposed for valued image (VI) status. Candidates must be proposed as being the most valuable of all Commons' images within a specified scope. Judging is carried out according to the valued image criteria.

A Most Valued Review (MVR) is opened where there are two or more candidates competing within essentially the same scope.

The rules for promotion can be found at Commons:Valued image candidates/Promotion rules.

An image which has previously been declined can be renominated within the same scope only if the issues leading to the original decline have been addressed. Previously nominated images that were closed as "undecided" can be renominated at any time. Once a candidate achieves VI or VIS status it can normally be demoted only if some better candidate replaces it during an MVR.

If you would like to nominate an image for VI status, please do so following the instructions below. If you are proposing a better candidate within essentially the same scope as an image which already has VI status, please open an MVR.

Skip to current candidates Valued Image links:

How to nominate an image for VI statusEdit

Nominations will be evaluated using the criteria listed at Commons:Valued image criteria. Please read those criteria before submitting an image to help cut down on the number of candidates that have a low chance of success. Make sure you understand the concept of scope and how to choose the correct scope for your nomination. Please make sure that your proposed image fulfills all of the necessary criteria before nominating it. For example, if it needs to be geocoded, do that in advance. If no appropriate categories exist, create and link them beforehand. Although some reviewers may help by fixing minor issues during the review process, it is your responsibility as nominator to ensure your image ticks all the necessary boxes before you propose it. If you nominate an image that ignores one of the criteria, don't be surprised if it fails VI review.

Adding a new nomination (image)Edit

Step 1: Copy the image name into this box (excluding the File: prefix), at the end of the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Valued image candidates/My-image-filename.jpg. Then click on the "Create new nomination" button.


Step 2: Follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save the resulting VIC subpage.

Step 3: Manually add the candidate image towards the end of Commons:Valued image candidates/candidate list (under the heading "New valued image nominations"), as the last parameter in the VICs template. Click here, and append the following line as the last parameter of the relevant section:

|My-image-filename.jpg

so that it looks like this:

{{VICs
 ...
 |My-image-filename.jpg
}}

and save the candidate list.


RenominationEdit

Declined VICs can be renominated by any registered user, but only after one or more of the root cause(s) leading to a decline has/have been addressed. Undecided VICs can be renominated as is although it is still recommended to consider and fix issue(s) which may have hindered a promotion of the candidate in the previous review.

Besides fixing issues with the previous nomination the following procedure shall be followed upon renomination.

Step 1: Edit the candidate subpage you intend to renominate. All declined and undecided VICs are placed in either Category:Declined valued image candidates, or Category:Undecided valued image candidates and sorted by the date of the previous nomination.

Step 2: Replace the previous nomination date and time by pasting in

|date={{subst:VI-time}}

Step 3: Replace the "undecided" or "declined" status with "nominated" (or "discussed" if you intend to add it to a Most Valued Review).

Step 4: If the previous nominator was a different user replace the nominator parameter with

|nominator=~~~

Step 5: If the candidate does not already have an archive link to previous reviews: Create one using the following procedure.

  • Cut the text in the previous review section (leave the closing braces "}}")
  • replace the review parameter with
|review=
{{subst:VIC-archive}}
}}
  • Save the page.
  • There is now a red link to Previous reviews. Click the link to create the archive subpage and paste in the previous reviews.
  • Save the previous reviews archive page

Step 6: Add the candidate to the candidates list.

How to open a Most Valued ReviewEdit

There must be at least two candidates competing within essentially the same scope to open an MVR. Each needs its own VIC subpage, which should be created as above if it does not already exist. Then, add the following section at the end of the page Commons:Valued image candidates/Most valued review candidate list:

=== Scope ===
{{VICs
  |candidate1.jpg
  |candidate2.jpg
}}

where candidate1.jpg and candidate2.jpg are the VIC subpages of the respective candidates. If need be, also remove the relevant image(s) from the list in Pending valued image candidates

If one of the candidates is an existing VI within essentially the same scope, the original VIC subpage is re-opened for voting by changing its status to status=discussed and new reviews are appended to the original VIC subpage. However, any original votes are not counted within the MVR.

Each candidate should have its status parameter set to discussed, while the MVR is ongoing.

How to review the candidatesEdit

How to review an imageEdit

Any registered user can review the valued image candidates. Comments are welcome from everyone, but neither the nominator nor the original image author may vote (that does not exclude voting from users who have edited the image with a view to improving it).

Nominations should be evaluated using the criteria listed at Commons:Valued image criteria. Please read those and the page on scope carefully before reviewing. Reviewing here is a serious business, and a reviewer who just breezes by to say "I like it!" is not adding anything of value. You need to spend the time to check the nomination against every one of the six VI criteria, and you also need to carry out searches to satisfy yourself on the "most valuable" criterion.

Review procedureEdit

  • On the review page the image <!!--or image set--> is presented in the review size. You are welcome to view the image in full resolution by following the image links, but bear in mind that it is the appearance of the image at review size which matters.
  • Check the candidate carefully against each of the six VI criteria. The criteria are mandatory, and to succeed the candidate has to satisfy all six.
  • Use the where used field, if provided, to study the current usage of the candidate in Wikimedia projects. If you find usage of interest do add relevant links to the nomination.
  • Look for other images of the same kind of subject by following the links to relevant categories in the image page, and to any Commons galleries.
    • If you find another image which is already a VI within essentially the same scope, the candidate and the existing VI should be moved to Most Valued Review (MVR) to determine which one is the more valued.
    • If you find one or more other images which in your opinion are equally or more valued images within essentially the same scope, you should nominate these images as well and move all the candidates to an MVR.
  • Once you have made up your mind, edit the review page and add your vote or comment to the review parameter as follows:
You type You get When
*{{Comment}} My Comment. -- ~~~~ *Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment My comment. -- Me You have a comment.
*{{Info}} My information. -- ~~~~ *Pictogram voting info.svg Info My information. -- Me You have information.
*{{Neutral}} Reason for neutral vote. -- ~~~~ *Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Reason for neutral vote. -- Me You are uncertain or wish to record a neutral vote.
*{{Oppose}} Reason for opposing vote. -- ~~~~ *Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Reason for opposing vote. -- Me You think that the candidate fails one or more of the six mandatory criteria.
*{{Question}} My question. -- ~~~~ *Pictogram voting question.svg Question My question. -- Me You have a question.
*{{Support}} Reason for supporting. -- ~~~~ *Symbol support vote.svg Support Reason for supporting. -- Me You think that the candidate meets all of the six mandatory criteria.
  • If the nomination fails one of the six criteria, but in a way that can be fixed, you can optionally let the nominator know what needs to be done using the {{VIF}} template.
  • Your comment goes immediately before the final closing braces "}}" on the page.


How to update the status
  • Finally, change the status of the nomination if appropriate:
    • status=nominated When no votes or only neutral votes have been added to the review field (blue image border).
    • status=supported When there is at least one {{Support}} vote but no {{Oppose}} votes (light green image border).
    • status=opposed When there is at least one {{Oppose}} vote but no {{Support}} votes (red image border).
    • status=discussed When there is at least one {{Oppose}} vote and one {{Support}} vote (yellow image border).


Remember the criteria: 1. Most valuable 2. Suitable scope 3. Illustrates well 4. Fully described 5. Geocoded 6. Well categorized.

Changes in scope during the review periodEdit

The nominator is allowed to make changes in scope as the review proceeds, for example in response to reviewer votes or comments. Whenever a scope is changed the nominator should post a signed comment at the bottom of the review area using {{VIC-scope-change|old scope|new scope|--~~~~}}, and should also leave a note on the talk page of all existing voters asking them to reconsider their vote. A support vote made before the change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn.


Pending valued image candidatesEdit

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache
13861 closed valued image candidates
 Closed as Nominations 
Promoted
  
11663 (84.1%) 
Undecided
  
854 (6.2%) 
Declined
  
1344 (9.7%) 


New valued image nominationsEdit

   
Woman wearing traditional Ladakhi hat (2014).jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Christopher Fynn (talk)) on 2014-12-13 21:11 (UTC)
Scope:
Woman wearing a traditional Ladakhi hat
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Must connect the scope to the category that contains the image --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:14, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
    • And geocoding needed. Yann (talk) 09:29, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
      • Photo is good, worth to be croped from sides a bit, to put some tendancy to hat - vertical. --Mile (talk) 11:05, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Open for review.
Tashigang Dzong 111120.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Christopher Fynn (talk)) on 2014-12-13 21:48 (UTC)
Scope:
Trashigang Dzong, general view
Used in:
w:en:Bhutan,w:en:Trashigang, w:et:Trashigang, w:fa:پادشاهی_بوتان, w:su:Butan
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Must connect the scope to the category that contains the image --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:14, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Open for review.
Chapeau de berger MHNT ETH AC 766.jpg
View promotion
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2014-12-14 07:17 (UTC)
Scope:
Joseph Gallieni's collection Shepherd Hat, French Sudan, the nineteenth century

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful. --P e z i (talk) 10:55, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. P e z i (talk) 12:00, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
Fistule Oreille.jpg
View promotion
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2014-12-14 07:22 (UTC)
Scope:
Anomaly malformation of the auricle : Periauricular sinuses
Reason:
Anomaly malformation often associated with deafness. -- Archaeodontosaurus (talk)

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful. --P e z i (talk) 10:57, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. P e z i (talk) 12:00, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
Juist, 7. Längengrad (Deich) -- 2014 -- 3525.jpg
View promotion
Nominated by:
XRay talk on 2014-12-14 09:01 (UTC)
Scope:
Sculpture ot the 7th longitude at the dike in Juist, Lower Saxony, Germany

Symbol support vote.svg Support : all criteria met. --JLPC (talk) 11:42, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. P e z i (talk) 12:00, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
Juist, Otto-Mann-Haus -- 2014 -- 3536.jpg
View promotion
Nominated by:
XRay talk on 2014-12-14 09:04 (UTC)
Scope:
Otto-Mann-Haus in Juist (front), Lower Saxony, Germany

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope. --JLPC (talk) 11:43, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. P e z i (talk) 12:00, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
Mission of China at UNIDO Vienna DSC 9813w.jpg
View promotion
Nominated by:
P e z i (talk) on 2014-12-14 11:33 (UTC)
Scope:
Permanent Mission of China at UNIDO, Vienna, SE view

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope. --JLPC (talk) 11:45, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. P e z i (talk) 12:00, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
2014 Kapliczka w Krosnowicach, 06.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-14 13:31 (UTC)
Scope:
Chapel in Krosnowice, view from NW

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 17:40, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 13:49, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
2014 Krosnowice, park przy dworze, 01.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-14 13:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Palace in Krosnowice, park near palace, view from S

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 17:41, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 13:49, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Blanzac 16 Entrée village par D10 2013.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
JLPC (talk) on 2014-12-14 13:55 (UTC)
Scope:
Entrance of the village by road D 10, S-SE view

Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 14:00, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Ołdrzychowice, Kościól Jana Chrzciciela, 01.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-14 13:58 (UTC)
Scope:
Church of Saint John the Baptist in Ołdrzychowice Kłodzkie, view from E

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 17:45, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Ołdrzychowice, Mauzoleum Oppersdorfów, 01.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-14 14:11 (UTC)
Scope:
Mausoleum of von Magnis family in Ołdrzychowice Kłodzkie, view from WNW

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:11, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Angel on bridge of angels in Rome.JPG
View (withdrawn)
Nominated by:
LivioAndronico talk on 2014-12-14 14:14 (UTC)
Scope:
Antonio Raggi Angel with column.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 14:22, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The scope is too broad, as there are many different angels on this bridge. Why this one and not another ? Comparisons are possible only with another view of the same statue, the Raggi's Angel with column.--Jebulon (talk) 21:26, 14 December 2014 (UTC)✓ Done For the peace of my dear Jebulon--LivioAndronico talk 21:38, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination

  • Why ? It is just a question of scope ! IMO your angel with the column is excellent, the best, a FP, and better than mine ! --Jebulon (talk) 20:52, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
    Why Jebulon ? And ask him as well? Because you are terribly boring, I'm not a professional photographer, I have an reflex of 400 € (which I also lent my brother) I do not have a 2500 € and here are just for fun. Everything seems to be a war ... boh. I'm 36 years I have other to do! Returning specifically photo, what was the need to object? Was enough to put discussion and comment,but no .... do lose him the fun, and moreover nobody gives a damn !!! It seems the mafia here, all silent in getting their facts. Affectueusement --LivioAndronico talk 14:27, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm not a professional photographer, I do not have 2500€ neither, I'm 53 years old, and there is no war at all. Maybe I'm terribly boring (a personal attack...), but you never accept just following our common rules. You never accept critics nor comments. You just want to do only what you want, and you don't try to improve your job etc etc....--Jebulon (talk) 19:50, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

No Jebulon,a Sony Alpha DSLR-A550 is very economic,is true. But please be serious(a personal attack? I don't care). Your are not constructive criticism but annoying (a personal attack? I don't care). My work is not improved? Is only a your personal opinion infact other people (I feel so much better than you) write me "Your todays set of images shows a big improvement of your skills, Livio. ". So,we want to do? I don't care.The only thing that interests me is that when I'll be a 53 years old, I'll be hope to be a useful person. Salutations --LivioAndronico talk 21:10, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
OK, you don't care attack me with insulting words. Useful at 53 ? A big deal indeed. I'll let you tonight: you must begin now to achieve this challenge ! EOD (end of discussion) for me.--Jebulon (talk) 22:24, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Over Jebulon? Non, non, monsieur vient de commencer --LivioAndronico talk 22:42, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It's a shame to see two good contributors argue about problems of form. This image should be promoted as it is very good. If LivioAndronico wanted the process could be resumed. Unlike the "mafia" here wholes happening under the eyes of all. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:39, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
No thanks, I passed the desire. Yes is a pity, especially when not done anything and somebody hit you.--LivioAndronico talk 08:45, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Can be closed as declined
Ołdrzychowice, zespół pałacowy, pałac, 01.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-14 14:20 (UTC)
Scope:
Oppersdorfe's park and palace in Ołdrzychowice Kłodzkie, view from SSW

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 17:43, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Beautiful Kuakata Beach.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Aftab (talk) on 2014-12-14 15:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Kuakata beach on the Patuakhali, Bangladesh (NE view)
Thank you for your review @Archaeodontosaurus. I understand the problem & Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Aftab (talk) 13:33, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Open for review.
Sant'Anastasia - Verona - Cappella del Rosario.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2014-12-14 16:40 (UTC)
Scope:
Chiesa di Sant'Anastasia, Verona, Cappella del Rosario

Symbol support vote.svg Support : all criteria met. --JLPC (talk) 17:42, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Pediment CoA cardinal Pedro Gonzales de Mendoza Monastery San Hieronimo, Granada, Andalusia, Spain.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jebulon (talk) on 2014-12-14 17:27 (UTC)
Scope:
Pedro González de Mendoza (El Gran Cardenal), relief of coats of arms.
Used in:
fr:Pedro González de Mendoza
Reason:
Seen in a pediment inside of the Monastery of San Geronimo in Granada, Andalusia, Spain. Alone in scope, for such CoA very famous in the spanish nobility. Pedro González de Mendoza (1428 - 1495) was a cardinal, a statesman, and a soldier. He took an important part in the fall of the muslim kingdom of Granada in 1492. He was archbishop of Sevilla, the of Toledo, but not of Granada. If things are simple, they are not funny: another Pedro González de Mendoza (1570 - 1639) exists, and this one was archbishop of Granada ! But he was not Cardinal... Alone in scope, Geocoded of course. -- Jebulon (talk)

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:15, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Canis lupus Canine percée MHNT PRE 2010.0.12.2 Henri Filhol.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2014-12-15 06:18 (UTC)
Scope:
Drilled tooth of Canis lupus - canine tooth used as a necklace, Magdalenian, Gourdan cave, France

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 12:55, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Merville église Saint-Saturnin.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2014-12-15 06:20 (UTC)
Scope:
Church Saint-Saturnin of Merville, Haute-Garonne France – West exposure

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 12:55, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Nonac 16 Fonts baptismaux 2014.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
JLPC (talk) on 2014-12-15 12:58 (UTC)
Scope:
Baptismal fonts, church of Nonac, Charente, France
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful. --P e z i (talk) 15:02, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Open for review.
Ołdrzychowice, zespół pałacowy, pałac, 02.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-15 15:51 (UTC)
Scope:
Oppersdorfe's palace in Ołdrzychowice Kłodzkie, view from SSW

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 17:18, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Ołdrzychowice, zespół pałacowy, park, 01.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-15 15:59 (UTC)
Scope:
Oppersdorfe's palace park in Ołdrzychowice Kłodzkie
Open for review.
Ołdrzychowice, zespół dworski, 01.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-15 16:10 (UTC)
Scope:
Gates of Magnis palace in Ołdrzychowice Kłodzkie

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 17:19, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Agriocnemis pieris by kadavoor.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jee on 2014-12-15 16:09 (UTC)
Scope:
Agriocnemis pieris, mating, female gynochrome morph
Reason:
This is a rare photographic evidence for several female colour morphs exist for this species. Verified and certified at [1]. -- Jee

Symbol support vote.svg Support : good and useful. --JLPC (talk) 17:21, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Agriocnemis pieris mating on Kadavoor.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jee on 2014-12-15 16:10 (UTC)
Scope:
Agriocnemis pieris, mating, female androchrome morph
Reason:
This is a rare photographic evidence for several female colour morphs exist for this species. Verified and certified at [2]. -- Jee

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:44, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
2014 Piszkowice, kościół św. Jana Chrzciciela 01.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-15 16:22 (UTC)
Scope:
Category:Saint John the Baptist church in Piszkowice, view from SW

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 17:23, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Stary Wielisław, ogrodzenie kościóła, 03.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-15 16:34 (UTC)
Scope:
Churchyard walls of Saint Catherine of Alexandria church in Stary Wielisław, view from SW

Symbol support vote.svg Support useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:46, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Baudelaire, Bibliothèque de la Pléiade, Œuvres complètes, volume I, dos et jaquette.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Yann (talk) on 2014-12-15 17:07 (UTC)
Scope:
Bibliothèque de la Pléiade, Baudelaire
Reason:
Show both the cover and the back biding. Montre à la fois la jaquette et la reliure typique de cette collection. -- Yann (talk)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Studio work, so no geocoding. Yann (talk) 17:07, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 17:25, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Open for review.
Sant'Anastasia - Verona - Centrego altar.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2014-12-15 18:42 (UTC)
Scope:
Chiesa di Sant'Anastasia, Verona, Centrego altar

Symbol support vote.svg Support useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:47, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Hexaplex trunculus armigerus 01.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2014-12-15 18:46 (UTC)
Scope:
Hexaplex trunculus ssp. armigerus (Banded Dye-Murex), Shell

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:48, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Pinus mugo subsp. uncinata MHNT.BOT.2005.0.976.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2014-12-16 06:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Pinus mugo subsp. uncinata Conifer cones and seeds

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 10:43, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Daux - Le Château de Peyrolade.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2014-12-16 06:40 (UTC)
Scope:
Daux, Haute-Garonne France, Peyrolade Castel, West exposure

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 10:44, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
AT-13765 Michaelerkuppel - Abschlussfigur - by Hu - 5832.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Hubertl (talk) on 2014-12-15 23:11 (UTC)
Scope:
Michaelertrakt Figure on the top, backside

Symbol support vote.svg Support : good and useful. --JLPC (talk) 13:21, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
St-Laurent-des-Combes Monument 11.11.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
JLPC (talk) on 2014-12-16 13:13 (UTC)
Scope:
War memorial of Saint-Laurent-des-Combes, Charente, France

Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 13:29, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
2014 Piszkowice, kościół św. Jana Chrzciciela 18.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-16 13:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Saint John the Baptist church in Piszkowice, interior

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope. --JLPC (talk) 13:59, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Bon point patriotique verso années 1914-1916 FR.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
JLPC (talk) on 2014-12-16 13:56 (UTC)
Scope:
Patriotic reward for school children during WWI, France
Reason:
The only one in scope. Restored : the other side is not uploadable because it's been almost destroyed by years and insects. -- Homework : no geocode. -- JLPC (talk)

Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 14:00, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Stary Wielisław, kaplica, 06.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-16 13:57 (UTC)
Scope:
Jan Ziębicki chapel mausoleum in Stary Wielisław, view from E

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 21:01, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Szalejów Dolny, kośćiół, 19.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-16 14:31 (UTC)
Scope:
Wall of Saints Simon and Jude church graveyard in Szalejów Dolny

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 21:01, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
2014 Szalejów Dolny, kaplica św. Anny 02.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-16 14:40 (UTC)
Scope:
Saint Anne chapel in Szalejów Dolny, view from W

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope. --JLPC (talk) 21:02, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Szalejów Dolny, kaplica św. Anny, 03.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-16 14:47 (UTC)
Scope:
Saint Anne chapel in Szalejów Dolny, interior

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope. --JLPC (talk) 21:03, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Astley Castle Front Elevation.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Nev1 (talk) on 2014-12-16 17:00 (UTC)
Scope:
Astley Castle south east façade

Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:49, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
2014 Bożków, pałac 01.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-16 17:48 (UTC)
Scope:
Bożków Palace, view from WNW

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 21:04, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Sant'Anastasia - Verona - Bevilacqua-Lazise Altar.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2014-12-16 18:27 (UTC)
Scope:
Chiesa di Sant'Anastasia, Verona, Bevilacqua-Lazise altar

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope. --JLPC (talk) 21:06, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Lanius isabellinus MHNT.ZOO.2010.11.213.Turkménistan.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2014-12-17 06:28 (UTC)
Scope:
Lanius isabellinus (Isabelline Shrike), eggs

Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 10:39, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
FluoriteBoltsburn.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2014-12-17 06:32 (UTC)
Scope:
Fluorite. Boltsburn Mine, Co. Durham, England
Reason:
Very famous deposit for this mineral species. -- Archaeodontosaurus (talk)

Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 10:40, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
2014 Szalejów Dolny, kaplica św. Marii Magdaleny 01.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-17 10:49 (UTC)
Scope:
Mary Magdalene chapel in Szalejów Dolny, view from SW

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 16:28, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
2014 Szalejów Dolny, kaplica św. Marii Magdaleny 02.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-17 10:52 (UTC)
Scope:
Mary Magdalene chapel in Szalejów Dolny, view from ESE

Symbol support vote.svg Support : all criteria met. --JLPC (talk) 16:29, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
2014 Szalejów Dolny, dwór.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-17 11:15 (UTC)
Scope:
Palace in Szalejów Dolny, view from NE

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 16:30, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
2014 Szalejów Dolny, park przy dworze 05.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-17 11:22 (UTC)
Scope:
Park at the palace in Szalejów Dolny, view from S

Symbol support vote.svg Support All criteria met --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:02, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Szalejów Górny, zespół kościoła, 15.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Jacek Halicki (talk) on 2014-12-17 11:44 (UTC)
Scope:
Saint George church complex in Szalejów Górny, view from SW

Symbol support vote.svg Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 16:31, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Air France Airbus A380 landing at LAX.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Gyrostat (talk) on 2014-12-17 14:22 (UTC)
Scope:
Airbus A380 of Air France at Los Angeles International Airport

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment as Los Angeles International Airport is in the scope I would expect to see some more of the airport. The tower maybe, or a characteristic terminal building. This could basically be any airport with a runway 24 R… --El Grafo (talk) 15:08, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Fair point. I'll see if I can think of another scope, then. Gyrostat (talk) 17:25, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Open for review.
Timema poppensis camouflaged on its host, Redwood (Sequoia sempervirens), California.jpeg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
El Grafo (talk) on 2014-12-17 14:49 (UTC)
Scope:
Timema poppensis Dorsal view
Used in:
en:Timema
Reason:
Currently, this is the only picture in Category:Timema poppensis and it very nicely shows how the species' camouflage pattern is adapted to it's host plant. It was also the over all winner of the BMC Ecology image competition. -- El Grafo (talk)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment If the scope is considered too broad for this image, something like "(camouflage)" could be added, but I'll leave that up to the regulars here to decide what makes the most sense. Unfortunately no geocoding, but this may very well be a studio (or laboratory) shot where that wouldn't make much sense anyway. --El Grafo (talk) 15:04, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very useful. If you can it would be very useful to have a side view and a close-up view of the head from the front. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:54, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Sorry, no can do: Not my image and not even uploaded by me, I just noticed it over at FPC. --El Grafo (talk) 21:31, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Open for review.
Marennes 17 Bidons eaux pluviales La Cayenne 2014.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
JLPC (talk) on 2014-12-17 16:23 (UTC)
Scope:
Water butts, Marennes, Charente-Maritime, France

Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 19:24, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Juist, Otto-Mann-Haus -- 2014 -- 3537.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
XRay talk on 2014-12-17 17:35 (UTC)
Scope:
Plaque of the "Deutsche Gesellschaft zur Rettung Schiffbrüchiger" at the Otto-Mann-Haus in Juist, Lower Saxony, Germany
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'd prefer to have the scope linked to this Category. --P e z i (talk) 22:35, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Fixed Yes, it's better. I fixed the scope. --XRay talk 04:35, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Open for review.
Juist, Memmertfeuer -- 2014 -- 3529.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
XRay talk on 2014-12-17 17:37 (UTC)
Scope:
Memmertfeuer (Light house) in Juist, Lower Saxony, Germany

Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 20:43, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Sant'Anastasia - Verona - Boldieri Altar.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2014-12-17 17:49 (UTC)
Scope:
Chiesa di Sant'Anastasia, Verona, Boldieri altar

Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 19:25, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Hôtel Weisshorn, (2337m). Zicht op Saint-Luc (1655m) in Val d'Anniviers 01.JPG
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Famberhorst (talk) on 2014-12-17 18:45 (UTC)
Scope:
Saint-Luc Val d'Anniviers Switzerland. view to the north.

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:05, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Rissoina ambigua 01.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2014-12-17 21:32 (UTC)
Scope:
Rissoina ambigua, Shell

Symbol support vote.svg Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:05, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
AT-13765 Michaelerkuppel - Abschlussfigur - by Hu - 5832.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Hubertl (talk) on 2014-12-15 23:11 (UTC)
Scope:
Michaelertrakt Figure on the top, backside

Symbol support vote.svg Support : good and useful. --JLPC (talk) 13:21, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Cheval de Fontalès Paul Davasse Magdalenien MHNT PRE 2011 0 555.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2014-12-18 06:07 (UTC)
Scope:
Horse engraved on a pebbleːPrehistoric site of Fontalès - France

Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 11:50, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.
Cathedrale St Etienne Toulouse - chapelle St François-Xavier.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2014-12-18 06:11 (UTC)
Scope:
Altarpiece of St. François-Xavier Chapelle in Toulouse Cathedral

Symbol support vote.svg Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 11:51, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review.


Pending Most valued review candidatesEdit

Collegiate Church in TumEdit

   
Tum kolegiata 2-2.JPG
View opposition
Nominated by:
Albertus teolog (talk) on 2009-09-21 13:16 (UTC)
Scope:
Collegiate church in Tum, exterior
Used in:
pl:Kolegiata w Tumie

Symbol support vote.svg Support Ok IMO --Berthold Werner (talk) 16:44, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 21:47, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Pictogram voting info.svg Info Opened, because there is VI within the same scope. Now, we should decide, which one is better. --Halavar (talk) 18:32, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Scores: 
1. Tum kolegiata 2-2.JPG: 0 (current VI within same scope) <--
2. Collegiate Church in Tum.jpg: +3 
=>
File:Tum kolegiata 2-2.JPG: Declined and demoted to VI-former. <--
File:Collegiate Church in Tum.jpg: Promoted
--Halavar (talk) 10:41, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
Collegiate Church in Tum.jpg
View promotion
Nominated by:
Chrumps (talk) on 2014-10-26 13:36 (UTC)
Scope:
Saint Mary and Saint Alexius collegiate church in Tum view from SW
Reason:
Cultural heritage monument in Poland -- Chrumps (talk)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment : could you, please, add "NW (or SE...) view" to the scope, as we usually do on this page ? --JLPC (talk) 16:12, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fine like this too. A scope too narrow does not make sense. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:30, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Of course there is a sense for adding a direction, because this church (and other churches and most of the buildings) looks completely different from other side. Yann, We discussed abot this few times here in VI... --Halavar (talk) 16:41, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done --Chrumps (talk) 17:30, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good now. --Halavar (talk) 22:09, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Result: 2 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. P e z i (talk) 15:42, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram voting info.svg Info Opened, because there is VI within the same scope. Now, we should decide, which one is better. --Halavar (talk) 18:32, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is better --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 09:48, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Agree, this one is better. --Halavar (talk) 11:44, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really, this is better. — revimsg 14:17, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
Scores: 
1. Tum kolegiata 2-2.JPG: 0 (current VI within same scope) <--
2. Collegiate Church in Tum.jpg: +3 
=>
File:Tum kolegiata 2-2.JPG: Declined and demoted to VI-former. <--
File:Collegiate Church in Tum.jpg: Promoted
--Halavar (talk) 10:41, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)

Léon Blum, 1927Edit

   
Leon Blum, Meurisse, 1927.jpg
View opposition
Nominated by:
Yann (talk) on 2013-12-24 16:58 (UTC)
Scope:
Léon Blum
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Yes, I know there are still some lines and scratches, but you need to see where I started. Yann (talk) 16:58, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Best in scope. Halavar (talk) 14:52, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:10, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Opened to vote, because there is a candidate within the same scope --Halavar (talk) 11:39, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Scores: 
1. Leon Blum, Meurisse, 1927.jpg: 0 (current VI within same scope) <--
2. Léon Blum Meurisse b 1927.jpg: +3 
=>
File:Leon Blum, Meurisse, 1927.jpg: Declined and demoted to VI-former. <--
File:Léon Blum Meurisse b 1927.jpg: Promoted. 
--Halavar (talk) 13:09, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)
Léon Blum Meurisse b 1927.jpg
View promotion
Nominated by:
JLPC (talk) on 2014-11-12 15:39 (UTC)
Scope:
Léon Blum, 1927, photograph
Reason:
This picture, shot in 1927 by an unknown photographer of Agence Meurisse, is the best in scope imo. Stiched, restored (all scratches suppressed) and cropped at home : no geocode. --JLPC (talk) 15:39, 12 November 2014 (UTC) -- JLPC (talk)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There is already a VI for this scope: File:Leon Blum, Meurisse, 1927.jpg, but your version is probably better. Could you create a MVR? Regards, Yann (talk) 16:09, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very similar images, but this one is little bit better:) --Halavar (talk) 11:40, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --P e z i (talk) 13:00, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yours is better. ;oD Yann (talk) 15:19, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Scores: 
1. Leon Blum, Meurisse, 1927.jpg: 0 (current VI within same scope) <--
2. Léon Blum Meurisse b 1927.jpg: +3 
=>
File:Leon Blum, Meurisse, 1927.jpg: Declined and demoted to VI-former. <--
File:Léon Blum Meurisse b 1927.jpg: Promoted. 
--Halavar (talk) 13:09, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICbot at 0:18 or 12:18 (UTC)

Justizzentrum Wien MitteEdit

   
Justizzentrum Wien Mitte DSC1200w.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
P e z i (talk) on 2014-10-22 10:03 (UTC)
Scope:
Justizzentrum Wien Mitte, SE view
Used in:

City Tower Vienna
Hochhausprojekt Wien Mitte
Landstraße (Wien)

Vienna/Landstraße

Symbol support vote.svg Best in Scope and useful. --JLPC (talk) 10:27, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:20, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram voting info.svg Info Opened to vote, because there is a candidate within the same scope --Halavar (talk) 22:43, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 13:49, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
Justizzentrum Wien Mitte DSC 5246w.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
P e z i (talk) on 2014-11-14 20:46 (UTC)
Scope:
Justizzentrum Wien Mitte, SE view
Used in:
City Tower Vienna
Reason:
Better light; More recent after finishing construction work on adjacent railway station. -- P e z i (talk)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Agree, this one is better. --Halavar (talk) 22:41, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Better imo.--JLPC (talk) 09:39, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 13:49, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Valle de los CaídosEdit

   
Valle de los caidos by forcy-cruz y basilica.jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Eusebius (talk) on 2008-10-29 15:06 (UTC)
Scope:
Valle de los Caídos
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Strong image --Foroa (talk) 06:36, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
But if anyone has the opportunity of taking a photograph of this site in the cross axis, and with a wider angle, it would be great! --Eusebius (talk) 06:39, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Meets all of the criteria. Elucidate (parlez à moi) Ici pour humor 12:16, 1 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support There are few quality problems (tilt, perspective), but this image is really valuable and great illustrative. --Twdragon (talk) 21:25, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Result: 3 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. -- Eusebius (talk) 22:51, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Under MVR.--Godot13 (talk) 06:18, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 13:49, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
SPA-2014-San Lorenzo de El Escorial-Valley of the Fallen (Valle de los Caídos).jpg
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Godot13 (talk) on 2014-12-10 06:24 (UTC)
Scope:
Valle de los Caídos (West)
Used in:
Valle de los Caídos

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment : there's already a VI of this site with a similar orientation. Although this one is better imo, it seems that a MVR is needed.--JLPC (talk) 13:33, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 13:49, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Grasleitenpasshütte, View from EastEdit

   
140626 Grasleitenpasshütte.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Code (talk) on 2014-12-11 20:31 (UTC)
Scope:
Grasleitenpasshütte, View from East.
Open for review.
140626 Grasleitenpasshütte ganz.jpg
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Code (talk) on 2014-12-11 20:37 (UTC)
Scope:
Grasleitenpasshütte, View from East.
Open for review.

Pending valued image set candidatesEdit

New valued image set nominationsEdit

Warning This section has been deactivated because of technical issues. Please do not add any VI set candidate.

Closed valued image set candidatesEdit