Commons:Кандидати за изабране слике

Alemannisch | asturianu | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | English | فارسی | español | suomi | français | galego | हिन्दी | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Lëtzebuergesch | молдовеняскэ | norsk bokmål | português | polski | română | русский | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | українська | 粵語 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | հայերեն | +/−

Ово су кандидати за изабране слике. Уочите да ово није исто што и слика дана.

За архиву претходних номинација, погледајте: Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log

Постоји такође хронолошки списак изабраних слика.

ФормалностиEdit

НоминацијаEdit

Ако мислите да сте нашли или направили слику која може да се сматра вредном, онда је додајте испод у секцију номинације, на врх стране путем овог линка.(Упутства)

Пре него што то урадите, осигурајте да сте унели одговарајући опис слике, као и прикладну лиценцу.

Молимо гласајте користећи реч из вашег језика или одговарајуће шаблоне:

  • За - Yes, Sim, Ja, Oui, Sí, Kyllä, 支持 , Tak,...
  • Против - No, Não, Nein, Non, Ei, 反对 , Nie,...

Такође можете користити шаблоне {{Oppose}}(Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose) и {{Support}}(Symbol support vote.svg Support). Такође можете изразити да волите слику са {{I love}}(Nuvola apps package favorite.svgSymbol support vote.svg Support) или да сте неутрални {{Neutral}}(Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral).

Молимо покушајте да укључите неколико речи о томе зашто вам се (није) свидела слика, посебно када гласате против.

Политика за кандидате за изабране сликеEdit

  • На крају гласања, резултати ће бити одређени петнаестог дана од номинације.
  • Номинације од анонимних корисника су добродошле
  • Доприноси у разговорима од стране анонимних корисника су добродошли
  • Гласови анонимних корисника се не рачунају
  • Номинације се не рачунају као гласови. Подршка мора да буде експлицитно изречена.
  • Номинатори могу да повуку своју номинацију било када.
  • Запамтите, циљ Викимедијине Оставе је да пружи централну базу за слободне слике које би се могле користити у свим Викимедијиним пројектима, укључујући и могуће будуће пројекте. Ово није проста остава за википедијине слика, тако да о сликама не треба судити према томе да ли одговарају неком пројекту.
  • Слике могу да се уклоне са списка уколико немају подршке (не рачунајући номинаторов глас) после седмог дана.

Кандидат ће постати изабрана слика у складу са следећим условима:

  • Одговарајућа лиценца (наравно)
  • Најмање 7 гласова подршке
  • Однос гласова за и против мора да буде најмање 2:1 (двотрећинска већина)
  • Код две различите верзије исте слике, не могу обе бити изабране, већ само она са већим бројем гласова.

За упутства о томе како се процесују старе номинације, погледајте Template talk:Featured pictures candidates#What to do after voting is finished.

Кандидати за уклањање статуса изабране сликеEdit

Током времена, стандарди за изабране слике се мењају. Може бити одлучено да за неке слике које су некада биле "довољно добре", ово више није случај. Овде се наводе слике за које сматрате да више не заслужују да буду изабране. Ово захтева двотрећинску већину (и минимум од 5 гласова) за уклањање статуса. Ако нема 2/3 за уклањање, слика остаје изабрана. За ове радње, гласајте са {{Keep}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep (заслужује да остане изабрана слика) или or {{Delist}} Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist (не заслужује да више буде изабрана слика). Молимо пружите и линк ка оригиналној номинацији за изабрану слику (појавиће се под "Links" на страни са описом слике). За остало, иста правила важе као и изнад. Молимо користите овај линк како бисте додали новог кандидата за уклањање статуса

Освежавање стране: purge this page's cache

Кандидати за изабране сликеEdit

Featured picture candidatesEdit

NASA Exoplanet Exploration Halloween posters 2020Edit

Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2020 at 15:17:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

File:Champlain Quebec city.jpg (delist)Edit

Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2020 at 10:58:55
SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Protest in Łódź, October 2020 - 37 (cropped).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2020 at 09:36:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Protest against abortion restriction in Łódź, October 2020

File:Žumberk (Žár) 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2020 at 07:52:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Žumberk, a small village

File:Blick vom Wachtküppel nach Nordosten.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2020 at 20:11:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

First snow on the Wasserkuppe, Hesse, Germany

File:Collier - vue d'ensemble 11-o.lau-F261.LA978-01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2020 at 18:46:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Necklace of the Lau of Malaita

File:Martial eagle (Polemaetus bellicosus) in flight.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2020 at 13:47:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Duisburg, Landschaftspark Duisburg-Nord -- 2020 -- 7824-6.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2020 at 12:27:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Valves at the switch house east at Landschaftspark Duisburg-Nord, Duisburg, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany

File:Cartouchière - vue d'ensemble 11-o.lau-F169.LA1140-01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2020 at 12:11:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bandolier of the Lau of Malaita

File:Neuntöter mit erbeutetem Heupferd im Geo-Naturpark Bergstraße-Odenwald.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2020 at 06:57:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Pointe de Nyon (1).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 20:36:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pointe de Nyon (2019 m) in commune of Morzine, Haute-Savoie, France

File:Port de Rives in Thonon-les-Bains 06.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 20:33:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Port de Rives in Thonon-les-Bains, Haute-Savoie, France
  • In case clarification is necessary for other reviewers, I see this kind of view all the time. This is nothing special to me. I don't find the composition especially impressive either - it looks like a shot any tourist in my home town could take. I don't have any issues with the technical quality.--Peulle (talk) 08:37, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Spurzem, great photo to me. Nice light and beautiful subject Cmao20 (talk) 11:31, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:New York and Jersey City Skyline Panorama.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 14:05:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I have no problems with the crops, and it's great to see both the Jersey City and Lower Manhattan skylines together (plus Ellis Island, which should get a category and be mentioned in the description). However, a lot of the buildings feel washed out to me. I feel like this was a hazy late morning, not ideal for the shoot, but I wonder whether selectively increasing saturation could help. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:00, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • I've been a lot in NY but this was an exceptional clear day. Btw the geotag is wrong, camera location can't be in lower Manhattan. --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 20:58, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment You know that I live in Manhattan, right? Time of day can be an issue in terms of haze, not just the day's weather. And in no way would I call that an exceptionally clear day. It's not exceedingly rare to have cloudless blue skies here. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:32, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There are at least five oily spots in the sky at right. --Cayambe (talk) 23:01, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Vertical distortion (left side), harsh contrast (in some areas the contrast is too much resulting in black solid) and finally Satured colors. Sorry --Wilfredor (talk) 00:32, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

File:WLM - 2020 - Schloss Schönbrunn - Kronprinzengarten - 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 13:10:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Crown Prince Garden, Schönbrunn Palace, Vienna, Austria
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Austria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by User:Moahim - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:10, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the dramatic streaming clouds and the way they echo the shapes below make this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:10, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Despite the clouds a bit too dull light for me, sorry. The crane is also annoying and I feel like it could be cloned out well, though for a support from me this still would not suffice. --A.Savin 14:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I guess I'm the only one who likes this. I'll leave this nomination up until probably tonight Eastern Standard Time and then withdraw if there are no supporting votes. I'm surprised, but we react differently to what we see, and that's natural. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:59, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it, it's very dramatic. Cmao20 (talk) 11:27, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great composition and clouds. -- King of ♥ 15:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:The Arcades, Christchurch, New Zealand 04.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 12:47:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Arcades, Christchurch, New Zealand
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment You're welcome. I enjoy the shape and the light. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:51, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Petite Venise depuis le pont de la rue de Turenne (Colmar) (2).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 12:12:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Little Venice from the rue de Turenne bridge in Colmar (Haut-Rhin, France). Gzen92 [discuter] 12:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Gzen92 [discuter] 12:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bad light: the houses are in the shadow and the sky is too bright. —kallerna (talk) 15:23, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I understand, I adjusted light tones and dark tones. Is it better ? Thanks. Gzen92 [discuter] 07:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Pretty and good quality but the light is still dull. I assume you were shooting in the direction of the sun, which never quite works. Cmao20 (talk) 11:28, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de San Juan de Mata y San Félix de Valois, Bratislava, Eslovaquia, 2020-02-01, DD 78.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 12:18:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church of St John of Matha, Bratislava, Slovakia
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question I really feel shrunk on both sides. Very tight crop. Possible more space around? -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for the nom MB-one! I had to get close to the church to photograph it, taking a shot with 30 cables wasn't an option. Will upload a new version with a more "natural" look later today Poco a poco (talk) 15:16, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose With this much distortion, this one should not be a QI. Even without the distortion, I fail to be amazed of the photo. Just a church facade. —kallerna (talk) 15:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Heavy distortion, shade divides the facade in two, very tight crop - this is not among the finest on Commons. --Ivar (talk) 15:54, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment New version uploaded with more crop on both sides and adjustments of perspective and aspect ratio Poco a poco (talk) 18:01, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The framing is still too cramped after minor change -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:17, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support Beautiful place, good quality and the distortion is really not that bad, I'm not sure why there are so many complaints about it. But the shade falling across the left of the facade is a bit distracting. Maybe would have been better at a different time of day. Cmao20 (talk) 07:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 08:56, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 18:30, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Knoblauch (Allium sativum)-20200621-RM-085344.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 11:26:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Bergtocht van Guarda via Ardez en Ftan naar Scuol. 20-09-2019. (d.j.b) 10.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 05:27:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Doors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A decorative and funny door knocker. With wear spots in the paint layer. The shadow effect gives the photo an added value for me. Guarda was awarded (the Wakker Prize) for the preservation of its architectural heritage in 1975.
    All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:27, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:27, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support My father used to photograph door knockers in many countries, therefore I know many of them. This one would have been a showpiece for his collection ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 09:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturated, highlights/shadows adjusted too much, no wow. The light is also too harsh. —kallerna (talk) 11:18, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful object, beautiful colors and good quality; very good for me -- Spurzem (talk) 20:38, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Harsh shadows and light spoil it in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely colours and textures in the wood Cmao20 (talk) 07:53, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Kallerna. Daniel Case (talk) 15:33, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Cmao20 --Llez (talk) 15:39, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Main path lined with stone pillars to the ruined Khmer Hindu temple of Wat Phou, Champasak, Laos.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 05:11:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Main path lined with stone pillars to the ruined Khmer Hindu temple of Wat Phou, Champasak, Laos
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Laos
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:11, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:11, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Maybe the light is a bit harsh, but I like the composition very much – it combines the centered axis with a careful balance of the juxtaposed trees and the rising mountains. --Aristeas (talk) 09:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice, but not special enough for FP. —kallerna (talk) 11:19, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MB-one (talk) 12:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Aristeas, the composition is painterly. Cmao20 (talk) 07:53, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's tilted, but that's easily fixable. I'm 50/50 on the wow factor; the pillars and ruins give it a certain something, but in the end I feel like there's not enough of them to see. It's a nature photo more than a shot of some interesting ruins.--Peulle (talk) 09:04, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Image rotated (1°). Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:26, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Peulle, I'd have probably tried to focus rather on the road showing less of the mounatins in the back, to me it doesn't look balanced Poco a poco (talk) 07:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC) Poco a poco (talk) 07:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Poco. I'd probably support a photo that narrowly focused on just the central section from bottom to top - the path. The taller peak on the right unfortunately unbalances the form to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:03, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 15:33, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:PK Thatta asv2020-02 img03 Shah Jahan Mosque.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 01:54:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dome interior, Shah Jahan Mosque, Thatta

File:Goodyera repens flowers in detail - Männiku.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2020 at 19:30:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Creeping lady's-tresses
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family_:_Orchidaceae
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Very tiny flowers of Creeping lady's-tresses, focus stacked of 46 images. The background is sky through the trees. All by Ivar (talk) 19:30, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 19:30, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 22:11, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful light, nice natural background. The DoF could have been more consistent, still enough crispy sharp areas to appreciate currently -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:02, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · 01:36, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive, considering the size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:23, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Definitely unsharp even on 12 MPx and some CA all across the plant (reflexion). But i like thia back color, much better than that light green. --Mile (talk) 07:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Unsharp if this was a photo of large flowers, but they are tiny Mile. Please have another look. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Charlesjsharp I still think stack could be better, i have one in a similar size, manual shots before stack, the flower was on the hill (windy-moving). Unless pic was scaled-up !? APS-C might not be best for small macros. --Mile (talk) 11:53, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • @PetarM: Nothing was upscaled. All my Nikon images tends to be a bit soft and usually additional sharpening is added. "Definitely unsharp" is imho very harsh assessment. --Ivar (talk) 12:24, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Ivar Maybe i should say "sharp enough", but stack could be done more appropriate. --Mile (talk) 12:38, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • I may be missing something here, but the description implies these flowers are 5 x 7mm, but yours are 30 x 30mm Mile. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:14, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Charlesjsharp My whole flower was 30×30 mm, all that sqaured size. Means each white blossom was under 10mm. I suppose Ivar gave a blossom size, not the complete size of the flower we are looking at ? --Mile (talk) 16:08, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Mile: You are comparing quite flat inflorescence with the one that has hairy flowers. 9 stacked images versus 46, they are not quite comparable. --Ivar (talk) 16:25, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Ivar We won't get far here. But you gave me a mission, I will try to find this flower in soon future. I will try to reaffirm my objectives here. Maybe I will fail too, but let's have a try. --Mile (talk) 16:45, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Mile: Face-smile.svg You need to wait at least for the next summer to find this rare species in Slovenia. Good luck with that! Anyway, the asessment "Definitely unsharp" is imo not competent. --Ivar (talk) 17:01, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Thats OK, i put this on Bookmark and see habitat, Central Europe too. --Mile (talk) 19:19, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Basile. --Aristeas (talk) 09:23, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Mile, this kind of shots have limited wow to me, therefore I really expect crispy sharpness, which unfortunately isn't the case here Poco a poco (talk) 15:19, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:58, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fine considering the flowers are very small. I don't think it's really that unsharp at all. Cmao20 (talk) 07:51, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:48, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 15:37, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Tallinna Tööstushariduskeskus 005-omblusklass pano.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2020 at 16:54:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

360° view on the Tallinn Industrial Education Centre sewing class

File:Tallinna Teeninduskool 009-kokalabor pano.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2020 at 16:45:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

360° view on the Tallinn School of Service cook's laboratory

Church of St Sebastian, Ponta DelgadaEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2020 at 09:25:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Church of St Sebastian, Ponta Delgada, São Miguel Island, Azores, Portugal. The church, built between 1531 and 1547, is one of the landmarks of the capital of the island. I propose these images as a set because I believe that each of them deserves the FP star alone and because the set depicts this beautiful church from different viewpoints giving a comprehensive view of it (3rd criteria "A group of images depicting the same subject from different viewpoints"). Note that there is already a closer look of the high altar that became FP and could have been added to this set. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 09:25, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 09:25, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Interested to see how this set is interpreted. For me, the images, high quality as they are, do not depict 'the same subject from different viewpoints'. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:30, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
    The subject is the church and I offer different view of parts of it Poco a poco (talk) 18:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment In the exterior image there is a car that is distracting and the "General view of the interior." there is a problem of distortion of the verticals, the upper part is stretched towards the sides (check the verticality of the columns) --Wilfredor (talk) 12:53, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Wilfredor: I reworked the image of the exterior view: the van is gone, I also improved the verticals. I've also made some adjusments of the interior view and added one additional image of the interior looking from the altar back to the entrance. Poco a poco (talk) 18:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
Almost everything is fine but "General view of the nave back from the altar." has the same problem now fixed in "General view of the interior.", please, fix it too and I will support it. Thanks --Wilfredor (talk) 21:06, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Wilfredor: I had already anticipated this feedback and rework the second interior image before I added it to the set, but I made now some additional adjustments. --Poco a poco (talk) 09:16, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
Sigo observando el problema de las columnas en "General view of the nave back from the altar.", la parte superior de las columnas esta inclinada hacia afuera, esto es fácilmente corregible usando las guías en Photoshop. --Wilfredor (talk) 15:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
Wilfredor: ¿¿cómo lo ves ahora?? si sigo sin atinar, ¿podrías añadir una nota? Poco a poco (talk) 18:09, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support IMHO Good now --Wilfredor (talk) 19:04, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Distortion quite strong on the first image, looks like the tower is falling down. --Ivar (talk) 12:58, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Ivar: I readjusted the perspective of the tower Poco a poco (talk) 18:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Imho it's not fixable, because shooting point was too close to the church. --Ivar (talk) 18:25, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • I was Ivar, indeed as far as I could and I also took the side further from the tower. The church is in the middle of the city and there are usually tons of people walking around specially visiting bars or restaurants nearby. I could manage this shot without people thank you patience and COVID-19. Poco a poco (talk) 18:39, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Amazing images, on the whole. I really like all three interior views and I think they should definitely be FP. The exterior isn't so clear for me, the van is distracting and I agree with Ivar that the tower looks like it's falling backwards. Cmao20 (talk) 13:57, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Cmao20: as mentioned above I addressed the mentioned issues of the external image Poco a poco (talk) 18:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks, I mean honestly it's an amazing set and I'm not going to quibble any further. Cmao20 (talk) 21:04, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The last two photos are unreservedly FPs to me. I'm not as sure about the rest. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I like all the photos and IMHO at least the first (now) and the two last really deserve the star, but I am not sure about the set idea. --Aristeas (talk) 09:33, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:16, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Tropidolaemus wagleri, Wagler's palm pit viper - Takua Pa District, Phang-nga Province (48238132136).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2020 at 08:55:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wagler's palm pit viper

File:Une tartiflette sortie du four.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2020 at 08:15:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info nominated by Benoît Prieur -- --Benoît (d) 08:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- --Benoît (d) 08:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sharp and appetizing-looking photo of the tartiflette. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:36, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No reason to have assymetic and 'tilted' tile pattern. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:39, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support per Ikan but I also take Charles' points. Cmao20 (talk) 13:50, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no wow. Kruusamägi (talk) 16:39, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Looks very yummy and certainly good photographic quality, but per Charlesjsharp and Kruusamägi. --MB-one (talk) 12:27, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose +1. --Peulle (talk) 21:41, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 16:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Tūranga (library), Christchurch City, New Zealand.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2020 at 07:23:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tūranga (library), Christchurch City, New Zealand
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#New_Zealand
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. It's Tūranga, a new public library in Christchurch, New Zealand. The old one was destroyed during the earthquakes. It's usually quite busy around so I'm quite pleased that I managed to take this shot without cars and people. -- Podzemnik (talk) 07:23, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Podzemnik (talk) 07:23, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:28, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I may be a lone dissenter, but the front of the building feels too in-your-face to me. The right side has a decent rhythm and I like the design on the bottom right of the front, but I just find the building in general upsetting to view and not part of a great composition, although I'm of course happy that a new public library was constructed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:40, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 13:18, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The more I look at it the more that cropped tree on the left bothers me. Daniel Case (talk) 04:11, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I've come back to this several times, and I really want to support it, but Daniel Case has a point about the tree. The library building and the hotel next to it work well together. I wish that you could've walked just a few steps to the right to avoid that tree, while keeping the hotel on the right side. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 22:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 15:32, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Plagiodontes daedaleus f. minor 01.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2020 at 07:06:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A shell of Plagiodontes daedaleus forma minor
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Shells#Family : Odontostomidae
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 07:06, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 07:06, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:29, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not really colorful like many of the shells you've photographed, but very nice details and very impressive, considering its size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:42, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Not so colourful, but have a look at the teeth! --Llez (talk) 10:00, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, boring colours, but amazing internal detail. What is the purpose of the 'teeth'? Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:33, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I suppose that it is an protection against predators, when the animal is retracted in the shell. In contrary to many sea and freshwater snails, most of he land snails lack an operculum, which has amongst others the same function. At any rate these teeth are very useful for taxonomists, for their arrangement (different in every species) helps to identify the species ;-). --Llez (talk) 11:59, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 13:19, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cmao20 (talk) 13:49, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:19, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 16:24, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:41, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 23:39, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:04, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --GRDN711 (talk) 20:43, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco a poco (talk) 07:45, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Jeanette Scissum at Marshall Space Flight Center.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2020 at 00:02:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jeanette Scissum
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by NASA/MSFC - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:02, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:02, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cvmontuy (talk) 02:50, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice photo of someone I wish I had already known about. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:25, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aristeas (talk) 11:14, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cmao20 (talk) 13:46, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Not an FP. Moon dominates and the file cabinet on the right is highly distracting. Face is not well lit. Seven Pandas (talk) 22:14, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Seven Pandas. Daniel Case (talk) 04:02, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
    • @Seven Pandas, Daniel Case: I'm confused about the month-old face comment. She is African-American, and the photo was shot a little overexposed to try and get more detail in her face with the filmstock of the time, so I think it's as all-out as it could have been. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
@Adam Cuerden:Her face doesn't bother me; I know we're asserting the main value of the image is historic. But ... I think SP had a point about how, if she's the basis for nominating the image for FP, it really works as one if she's only a quarter of the total image and not the most prominent thing in it. Daniel Case (talk) 16:56, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above. This would make a wonderful VI and probably a good FP at en.wikipedia, but I wouldn't call this a top-notch environmental portrait. --El Grafo (talk) 09:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 15:29, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Steuerhaus, Memmingen, Alemania, 2019-06-21, DD 90.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2020 at 21:10:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Steuerhaus, Memmingen, Germany
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Steuerhaus, Memmingen, Germany. The building dates from 1494/1495 and was created for the administration of the finances of the city. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 21:10, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:10, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I have the feeling that some people at the left are distorted (stretched horizontally), caused by the wide angle objective, also the arch at the right. --Llez (talk) 06:09, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
    Llez I applied an aspect ratio adjustment, looks better now, thanks, Poco a poco (talk) 08:47, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice, and the forward-and-back motion is helped by the wicker chairs. Side point: It's funny that there are no flags in the flagpoles. In the U.S., there would be, but I understand the different historical consciousness of Germany. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:34, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Complicated! Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 11:14, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan, a really nice colourful photo. Cmao20 (talk) 13:45, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. It's also faintly nostalgic to see people sitting in groups at tables right next to other people in groups sitting at tables ... Daniel Case (talk) 20:42, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but I've looked at this a few times now, and I don't understand what's so special about it that it should warrant FP status.--Peulle (talk) 10:58, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Peulle. —kallerna (talk) 11:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Peulle. --MB-one (talk) 12:33, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Peulle and right crop doesn't work for me. --Ivar (talk) 13:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 15:28, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Boring sky, and not special enough, per others. Incidentally, visible distorsions among the people -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Georgios Ntaviotis & Daniel Souček, U21 CZE-GRE 2019-10-10.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2020 at 19:00:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Georgios Ntaviotis and Daniel Souček in an internatinoal association football match of European Under-21 Championship Qualifying Round between the Czech Republic and Greece
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Association football (soccer)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me. -- T.Bednarz (talk) 19:00, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- T.Bednarz (talk) 19:00, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The scene doesn't speak for itself (why does the guy in the white shirt appear to be shouting at his hand, and why is the other guy not interested in the ball?). Also, the motion blur, on the hand and the ball, detracts from the image rather than adding to it. --Bobulous (talk) 19:10, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm sorry, but once you read Bobulous's !vote you can't take the picture seriously (In any event, regardless of the outcome of this, I think the image would benefit greatly from being cropped in from the left as that part of it adds nothing). Daniel Case (talk) 20:39, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I was going to suggest you nominate this image instead, but realised rather late that it has already been awarded FP status. That is a striking image. --Bobulous (talk) 19:45, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Beilstein - Burg Hohenbeilstein und Unteres Schloss - Ansicht vom Birkenweg mit Abendsonne.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2020 at 19:35:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from the Birkenweg to Hohenbeilstein Castle (on the top of the hill) and to the so-called Unteres Schloss
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It was not easily possible to use a tripod (I took this photo standing on a parking place, people and cars cruising around me ;–), I wanted f/10 to get enough DoF at 94mm, and so I selected ISO 400 to get 1/125 s in order to avoid camera shake. --Aristeas (talk) 07:05, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • IMO it would be nothing wrong about using, for example, f/7.3 and 1/50 sec exposure. Tripod? For god's sake, a Sony A7Rx user hardly ever needs a tripod ;-) --A.Savin 13:02, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I will provide a version with noise reduction in the sky as soon as possible (hopefully tomorrow or at Monday), but at the moment I am working hard as a member of the jury for WLM 2020/DE and can’t do any photo editing ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 07:05, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info New version with less noise uploaded. @Aristeas: Please revert, if it's not meeting Your expectations. --Ivar (talk) 08:58, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • @Iifar: Thank you very mich for helping out! (Maybe I will take the freedom to upload my own de-noised version created from the RAW file next week, but your version is definitely a good improvement, I will take it as a measure for my own attempt.) --Aristeas (talk) 11:01, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Appealing light, interesting architecture. Assuming no tripod was taken, the settings seem consistent to me (minor noise in the sky, honestly not a deal-breaker in my view). High resolution and appropriate DoF -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:55, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thank you very much, Cmao20, for nominating and all of you for your comments and support. --Aristeas (talk) 07:05, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 09:00, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:08, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • This one, FF, paid some 2000, but ISO 400 migth be problem. A.Savin !? --Mile (talk) 11:33, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:36, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In Ivar's version well fixed, thanks. --A.Savin 13:02, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:13, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose None of the three buildings is large enough in the scene to keep the attention, so it feels like the three buildings together define the composition, and the way they're laid out doesn't feel balanced. Also, the way the trees suddenly burst in to obscure the building at the bottom-left makes it feel even less balanced. Lighting and detail are excellent, but the arrangement just doesn't fit together for me. --Bobulous (talk) 19:15, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I'd like more space at the bottom --Llez (talk) 06:00, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I understand your wish very well, but the problem is that at the bottom there are some very ugly modern buildings which would spoil the image … Next week I will have a look at the RAW file if I can rescue some more pixels at the bottom, but we cannot do much, sorry. --Aristeas (talk) 11:01, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Petit Champlain at night, Quebec city.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2020 at 19:34:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Petit Champlain at night, Quebec city
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment On balance, I think I agree. Very similar composition, same motif, but this is a larger file, brighter and has IMO a nicer composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment +1. I agree with Cmao20 too -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:05, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
IMHO It is a different composition, the previous one has more of an upper part than this, there are also people and another different decoration of lights --Wilfredor (talk) 21:32, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Although the new image is of higher quality, I prefer the composition of the old one. I just don't think a square crop works as well as a vertical aspect ratio. -- King of ♥ 22:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per resolution of whether we should delist the old one or not. Daniel Case (talk) 18:48, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral exactly like Daniel. I like both photos very much, but I fear we cannot feature both of them. --Aristeas (talk) 09:29, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the feedback, I will create a delist nomination --Wilfredor (talk) 13:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Friedhof ohlsdorf november 2019 30.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2020 at 16:23:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hamburg, cemetery Ohlsdorf, memorial for the civilian casualties in WW2, entrance
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dirtsc - uploaded by Dirtsc - nominated by Dirtsc -- Dirtsc (talk) 16:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dirtsc (talk) 16:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice, a really arty composition with beautiful light. Cmao20 (talk) 19:46, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree. Really good, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:55, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very beautiful indeed, but the bright part looks unnatural. It is totally OK for the sun to be blown out. We shouldn't resort to fake highlight recovery to artificially suppress the brightness of the sky when the color information just isn't there. -- King of ♥ 22:27, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support KoH is right, but I still love the composition and light. ;–) Sidenote: It’s a pity and I do not understand why this photo did not pass the pre-jury for WLM 2020 :–(. But the pre-jury is always somewhat tricky … and always kills a few of the best submissions. --Aristeas (talk) 08:41, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
    @Aristeas: Thanks for the sidenote! Greetings --Dirtsc (talk) 16:30, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:14, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I love the scene, but why is the metalwork so much softer and lighter in the areas where the sky is seen? --Bobulous (talk) 19:17, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:50, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:36, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:27, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mosbatho (talk) 20:21, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Like King of ♥, I like everything about the image except for the unnatural glow and sudden decrease in sharpness in the upper right corner of the gate. --MB-one (talk) 12:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose what have you done to the top right of the gate Dirtsc? Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:47, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
    @Charlesjsharp: I tried a rework, but didn't want to change the original. Please tell me, if you think the version File:Friedhof ohlsdorf november 2019 30a.jpg might be better. I'm not quite happy with the new version yet, because it is darker than the original. Greetings --Dirtsc (talk) 19:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • I see more artefacts. Sometimes you just cannot recover overexposed areas. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:FCCA GE C30-7 Chinchan - Ticlio.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2020 at 13:49:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

FCCA between Chinchan and Ticlio, Peru
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by David Gubler - nominated by Ivar (talk) 13:49, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 13:49, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Typically good from Kabelleger. Cmao20 (talk) 19:45, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cmao20. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:56, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 22:09, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♥ 22:28, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:47, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBruce1eetalk 06:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:01, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Basile, and also a nice colour/saturation contrast. --Aristeas (talk) 08:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:06, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:15, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I love this scene, and it's almost perfect except for the bizarre texture seen in the water closest to the front of the train. Is that some sort of noise reduction artefact? Can it be fixed? (Also, is the train driver giving you a thumbs up?) --Bobulous (talk) 19:21, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Must be some moiré effect, interference between the water's structure and the sensor pixels. I've uploaded a new version in which I didn't sharpen the water, I think it's much better that way. As usual SHIFT+reload may be necessary to see the changes. --Kabelleger (talk) 17:26, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
      • Symbol support vote.svg Support The latest version is softer at 100%, but it does hide the odd prickliness of the water at full screen, so I think it's worth the trade. --Bobulous (talk) 19:53, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:31, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 05:58, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:20, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:49, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:44, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 20:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 09:18, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Rose-ringed parakeet (Psittacula krameri borealis) male Jaipur 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2020 at 13:23:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rose-ringed parakeet (Psittacula krameri borealis) male near Jaipur

File:Laila Peak.jpg (delist)Edit

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2020 at 12:56:01
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info (Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Nice view, but far below today's FP and QI standards. --A.Savin 12:56, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Ivar (talk) 17:55, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --StellarHalo (talk) 19:24, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Pretty, but tiny. Give me twice this resolution and I'd vote to keep. Cmao20 (talk) 19:41, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep. I feel like we should keep really good or striking small pictures from the early digital photography age as historical. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:59, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Below 2 MP. A landscape would have to be in the 2-4 MP range for me to say "I wouldn't vote for this now, but I wouldn't delist it either." -- King of ♥ 22:29, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Slightly underexposed (sky), and the WB seems too warm, but the main issue is definitely the size. In years 2000-2001 I remember I was among the first to own a digital camera, working with floppy disks (almost this model). Maximum resolution 0.35 Mpx 🔬😭 Nice gadget at these old times to avoid developing the photos on paper before inserting them in university reports, however I really don't think any of these documents would have ever made a great image. Even at this period it was very clear the quality was disappointingly low compared to the standards -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:45, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Per Ikan Kekek. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 15:04, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful delist If there were some way we could at least recognize the independently commendable elements (the composition and lighting), I wish we could. In those areas it could certainly serve as an example to emulate.Daniel Case (talk) 20:07, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist I am not swayed by Ikan's arguments; there is no such category as far as I'm aware, and this image doesn't meet the current FP bar, imo.--Peulle (talk) 21:43, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment If historical digital photos can't be grandfathered in, why vote? Someone should create a bot that will automatically remove FP status from all photos below 2MP and run it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Points well taken, but why not do this kind of delisting with a bot? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:04, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • I guess I do think that there should be some kind of acknowledgement of good pioneering use of the new digital technology, but if we want to revoke the FP status of everything under 2MP, a bot should be created and run. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:07, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • As for me, the photo is also a bit short on wow side, although it of course may have been considered unusual at the timepoint of promotion. But meanwhile we have lots of impressive mountain views, and I'm also not quite sure if the upright format is the best one for this scenery. That said, I still think what should be delisted is not to be decised via bot, but needs consensus instead. --A.Savin 16:34, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Ancien hôtel des Postes de Charleroi (DSC 0278).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2020 at 07:22:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ancien hôtel des Postes (Charleroi, Belgium)
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Belgium
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info by -- Trougnouf (talk) 07:22, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Trougnouf (talk) 07:22, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looks like a good QI, but I'm not really wowed by the light or the motif, sorry.--Peulle (talk) 09:00, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support I agreed with Peulle at first but looking at it some more the soft light and the beautiful clouds have won me over. Support is only weak because I feel it is a little bit oversharpened and there is a little colour noise. Cmao20 (talk) 19:43, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done more denoising, less sharpening. Thank you ! --Trougnouf (talk) 17:23, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The clouds radiating from the center really enhance the composition. -- King of ♥ 22:30, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Peulle. Daniel Case (talk) 02:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:05, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like this. The lighting is subtle but the main building still has a luminosity which makes it stand out against its surroundings. The composition works for me: just the right amount of sky above the tower, and just about as much empty pavement showing below as is viable, and a clear view of the main building without obstruction or distraction. Detail is sharp at full screen (34" 4K) and sufficient at 100%. --Bobulous (talk) 19:29, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 15:26, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Chute Montmorency3.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2020 at 00:45:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Montmorency Falls

File:Green karst peaks seen from the top of Mount Nam Xay a sunny morning during the monsoon Vang Vieng Laos.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2020 at 23:56:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Green karst peaks seen from the top of Mount Nam Xay a sunny morning during the monsoon Vang Vieng Laos
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Have another look, Basile, it does not look crispy sharp to me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:41, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Charles J Sharp, sharp like your honeycomb I think. If not "crispy" then normally sharp. But look, you have two nominations currently, this honeycomb measuring 3,415 × 3,415 pixels, and a moth sized 4,422 × 2,948 pixels. Your buzzard archived yesterday measured 2,600 x 4,000 pixels, and your chameleon last week 3,785 × 2,523 pixels. Now this is how detailed this landscape appears when downsized or cropped to 4'422 px large, like the biggest of your 4 last candidatures. The autofocus was set, certainly the limit of the camera was reached. More sharpness would mean over-sharpened in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:16, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • I was reacting to your dismissing the oppose vote with the 'crispy' adjective. I wouldn't dream of comparing the absolute sharpness of my hand-held photos using a enthusiast-level crop-frame body and a hand-held 400mm lens in average light conditions with your professional-level full-frame body and tripod with the option of testing out various settings. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:34, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:25, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support of course --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:14, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:49, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 10:29, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 10:50, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very beautiful landscape and the sharpness looks fine to me. Cmao20 (talk) 06:49, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:59, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Majestic. -- King of ♥ 22:32, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:21, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice scenery, sharpness clearly OK. --A.Savin 13:19, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good composition and exposure, and a nice sense of depth delivered by the low angle of the sun. Detail is sharp at full screen (34" 4K) and sufficient at 100%. The clouds and the colours and the rugged terrain make for a striking scene. --Bobulous (talk) 19:36, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 05:54, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:50, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 20:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support due to sharpness Poco a poco (talk) 07:54, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Sugarloaf Mountain with the cloud on top.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2020 at 21:53:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sugarloaf Mountain with the cloud on top
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Brazil
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded Donatas Dabravolskas - nominated by -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 21:53, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 21:53, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The quality is not perfect but this is a really amazing sight. Cmao20 (talk) 10:36, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice, but wb seems to slightly off. —kallerna (talk) 15:14, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A very striking scene, especially with the lines of cables partially disappearing within the cloud. The peak does appear starkly darker and more saturated than the rest of the rock, but I'm guessing this might be because it's above cloud level and less affected by moisture haze. The composition is good, the exposure fitting, and the warm colour seems right to me given how low the sun must be to cast shadows like that. --Bobulous (talk) 19:33, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:57, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:28, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not impressed by composition or quality. Should not be any need to crop (or it may be downsized). Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:44, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Not sure about the WB, especially given this picture taken by the same photographer at the same time. Daniel Case (talk) 23:57, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Duplicate picture (see metadata of both, e.g. unique ID). The other version was uploaded 5 Sep 2019 as part of WLM, the now nominated version -- on 16 Jul 2020 as part of WLE. Interesting strategy... --A.Savin 12:36, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
    A.Savin: Good point, but in the case this image had made it to the final of WLE 2020 in Brazil it would have been disqualified as we expect images that had not been uploaded before (that includes of course derivative works!). FYI Donatas Dabravolskas. Otherwise I agree with Charles and I find the original WB more realistic, therefore Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poco a poco (talk) 17:08, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:06, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 17:02, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Walkway and hut in paddy fields with water reflection of colorful clouds at sunset in Vang Vieng Laos.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2020 at 21:41:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Walkway and hut in paddy fields at sunset in Vang Vieng Laos
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural#Laos
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Another Laotian landscape from Basile Morin. As with so many of these I think it has really special and unusual light. created by Basile Morin - uploaded by Basile Morin - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 21:41, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 21:41, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
  • I don't find this one among the best of Basile's landscapes. The sky is nice, but the foreground is too much about the mud puddles on the left. There's nothing wrong with that, necessarily, except that I feel like I'm supposed to be looking at the structure in the background and the field to the right (where the light is less appealing). — Rhododendrites talk |  23:20, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impossible not to support these beautiful lines. --Podzemnik (talk) 06:33, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Absolutely, per Podzemnik. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:35, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice, but not exceptional enough for FP. —kallerna (talk) 11:43, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks a lot, Cmao20, for the nomination -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:14, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♥ 14:17, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 06:13, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 07:34, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:04, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:29, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:55, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per nomination. --Aristeas (talk) 08:44, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 10:31, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the contrast between the sublimity of the background and the prosaic mud in the foreground reflecting it, mud that someone has to walk around so that they and their family can eat. Daniel Case (talk) 17:57, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • And feed others, very often, too :-) I tried to target the orange clouds through the reflection. Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:33, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --GRDN711 (talk) 01:44, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose solid image but unfortunate light IMO. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:49, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:07, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others --Milseburg (talk) 20:17, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above Poco a poco (talk) 07:50, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Galerie de la Reine, Brussels (DSCF7218).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2020 at 17:35:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Galerie de la Reine in Brussels (empty due to the COVID-19 pandemic)
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Belgium
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info by -- Trougnouf (talk) 17:35, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Trougnouf (talk) 17:35, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Quality is OK, good timing. But way too much of the floor, instead I'd wish to see more of the arches (like on this photo). IMO it would have been nothing wrong about heading the camera slightly upwards and then doing perspective correction. Light is a bit weak, too. --A.Savin 18:27, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Works great for me, I like having the vanishing point near the center. -- King of ♥ 21:14, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I like it, but tend to agree with A.Savin about too much floor. I'd be inclined to support with a crop, but some might not like that for resolution reasons. — Rhododendrites talk |  23:29, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per King. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:36, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too much floor. —kallerna (talk) 11:42, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per A.Savin --StellarHalo (talk) 13:44, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose per Kallerna. Nice picture but it does look slightly unbalanced, the trouble is there is nothing much to look at in the floor. I think landscape not portrait would have been a better choice here. Cmao20 (talk) 10:26, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose I think that cropping away the floor up to at least above the cracked tile would stop the empty space drawing attention away from the more interesting shopfronts and covered ceiling. Also, I hate to say it, but the red-and-white safety barrier/tape in the mid-distance is a little distracting once you spot it. --Bobulous (talk) 19:52, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per King. I think cropping the floor out would only have been justified if, like this onetime FP nom of mine, the camera had been able to take in the end point of the glass roof. Also, I think (per the way some !voters said they'd support that image if there hadn't been all those people at the bottom), it emphasizes the emptiness of a usually crowded public space due to the pandemic. Daniel Case (talk) 17:23, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Humanité René Philastre and Charles-Antoine Cambon - Set design for the second part of Victor Hugo's Les Burgraves, première production.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2020 at 09:58:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Les Burgraves
These set designs were meant to e turned into physical objects, the artistry is kind of a bonus. So, yes, but I'm not quite sure whether they were an artist guide or a construction guide. Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:14, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Got it. Thanks for explaining. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:06, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:49, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic_media/Entertainment#Music_and_Opera


Кандидати за брисањеEdit

Featured picture candidatesEdit

NASA Exoplanet Exploration Halloween posters 2020Edit

Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2020 at 15:17:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

File:Champlain Quebec city.jpg (delist)Edit

Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2020 at 10:58:55
SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Protest in Łódź, October 2020 - 37 (cropped).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2020 at 09:36:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Protest against abortion restriction in Łódź, October 2020

File:Žumberk (Žár) 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2020 at 07:52:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Žumberk, a small village

File:Blick vom Wachtküppel nach Nordosten.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2020 at 20:11:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

First snow on the Wasserkuppe, Hesse, Germany

File:Collier - vue d'ensemble 11-o.lau-F261.LA978-01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2020 at 18:46:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Necklace of the Lau of Malaita

File:Martial eagle (Polemaetus bellicosus) in flight.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2020 at 13:47:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Duisburg, Landschaftspark Duisburg-Nord -- 2020 -- 7824-6.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2020 at 12:27:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Valves at the switch house east at Landschaftspark Duisburg-Nord, Duisburg, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany

File:Cartouchière - vue d'ensemble 11-o.lau-F169.LA1140-01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2020 at 12:11:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bandolier of the Lau of Malaita

File:Neuntöter mit erbeutetem Heupferd im Geo-Naturpark Bergstraße-Odenwald.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2020 at 06:57:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Pointe de Nyon (1).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 20:36:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pointe de Nyon (2019 m) in commune of Morzine, Haute-Savoie, France

File:Port de Rives in Thonon-les-Bains 06.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 20:33:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Port de Rives in Thonon-les-Bains, Haute-Savoie, France
  • In case clarification is necessary for other reviewers, I see this kind of view all the time. This is nothing special to me. I don't find the composition especially impressive either - it looks like a shot any tourist in my home town could take. I don't have any issues with the technical quality.--Peulle (talk) 08:37, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Spurzem, great photo to me. Nice light and beautiful subject Cmao20 (talk) 11:31, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:New York and Jersey City Skyline Panorama.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 14:05:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I have no problems with the crops, and it's great to see both the Jersey City and Lower Manhattan skylines together (plus Ellis Island, which should get a category and be mentioned in the description). However, a lot of the buildings feel washed out to me. I feel like this was a hazy late morning, not ideal for the shoot, but I wonder whether selectively increasing saturation could help. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:00, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • I've been a lot in NY but this was an exceptional clear day. Btw the geotag is wrong, camera location can't be in lower Manhattan. --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 20:58, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment You know that I live in Manhattan, right? Time of day can be an issue in terms of haze, not just the day's weather. And in no way would I call that an exceptionally clear day. It's not exceedingly rare to have cloudless blue skies here. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:32, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There are at least five oily spots in the sky at right. --Cayambe (talk) 23:01, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Vertical distortion (left side), harsh contrast (in some areas the contrast is too much resulting in black solid) and finally Satured colors. Sorry --Wilfredor (talk) 00:32, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

File:WLM - 2020 - Schloss Schönbrunn - Kronprinzengarten - 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 13:10:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Crown Prince Garden, Schönbrunn Palace, Vienna, Austria
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Austria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by User:Moahim - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:10, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think the dramatic streaming clouds and the way they echo the shapes below make this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:10, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Despite the clouds a bit too dull light for me, sorry. The crane is also annoying and I feel like it could be cloned out well, though for a support from me this still would not suffice. --A.Savin 14:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I guess I'm the only one who likes this. I'll leave this nomination up until probably tonight Eastern Standard Time and then withdraw if there are no supporting votes. I'm surprised, but we react differently to what we see, and that's natural. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:59, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it, it's very dramatic. Cmao20 (talk) 11:27, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great composition and clouds. -- King of ♥ 15:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:The Arcades, Christchurch, New Zealand 04.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 12:47:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Arcades, Christchurch, New Zealand
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment You're welcome. I enjoy the shape and the light. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:51, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Petite Venise depuis le pont de la rue de Turenne (Colmar) (2).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 12:12:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Little Venice from the rue de Turenne bridge in Colmar (Haut-Rhin, France). Gzen92 [discuter] 12:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Gzen92 [discuter] 12:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bad light: the houses are in the shadow and the sky is too bright. —kallerna (talk) 15:23, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I understand, I adjusted light tones and dark tones. Is it better ? Thanks. Gzen92 [discuter] 07:42, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Pretty and good quality but the light is still dull. I assume you were shooting in the direction of the sun, which never quite works. Cmao20 (talk) 11:28, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de San Juan de Mata y San Félix de Valois, Bratislava, Eslovaquia, 2020-02-01, DD 78.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 12:18:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church of St John of Matha, Bratislava, Slovakia
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question I really feel shrunk on both sides. Very tight crop. Possible more space around? -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for the nom MB-one! I had to get close to the church to photograph it, taking a shot with 30 cables wasn't an option. Will upload a new version with a more "natural" look later today Poco a poco (talk) 15:16, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose With this much distortion, this one should not be a QI. Even without the distortion, I fail to be amazed of the photo. Just a church facade. —kallerna (talk) 15:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Heavy distortion, shade divides the facade in two, very tight crop - this is not among the finest on Commons. --Ivar (talk) 15:54, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment New version uploaded with more crop on both sides and adjustments of perspective and aspect ratio Poco a poco (talk) 18:01, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The framing is still too cramped after minor change -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:17, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support Beautiful place, good quality and the distortion is really not that bad, I'm not sure why there are so many complaints about it. But the shade falling across the left of the facade is a bit distracting. Maybe would have been better at a different time of day. Cmao20 (talk) 07:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 08:56, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 18:30, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Knoblauch (Allium sativum)-20200621-RM-085344.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 11:26:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Bergtocht van Guarda via Ardez en Ftan naar Scuol. 20-09-2019. (d.j.b) 10.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 05:27:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Doors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A decorative and funny door knocker. With wear spots in the paint layer. The shadow effect gives the photo an added value for me. Guarda was awarded (the Wakker Prize) for the preservation of its architectural heritage in 1975.
    All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:27, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:27, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support My father used to photograph door knockers in many countries, therefore I know many of them. This one would have been a showpiece for his collection ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 09:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturated, highlights/shadows adjusted too much, no wow. The light is also too harsh. —kallerna (talk) 11:18, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful object, beautiful colors and good quality; very good for me -- Spurzem (talk) 20:38, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Harsh shadows and light spoil it in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely colours and textures in the wood Cmao20 (talk) 07:53, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Kallerna. Daniel Case (talk) 15:33, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Cmao20 --Llez (talk) 15:39, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Main path lined with stone pillars to the ruined Khmer Hindu temple of Wat Phou, Champasak, Laos.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 05:11:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Main path lined with stone pillars to the ruined Khmer Hindu temple of Wat Phou, Champasak, Laos
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Laos
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:11, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:11, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Maybe the light is a bit harsh, but I like the composition very much – it combines the centered axis with a careful balance of the juxtaposed trees and the rising mountains. --Aristeas (talk) 09:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice, but not special enough for FP. —kallerna (talk) 11:19, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MB-one (talk) 12:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Aristeas, the composition is painterly. Cmao20 (talk) 07:53, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's tilted, but that's easily fixable. I'm 50/50 on the wow factor; the pillars and ruins give it a certain something, but in the end I feel like there's not enough of them to see. It's a nature photo more than a shot of some interesting ruins.--Peulle (talk) 09:04, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Image rotated (1°). Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:26, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Peulle, I'd have probably tried to focus rather on the road showing less of the mounatins in the back, to me it doesn't look balanced Poco a poco (talk) 07:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC) Poco a poco (talk) 07:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Poco. I'd probably support a photo that narrowly focused on just the central section from bottom to top - the path. The taller peak on the right unfortunately unbalances the form to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:03, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 15:33, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:PK Thatta asv2020-02 img03 Shah Jahan Mosque.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2020 at 01:54:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dome interior, Shah Jahan Mosque, Thatta

File:Goodyera repens flowers in detail - Männiku.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2020 at 19:30:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Creeping lady's-tresses
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family_:_Orchidaceae
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Very tiny flowers of Creeping lady's-tresses, focus stacked of 46 images. The background is sky through the trees. All by Ivar (talk) 19:30, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 19:30, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 22:11, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful light, nice natural background. The DoF could have been more consistent, still enough crispy sharp areas to appreciate currently -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:02, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · 01:36, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive, considering the size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:23, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Definitely unsharp even on 12 MPx and some CA all across the plant (reflexion). But i like thia back color, much better than that light green. --Mile (talk) 07:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Unsharp if this was a photo of large flowers, but they are tiny Mile. Please have another look. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:13, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Charlesjsharp I still think stack could be better, i have one in a similar size, manual shots before stack, the flower was on the hill (windy-moving). Unless pic was scaled-up !? APS-C might not be best for small macros. --Mile (talk) 11:53, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • @PetarM: Nothing was upscaled. All my Nikon images tends to be a bit soft and usually additional sharpening is added. "Definitely unsharp" is imho very harsh assessment. --Ivar (talk) 12:24, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Ivar Maybe i should say "sharp enough", but stack could be done more appropriate. --Mile (talk) 12:38, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • I may be missing something here, but the description implies these flowers are 5 x 7mm, but yours are 30 x 30mm Mile. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:14, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Charlesjsharp My whole flower was 30×30 mm, all that sqaured size. Means each white blossom was under 10mm. I suppose Ivar gave a blossom size, not the complete size of the flower we are looking at ? --Mile (talk) 16:08, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Mile: You are comparing quite flat inflorescence with the one that has hairy flowers. 9 stacked images versus 46, they are not quite comparable. --Ivar (talk) 16:25, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Ivar We won't get far here. But you gave me a mission, I will try to find this flower in soon future. I will try to reaffirm my objectives here. Maybe I will fail too, but let's have a try. --Mile (talk) 16:45, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Mile: Face-smile.svg You need to wait at least for the next summer to find this rare species in Slovenia. Good luck with that! Anyway, the asessment "Definitely unsharp" is imo not competent. --Ivar (talk) 17:01, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Thats OK, i put this on Bookmark and see habitat, Central Europe too. --Mile (talk) 19:19, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Basile. --Aristeas (talk) 09:23, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Mile, this kind of shots have limited wow to me, therefore I really expect crispy sharpness, which unfortunately isn't the case here Poco a poco (talk) 15:19, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:58, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fine considering the flowers are very small. I don't think it's really that unsharp at all. Cmao20 (talk) 07:51, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:48, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 15:37, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Tallinna Tööstushariduskeskus 005-omblusklass pano.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2020 at 16:54:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

360° view on the Tallinn Industrial Education Centre sewing class

File:Tallinna Teeninduskool 009-kokalabor pano.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2020 at 16:45:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

360° view on the Tallinn School of Service cook's laboratory

Church of St Sebastian, Ponta DelgadaEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2020 at 09:25:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Church of St Sebastian, Ponta Delgada, São Miguel Island, Azores, Portugal. The church, built between 1531 and 1547, is one of the landmarks of the capital of the island. I propose these images as a set because I believe that each of them deserves the FP star alone and because the set depicts this beautiful church from different viewpoints giving a comprehensive view of it (3rd criteria "A group of images depicting the same subject from different viewpoints"). Note that there is already a closer look of the high altar that became FP and could have been added to this set. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 09:25, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 09:25, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Interested to see how this set is interpreted. For me, the images, high quality as they are, do not depict 'the same subject from different viewpoints'. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:30, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
    The subject is the church and I offer different view of parts of it Poco a poco (talk) 18:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment In the exterior image there is a car that is distracting and the "General view of the interior." there is a problem of distortion of the verticals, the upper part is stretched towards the sides (check the verticality of the columns) --Wilfredor (talk) 12:53, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Wilfredor: I reworked the image of the exterior view: the van is gone, I also improved the verticals. I've also made some adjusments of the interior view and added one additional image of the interior looking from the altar back to the entrance. Poco a poco (talk) 18:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
Almost everything is fine but "General view of the nave back from the altar." has the same problem now fixed in "General view of the interior.", please, fix it too and I will support it. Thanks --Wilfredor (talk) 21:06, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Wilfredor: I had already anticipated this feedback and rework the second interior image before I added it to the set, but I made now some additional adjustments. --Poco a poco (talk) 09:16, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
Sigo observando el problema de las columnas en "General view of the nave back from the altar.", la parte superior de las columnas esta inclinada hacia afuera, esto es fácilmente corregible usando las guías en Photoshop. --Wilfredor (talk) 15:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
Wilfredor: ¿¿cómo lo ves ahora?? si sigo sin atinar, ¿podrías añadir una nota? Poco a poco (talk) 18:09, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support IMHO Good now --Wilfredor (talk) 19:04, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Distortion quite strong on the first image, looks like the tower is falling down. --Ivar (talk) 12:58, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Ivar: I readjusted the perspective of the tower Poco a poco (talk) 18:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Imho it's not fixable, because shooting point was too close to the church. --Ivar (talk) 18:25, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • I was Ivar, indeed as far as I could and I also took the side further from the tower. The church is in the middle of the city and there are usually tons of people walking around specially visiting bars or restaurants nearby. I could manage this shot without people thank you patience and COVID-19. Poco a poco (talk) 18:39, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Amazing images, on the whole. I really like all three interior views and I think they should definitely be FP. The exterior isn't so clear for me, the van is distracting and I agree with Ivar that the tower looks like it's falling backwards. Cmao20 (talk) 13:57, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Cmao20: as mentioned above I addressed the mentioned issues of the external image Poco a poco (talk) 18:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks, I mean honestly it's an amazing set and I'm not going to quibble any further. Cmao20 (talk) 21:04, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The last two photos are unreservedly FPs to me. I'm not as sure about the rest. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I like all the photos and IMHO at least the first (now) and the two last really deserve the star, but I am not sure about the set idea. --Aristeas (talk) 09:33, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:16, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Tropidolaemus wagleri, Wagler's palm pit viper - Takua Pa District, Phang-nga Province (48238132136).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2020 at 08:55:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wagler's palm pit viper

File:Une tartiflette sortie du four.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2020 at 08:15:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info nominated by Benoît Prieur -- --Benoît (d) 08:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- --Benoît (d) 08:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sharp and appetizing-looking photo of the tartiflette. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:36, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No reason to have assymetic and 'tilted' tile pattern. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:39, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support per Ikan but I also take Charles' points. Cmao20 (talk) 13:50, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no wow. Kruusamägi (talk) 16:39, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Looks very yummy and certainly good photographic quality, but per Charlesjsharp and Kruusamägi. --MB-one (talk) 12:27, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose +1. --Peulle (talk) 21:41, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 16:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Tūranga (library), Christchurch City, New Zealand.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2020 at 07:23:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tūranga (library), Christchurch City, New Zealand
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#New_Zealand
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. It's Tūranga, a new public library in Christchurch, New Zealand. The old one was destroyed during the earthquakes. It's usually quite busy around so I'm quite pleased that I managed to take this shot without cars and people. -- Podzemnik (talk) 07:23, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Podzemnik (talk) 07:23, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:28, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I may be a lone dissenter, but the front of the building feels too in-your-face to me. The right side has a decent rhythm and I like the design on the bottom right of the front, but I just find the building in general upsetting to view and not part of a great composition, although I'm of course happy that a new public library was constructed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:40, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 13:18, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The more I look at it the more that cropped tree on the left bothers me. Daniel Case (talk) 04:11, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I've come back to this several times, and I really want to support it, but Daniel Case has a point about the tree. The library building and the hotel next to it work well together. I wish that you could've walked just a few steps to the right to avoid that tree, while keeping the hotel on the right side. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 22:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 15:32, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Plagiodontes daedaleus f. minor 01.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2020 at 07:06:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A shell of Plagiodontes daedaleus forma minor
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Shells#Family : Odontostomidae
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 07:06, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 07:06, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:29, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not really colorful like many of the shells you've photographed, but very nice details and very impressive, considering its size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:42, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Not so colourful, but have a look at the teeth! --Llez (talk) 10:00, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, boring colours, but amazing internal detail. What is the purpose of the 'teeth'? Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:33, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I suppose that it is an protection against predators, when the animal is retracted in the shell. In contrary to many sea and freshwater snails, most of he land snails lack an operculum, which has amongst others the same function. At any rate these teeth are very useful for taxonomists, for their arrangement (different in every species) helps to identify the species ;-). --Llez (talk) 11:59, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 13:19, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cmao20 (talk) 13:49, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:19, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 16:24, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:41, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:15, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 23:39, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:04, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --GRDN711 (talk) 20:43, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco a poco (talk) 07:45, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Jeanette Scissum at Marshall Space Flight Center.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2020 at 00:02:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jeanette Scissum
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by NASA/MSFC - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:02, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:02, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cvmontuy (talk) 02:50, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice photo of someone I wish I had already known about. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:25, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aristeas (talk) 11:14, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cmao20 (talk) 13:46, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Not an FP. Moon dominates and the file cabinet on the right is highly distracting. Face is not well lit. Seven Pandas (talk) 22:14, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Seven Pandas. Daniel Case (talk) 04:02, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
    • @Seven Pandas, Daniel Case: I'm confused about the month-old face comment. She is African-American, and the photo was shot a little overexposed to try and get more detail in her face with the filmstock of the time, so I think it's as all-out as it could have been. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:35, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
@Adam Cuerden:Her face doesn't bother me; I know we're asserting the main value of the image is historic. But ... I think SP had a point about how, if she's the basis for nominating the image for FP, it really works as one if she's only a quarter of the total image and not the most prominent thing in it. Daniel Case (talk) 16:56, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above. This would make a wonderful VI and probably a good FP at en.wikipedia, but I wouldn't call this a top-notch environmental portrait. --El Grafo (talk) 09:07, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 15:29, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Steuerhaus, Memmingen, Alemania, 2019-06-21, DD 90.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2020 at 21:10:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Steuerhaus, Memmingen, Germany
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Steuerhaus, Memmingen, Germany. The building dates from 1494/1495 and was created for the administration of the finances of the city. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 21:10, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:10, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I have the feeling that some people at the left are distorted (stretched horizontally), caused by the wide angle objective, also the arch at the right. --Llez (talk) 06:09, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
    Llez I applied an aspect ratio adjustment, looks better now, thanks, Poco a poco (talk) 08:47, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice, and the forward-and-back motion is helped by the wicker chairs. Side point: It's funny that there are no flags in the flagpoles. In the U.S., there would be, but I understand the different historical consciousness of Germany. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:34, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Complicated! Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:57, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 11:14, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan, a really nice colourful photo. Cmao20 (talk) 13:45, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. It's also faintly nostalgic to see people sitting in groups at tables right next to other people in groups sitting at tables ... Daniel Case (talk) 20:42, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but I've looked at this a few times now, and I don't understand what's so special about it that it should warrant FP status.--Peulle (talk) 10:58, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Peulle. —kallerna (talk) 11:20, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Peulle. --MB-one (talk) 12:33, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Peulle and right crop doesn't work for me. --Ivar (talk) 13:32, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 15:28, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Boring sky, and not special enough, per others. Incidentally, visible distorsions among the people -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:43, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Georgios Ntaviotis & Daniel Souček, U21 CZE-GRE 2019-10-10.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2020 at 19:00:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Georgios Ntaviotis and Daniel Souček in an internatinoal association football match of European Under-21 Championship Qualifying Round between the Czech Republic and Greece
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Association football (soccer)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me. -- T.Bednarz (talk) 19:00, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- T.Bednarz (talk) 19:00, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The scene doesn't speak for itself (why does the guy in the white shirt appear to be shouting at his hand, and why is the other guy not interested in the ball?). Also, the motion blur, on the hand and the ball, detracts from the image rather than adding to it. --Bobulous (talk) 19:10, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm sorry, but once you read Bobulous's !vote you can't take the picture seriously (In any event, regardless of the outcome of this, I think the image would benefit greatly from being cropped in from the left as that part of it adds nothing). Daniel Case (talk) 20:39, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I was going to suggest you nominate this image instead, but realised rather late that it has already been awarded FP status. That is a striking image. --Bobulous (talk) 19:45, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Beilstein - Burg Hohenbeilstein und Unteres Schloss - Ansicht vom Birkenweg mit Abendsonne.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2020 at 19:35:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from the Birkenweg to Hohenbeilstein Castle (on the top of the hill) and to the so-called Unteres Schloss
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It was not easily possible to use a tripod (I took this photo standing on a parking place, people and cars cruising around me ;–), I wanted f/10 to get enough DoF at 94mm, and so I selected ISO 400 to get 1/125 s in order to avoid camera shake. --Aristeas (talk) 07:05, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • IMO it would be nothing wrong about using, for example, f/7.3 and 1/50 sec exposure. Tripod? For god's sake, a Sony A7Rx user hardly ever needs a tripod ;-) --A.Savin 13:02, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I will provide a version with noise reduction in the sky as soon as possible (hopefully tomorrow or at Monday), but at the moment I am working hard as a member of the jury for WLM 2020/DE and can’t do any photo editing ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 07:05, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info New version with less noise uploaded. @Aristeas: Please revert, if it's not meeting Your expectations. --Ivar (talk) 08:58, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • @Iifar: Thank you very mich for helping out! (Maybe I will take the freedom to upload my own de-noised version created from the RAW file next week, but your version is definitely a good improvement, I will take it as a measure for my own attempt.) --Aristeas (talk) 11:01, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Appealing light, interesting architecture. Assuming no tripod was taken, the settings seem consistent to me (minor noise in the sky, honestly not a deal-breaker in my view). High resolution and appropriate DoF -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:55, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thank you very much, Cmao20, for nominating and all of you for your comments and support. --Aristeas (talk) 07:05, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 09:00, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:08, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • This one, FF, paid some 2000, but ISO 400 migth be problem. A.Savin !? --Mile (talk) 11:33, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:36, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In Ivar's version well fixed, thanks. --A.Savin 13:02, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:13, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose None of the three buildings is large enough in the scene to keep the attention, so it feels like the three buildings together define the composition, and the way they're laid out doesn't feel balanced. Also, the way the trees suddenly burst in to obscure the building at the bottom-left makes it feel even less balanced. Lighting and detail are excellent, but the arrangement just doesn't fit together for me. --Bobulous (talk) 19:15, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I'd like more space at the bottom --Llez (talk) 06:00, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I understand your wish very well, but the problem is that at the bottom there are some very ugly modern buildings which would spoil the image … Next week I will have a look at the RAW file if I can rescue some more pixels at the bottom, but we cannot do much, sorry. --Aristeas (talk) 11:01, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Petit Champlain at night, Quebec city.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2020 at 19:34:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Petit Champlain at night, Quebec city
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment On balance, I think I agree. Very similar composition, same motif, but this is a larger file, brighter and has IMO a nicer composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:54, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment +1. I agree with Cmao20 too -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:05, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
IMHO It is a different composition, the previous one has more of an upper part than this, there are also people and another different decoration of lights --Wilfredor (talk) 21:32, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Although the new image is of higher quality, I prefer the composition of the old one. I just don't think a square crop works as well as a vertical aspect ratio. -- King of ♥ 22:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral per resolution of whether we should delist the old one or not. Daniel Case (talk) 18:48, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral exactly like Daniel. I like both photos very much, but I fear we cannot feature both of them. --Aristeas (talk) 09:29, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the feedback, I will create a delist nomination --Wilfredor (talk) 13:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Friedhof ohlsdorf november 2019 30.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2020 at 16:23:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hamburg, cemetery Ohlsdorf, memorial for the civilian casualties in WW2, entrance
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dirtsc - uploaded by Dirtsc - nominated by Dirtsc -- Dirtsc (talk) 16:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dirtsc (talk) 16:23, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice, a really arty composition with beautiful light. Cmao20 (talk) 19:46, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree. Really good, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:55, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very beautiful indeed, but the bright part looks unnatural. It is totally OK for the sun to be blown out. We shouldn't resort to fake highlight recovery to artificially suppress the brightness of the sky when the color information just isn't there. -- King of ♥ 22:27, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support KoH is right, but I still love the composition and light. ;–) Sidenote: It’s a pity and I do not understand why this photo did not pass the pre-jury for WLM 2020 :–(. But the pre-jury is always somewhat tricky … and always kills a few of the best submissions. --Aristeas (talk) 08:41, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
    @Aristeas: Thanks for the sidenote! Greetings --Dirtsc (talk) 16:30, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:14, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I love the scene, but why is the metalwork so much softer and lighter in the areas where the sky is seen? --Bobulous (talk) 19:17, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:50, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:36, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:27, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mosbatho (talk) 20:21, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Like King of ♥, I like everything about the image except for the unnatural glow and sudden decrease in sharpness in the upper right corner of the gate. --MB-one (talk) 12:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose what have you done to the top right of the gate Dirtsc? Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:47, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
    @Charlesjsharp: I tried a rework, but didn't want to change the original. Please tell me, if you think the version File:Friedhof ohlsdorf november 2019 30a.jpg might be better. I'm not quite happy with the new version yet, because it is darker than the original. Greetings --Dirtsc (talk) 19:00, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
  • I see more artefacts. Sometimes you just cannot recover overexposed areas. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:FCCA GE C30-7 Chinchan - Ticlio.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2020 at 13:49:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

FCCA between Chinchan and Ticlio, Peru
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by David Gubler - nominated by Ivar (talk) 13:49, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 13:49, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Typically good from Kabelleger. Cmao20 (talk) 19:45, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cmao20. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:56, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 22:09, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♥ 22:28, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:47, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportBruce1eetalk 06:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:01, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Basile, and also a nice colour/saturation contrast. --Aristeas (talk) 08:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:06, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:12, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:15, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I love this scene, and it's almost perfect except for the bizarre texture seen in the water closest to the front of the train. Is that some sort of noise reduction artefact? Can it be fixed? (Also, is the train driver giving you a thumbs up?) --Bobulous (talk) 19:21, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Must be some moiré effect, interference between the water's structure and the sensor pixels. I've uploaded a new version in which I didn't sharpen the water, I think it's much better that way. As usual SHIFT+reload may be necessary to see the changes. --Kabelleger (talk) 17:26, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
      • Symbol support vote.svg Support The latest version is softer at 100%, but it does hide the odd prickliness of the water at full screen, so I think it's worth the trade. --Bobulous (talk) 19:53, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:31, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 05:58, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:20, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:49, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:44, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 20:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --El Grafo (talk) 09:18, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Rose-ringed parakeet (Psittacula krameri borealis) male Jaipur 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2020 at 13:23:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rose-ringed parakeet (Psittacula krameri borealis) male near Jaipur

File:Laila Peak.jpg (delist)Edit

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2020 at 12:56:01
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info (Original nomination)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Nice view, but far below today's FP and QI standards. --A.Savin 12:56, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --Ivar (talk) 17:55, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist --StellarHalo (talk) 19:24, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Pretty, but tiny. Give me twice this resolution and I'd vote to keep. Cmao20 (talk) 19:41, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep. I feel like we should keep really good or striking small pictures from the early digital photography age as historical. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:59, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Below 2 MP. A landscape would have to be in the 2-4 MP range for me to say "I wouldn't vote for this now, but I wouldn't delist it either." -- King of ♥ 22:29, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist Slightly underexposed (sky), and the WB seems too warm, but the main issue is definitely the size. In years 2000-2001 I remember I was among the first to own a digital camera, working with floppy disks (almost this model). Maximum resolution 0.35 Mpx 🔬😭 Nice gadget at these old times to avoid developing the photos on paper before inserting them in university reports, however I really don't think any of these documents would have ever made a great image. Even at this period it was very clear the quality was disappointingly low compared to the standards -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:45, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Per Ikan Kekek. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 15:04, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful delist If there were some way we could at least recognize the independently commendable elements (the composition and lighting), I wish we could. In those areas it could certainly serve as an example to emulate.Daniel Case (talk) 20:07, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist I am not swayed by Ikan's arguments; there is no such category as far as I'm aware, and this image doesn't meet the current FP bar, imo.--Peulle (talk) 21:43, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment If historical digital photos can't be grandfathered in, why vote? Someone should create a bot that will automatically remove FP status from all photos below 2MP and run it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:28, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Points well taken, but why not do this kind of delisting with a bot? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:04, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • I guess I do think that there should be some kind of acknowledgement of good pioneering use of the new digital technology, but if we want to revoke the FP status of everything under 2MP, a bot should be created and run. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:07, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • As for me, the photo is also a bit short on wow side, although it of course may have been considered unusual at the timepoint of promotion. But meanwhile we have lots of impressive mountain views, and I'm also not quite sure if the upright format is the best one for this scenery. That said, I still think what should be delisted is not to be decised via bot, but needs consensus instead. --A.Savin 16:34, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Ancien hôtel des Postes de Charleroi (DSC 0278).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2020 at 07:22:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ancien hôtel des Postes (Charleroi, Belgium)
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Belgium
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info by -- Trougnouf (talk) 07:22, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Trougnouf (talk) 07:22, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looks like a good QI, but I'm not really wowed by the light or the motif, sorry.--Peulle (talk) 09:00, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support I agreed with Peulle at first but looking at it some more the soft light and the beautiful clouds have won me over. Support is only weak because I feel it is a little bit oversharpened and there is a little colour noise. Cmao20 (talk) 19:43, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done more denoising, less sharpening. Thank you ! --Trougnouf (talk) 17:23, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The clouds radiating from the center really enhance the composition. -- King of ♥ 22:30, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Peulle. Daniel Case (talk) 02:42, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:05, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like this. The lighting is subtle but the main building still has a luminosity which makes it stand out against its surroundings. The composition works for me: just the right amount of sky above the tower, and just about as much empty pavement showing below as is viable, and a clear view of the main building without obstruction or distraction. Detail is sharp at full screen (34" 4K) and sufficient at 100%. --Bobulous (talk) 19:29, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 15:26, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Chute Montmorency3.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2020 at 00:45:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Montmorency Falls

File:Green karst peaks seen from the top of Mount Nam Xay a sunny morning during the monsoon Vang Vieng Laos.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2020 at 23:56:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Green karst peaks seen from the top of Mount Nam Xay a sunny morning during the monsoon Vang Vieng Laos
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Have another look, Basile, it does not look crispy sharp to me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:41, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Charles J Sharp, sharp like your honeycomb I think. If not "crispy" then normally sharp. But look, you have two nominations currently, this honeycomb measuring 3,415 × 3,415 pixels, and a moth sized 4,422 × 2,948 pixels. Your buzzard archived yesterday measured 2,600 x 4,000 pixels, and your chameleon last week 3,785 × 2,523 pixels. Now this is how detailed this landscape appears when downsized or cropped to 4'422 px large, like the biggest of your 4 last candidatures. The autofocus was set, certainly the limit of the camera was reached. More sharpness would mean over-sharpened in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:16, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • I was reacting to your dismissing the oppose vote with the 'crispy' adjective. I wouldn't dream of comparing the absolute sharpness of my hand-held photos using a enthusiast-level crop-frame body and a hand-held 400mm lens in average light conditions with your professional-level full-frame body and tripod with the option of testing out various settings. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:34, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:25, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support of course --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:14, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:49, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 10:29, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 10:50, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very beautiful landscape and the sharpness looks fine to me. Cmao20 (talk) 06:49, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:59, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Majestic. -- King of ♥ 22:32, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:21, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice scenery, sharpness clearly OK. --A.Savin 13:19, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good composition and exposure, and a nice sense of depth delivered by the low angle of the sun. Detail is sharp at full screen (34" 4K) and sufficient at 100%. The clouds and the colours and the rugged terrain make for a striking scene. --Bobulous (talk) 19:36, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 05:54, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:50, 25 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 20:40, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support due to sharpness Poco a poco (talk) 07:54, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

File:Sugarloaf Mountain with the cloud on top.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2020 at 21:53:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sugarloaf Mountain with the cloud on top
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Brazil
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded Donatas Dabravolskas - nominated by -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 21:53, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 21:53, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The quality is not perfect but this is a really amazing sight. Cmao20 (talk) 10:36, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nice, but wb seems to slightly off. —kallerna (talk) 15:14, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A very striking scene, especially with the lines of cables partially disappearing within the cloud. The peak does appear starkly darker and more saturated than the rest of the rock, but I'm guessing this might be because it's above cloud level and less affected by moisture haze. The composition is good, the exposure fitting, and the warm colour seems right to me given how low the sun must be to cast shadows like that. --Bobulous (talk) 19:33, 21 October 2020 (UTC)