Wikimedia Commons

Commons:Valued image candidates

(Redirected from Commons:Кандидаты в ценные изображения)

Shortcut: COM:VIC

Skip to image nominations Skip to image nominations Most valued reviews Skip to most valued reviews Skip to set nominations Skip to set nominations

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

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

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

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

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

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

How to nominate an image for VI status edit

Nominations will be evaluated using the criteria listed at Commons:Valued image criteria. Please read those criteria before submitting an image to help cut down on the number of candidates that have a low chance of success. Make sure you understand the concept of scope and how to choose the correct scope for your nomination.

Please make sure that your proposed image fulfills all of the necessary criteria before nominating it. For example, if it needs to be geocoded, do that in advance. If no appropriate categories exist, create and link them beforehand. Although some reviewers may help by fixing minor issues during the review process, it is your responsibility as nominator to ensure your image ticks all the necessary boxes before you propose it. If you nominate an image that ignores one of the criteria, don't be surprised if it fails VI review.

Adding a new nomination (image) edit

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


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

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

|My-image-filename.jpg

so that it looks like this: 

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

and save the candidate list.

Renomination edit

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

|nominator=~~~

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

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

Step 6: Add the candidate to the candidates list.

How to open a Most Valued Review edit

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

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

where Scope is the scope of both images, and candidate1.jpg and candidate2.jpg are the respective candidates. If need be, also remove the relevant image(s) from the list in Pending valued image candidates

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

The status parameter of each candidate should remain set to "discussed" while the MVR is ongoing.

How to review the candidates edit

How to review an image edit

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

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

Review procedure edit

  • On the review page the image is presented in the review size. You are welcome to view the image in full resolution by following the image links, but bear in mind that it is the appearance of the image at review size which matters.
  • Check the candidate carefully against each of the six VI criteria. The criteria are mandatory, and to succeed the candidate has to satisfy all six.
  • Use the where used field, if provided, to study the current usage of the candidate in Wikimedia projects. If you find usage of interest do add relevant links to the nomination.
  • Look for other images of the same kind of subject by following the links to relevant categories in the image page, and to any Commons galleries.
    • If you find another image which is already a VI within essentially the same scope, the candidate and the existing VI should be moved to Most Valued Review (MVR) to determine which one is the more valued.
    • If you find one or more other images which in your opinion are equally or more valued images within essentially the same scope, you should nominate these images as well and move all the candidates to an MVR.
  • Once you have made up your mind, edit the review page and add your vote or comment to the review parameter as follows:
You type You get When
*{{Comment}} My Comment. -- ~~~~ You have a comment.
*{{Info}} My information. -- ~~~~ You have information.
*{{Neutral}} Reason for neutral vote. -- ~~~~
  •  Neutral Reason for neutral vote. -- Example
 You are uncertain or wish to record a neutral vote.
*{{Oppose}} Reason for opposing vote. -- ~~~~
  •  Oppose Reason for opposing vote. -- Example
 You think that the candidate fails one or more of the six mandatory criteria.
*{{Question}} My question. -- ~~~~ You have a question.
*{{Support}} Reason for supporting. -- ~~~~
  •  Support Reason for supporting. -- Example
 You think that the candidate meets all of the six mandatory criteria.
  • If the nomination fails one of the six criteria, but in a way that can be fixed, you can optionally let the nominator know what needs to be done using the {{VIF}} template.
  • Your comment goes immediately before the final closing braces "}}" on the page.
How to update the status
  • Finally, change the status of the nomination if appropriate:
    • status=nominated When no votes or only neutral votes have been added to the review field (blue image border).
    • status=supported When there is at least one {{Support}} vote but no {{Oppose}} votes (light green image border).
    • status=opposed When there is at least one {{Oppose}} vote but no {{Support}} votes (red image border).
    • status=discussed When there is at least one {{Oppose}} vote and one {{Support}} vote (yellow image border).


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

Changes in scope during the review period edit

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

You can submit new nominations starting on COM:VIC.

Pending valued image candidates edit

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache
53,465 closed valued image candidates
 Closed as Nominations 
Promoted
  
 48,029 (89.8%) 
Undecided
  
 2,970 (5.6%) 
Declined
  
 2,466 (4.6%) 


New valued image nominations edit

   
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Sandro Halank (talk) on 2023-11-30 20:50 (UTC)
Scope:
Dirk Kienscherf
Used in:
arz:ديرك كينستشيرف, de:Dirk Kienscherf, de:Liste der Mitglieder der Hamburgischen Bürgerschaft (17. Wahlperiode), de:Liste der Mitglieder der Hamburgischen Bürgerschaft (18. Wahlperiode), de:Liste der Mitglieder der Hamburgischen Bürgerschaft (19. Wahlperiode), de:Liste der Mitglieder der Hamburgischen Bürgerschaft (20. Wahlperiode), de:Liste der Mitglieder der Hamburgischen Bürgerschaft (21. Wahlperiode), de:Liste der Mitglieder der Hamburgischen Bürgerschaft (22. Wahlperiode), d:Q1227916

  Support Best in scope and useful. --Tagooty (talk) 03:14, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
FlorianH76 (talk) on 2023-11-30 18:45 (UTC)
Scope:
1993 Russian constitutional crisis
Reason:
A rare good quality photo of those events uploaded to Wikimedia -- FlorianH76 (talk)
  •   Comment The scope is inappropriate: it must describe what is presented. There must be an English caption and geocoding. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:22, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I can translate the caption in English. What kind of the scope would you propose for this image? FlorianH76 (talk) 14:39, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Pierre André (talk) on 2023-12-01 11:20 (UTC)
Scope:
Ferme d'Escamin (Baisieux), view from Chemin des Pendus
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
DimiTalen on 2023-12-01 12:34 (UTC)
Scope:
Winter view of Arc 1950 from the south
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
DimiTalen on 2023-12-01 12:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Winter view of Arc 1600 and Bourg-Saint-Maurice
  •   Comment It would be good to put the view orientation. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:25, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • There are better views of the town. Time of year is not important. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:03, 3 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It would seem the best view of Arc 1600 and Bourg combined, so I adjusted the scope. DimiTalen 09:34, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 
View promotion
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2023-12-01 18:24 (UTC)
Scope:
Malimbus nitens (Blue-billed malimbe)
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:02, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
 
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2023-12-02 11:04 (UTC)
Scope:
Piazza San Bernardo (Rome) - panorama
Open for review.
 
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2023-12-02 11:07 (UTC)
Scope:
Piazza San Bernardo (Rome) - view from the south
Open for review.
 
View promotion
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2023-12-03 06:11 (UTC)
Scope:
Mirapecten mirificus (Miraculous Scallop), right valve
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:02, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
 
View promotion
Nominated by:
Terragio67 (talk) on 2023-12-03 08:35 (UTC)
Scope:
Abbazia di Santa Maria del Monte - Abbey church - Interior
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:03, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
 
View promotion
Nominated by:
Terragio67 (talk) on 2023-12-03 08:55 (UTC)
Scope:
Abbazia di Santa Maria del Monte - Abbey church - Dome - Details
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:03, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
 
View promotion
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2023-12-03 09:44 (UTC)
Scope:
Acrocephalus scirpaceus (museum specimens) (common reed warbler ssp. scirpaeus) eggs
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:03, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
 
View promotion
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2023-12-03 12:28 (UTC)
Scope:
Alcedo quadribrachys quadribrachys (Shining-blue kingfisher)

  Support Best in scope and useful. --Tagooty (talk) 03:24, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
 
View promotion
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2023-12-03 12:39 (UTC)
Scope:
Cinnyris minullus (Tiny sunbird) male
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
 
View promotion
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2023-12-03 15:53 (UTC)
Scope:
Cyanomitra olivacea obscura (Western olive sunbird) juvenile

  Support Best in scope and useful. --Tagooty (talk) 03:27, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:04, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
 
View promotion
Nominated by:
Tagooty (talk) on 2023-12-04 03:15 (UTC)
Scope:
"Fontana della Ninfa (Fountain of the Nymph)" by Diego Sarti and Pietro Veronesi, Montagnola Park, Bologna
Used in:
en:Park of Montagnola, Bologna • wikidata:Q123469663
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:05, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
 
View promotion
Nominated by:
Tagooty (talk) on 2023-12-04 03:21 (UTC)
Scope:
"Fontana della Ninfa (Fountain of the Nymph)" by Diego Sarti and Pietro Veronesi, Montagnola Park, Bologna - view from left
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:05, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
 
View promotion
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2023-12-04 06:19 (UTC)
Scope:
Mirapecten mirificus (Miraculous Scallop), left valve
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:27, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
 
View promotion
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2023-12-04 06:20 (UTC)
Scope:
Room of Dedale and Icarus at the Correr Museum - Ceiling fresco
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:27, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
 
View promotion
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2023-12-04 06:21 (UTC)
Scope:
Drepana falcataria – mounted specimen female dorsal
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:27, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
 
View promotion
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2023-12-04 06:25 (UTC)
Scope:
Mehmed II by Gentile Bellini - Renaissance medals in the Museo Correr
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:28, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
 
View promotion
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2023-12-04 07:42 (UTC)
Scope:
Acrocephalus arundinaceus eggs (great reed warbler ssp. arundinaceus)
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:28, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
 
View promotion
Nominated by:
GRDN711 (talk) on 2023-12-04 15:36 (UTC)
Scope:
NACC Argonaut – starboard (right side) view
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:29, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
 
View promotion
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2023-12-03 17:50 (UTC)
Scope:
Corythornis leucogaster bowdleri (White-bellied kingfisher)

  Support Best in scope and useful. --Tagooty (talk) 03:18, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:29, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2023-12-04 18:34 (UTC)
Scope:
Celaenorrhinus plagiatus (Berger's black sprite) dorsal
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2023-12-04 19:06 (UTC)
Scope:
Ypthima doleta (Common African ringlet) dorsal
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2023-12-05 06:15 (UTC)
Scope:
Vexillum unifasciale, shell, juvenile
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2023-12-05 06:24 (UTC)
Scope:
Tucia Vestalis, by Antonio Canova, Museo Correr in Venice
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2023-12-05 06:26 (UTC)
Scope:
Drepana falcataria – mounted specimen female ventral

  Support Useful and used --Llez (talk) 05:33, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2023-12-05 06:27 (UTC)
Scope:
Female bust of the Flavian period, second half of the 1st century AD - Venice National Archaeological Museum

  Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:50, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2023-12-05 06:35 (UTC)
Scope:
Acrocephalus brevipennis (Cape Verde warbler) eggs
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2023-12-05 12:13 (UTC)
Scope:
Euphaedra ceres ceres (Ceres forester) underside
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2023-12-05 12:24 (UTC)
Scope:
Micropentila adelgitha (Common dots) underside
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2023-12-05 13:06 (UTC)
Scope:
Sarangesa thecla thecla (Common elfin) dorsal
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Palauenc05 (talk) on 2023-12-05 17:46 (UTC)
Scope:
Staircase tower in the backyard of the Steipe in Trier, Germany (northeast view).
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Anatoliy 🇺🇦 (talk) on 2023-12-05 19:45 (UTC)
Scope:
Ruins of Church of the Nativity of the Theotokos, Viazivka, one year after destroyation.
Reason:
National cultural heritage monument — wooden church of the Nativity of the Theotokos in Viazivka, Zhytomyr Oblast, Ukraine (built in 1862) was destroyed by Russian shelling on 7 March 2022 during Russian-Ukrainian war. This is photograph of church ruins 14 months after destroyation. -- Anatoliy 🇺🇦 (talk)

  Comment you must fix the scope, it links to another category, not to Category:Ruins of Church of the Nativity of the Theotokos, Viazivka --Ezarateesteban 23:01, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

fixed.--Anatoliy 🇺🇦 (talk) 23:06, 5 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Anatoliy 🇺🇦 (talk) on 2023-12-05 20:26 (UTC)
Scope:
Category:Ukraine Independence Act
Open for review.
 
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Ezarateesteban on 2023-12-05 22:58 (UTC)
Scope:
Victoria Calzada
  •   Comment Brand new Wikipedia article. We should wait some time to see if it survives notability requirement. Might be a marketing plan. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It was done in edit-a-thon on GlamWiki2023, please @Charlesjsharp:  Assume good faith Ezarateesteban 17:03, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2023-12-06 05:31 (UTC)
Scope:
Pseudonebularia lienardi, shell
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2023-12-06 06:12 (UTC)
Scope:
Sculptor's tools of Antonio Canova - Museo Correr
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2023-12-06 06:13 (UTC)
Scope:
Watsonalla uncinula – mounted specimen male dorsal
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2023-12-06 06:15 (UTC)
Scope:
Pixis d'Ars - Museu Nacional d'Art de Catalunya
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2023-12-06 07:15 (UTC)
Scope:
Acrocephalus stentoreus (museum specimens) (clamorous reed warbler ssp. stentoreus)
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2023-12-05 13:12 (UTC)
Scope:
Epitolina dispar (Common epitolina) female underside
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2023-12-05 15:02 (UTC)
Scope:
Osmodes thora (Common white-spots)

  Support Useful and used. There is only one image of this butterfly for comparison but this butterfly is rare and its inclusion in Commons is beneficial. The image quality using novel focus-stacking technique is excellent. --GRDN711 (talk) 17:18, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Open for review.
 
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2023-12-05 15:22 (UTC)
Scope:
Euphaedra crockeri crockeri (Crocker's forester) dorsal
Open for review.
 
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Uoaei1 (talk) on 2023-12-06 13:48 (UTC)
Scope:
Basilika Seckau - choir
Open for review.
 
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Uoaei1 (talk) on 2023-12-06 13:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Basilika Seckau - nave viewing eastwards to the altar
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2023-12-06 19:40 (UTC)
Scope:
Mercedes-Benz C236 - cockpit
Used in:
de:Mercedes-Benz Baureihe 236, en:Mercedes-Benz CLE-Class, it:Mercedes-Benz CLE, uk:Mercedes-Benz CLE-Клас
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Alexander-93 (talk) on 2023-12-06 19:40 (UTC)
Scope:
Peugeot e-208 facelift - right rear view
Used in:
de:Peugeot 208 II, en:Peugeot 208, it:Peugeot 208 (2019)
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2023-12-07 06:03 (UTC)
Scope:
Portrait of Caracalla in Venice National Archaeological Museum

  Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 18:37, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2023-12-07 06:08 (UTC)
Scope:
Watsonalla uncinula – mounted specimen male ventral

  Support Useful and used.

Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2023-12-07 06:09 (UTC)
Scope:
Orange Trees by the sea by Joaquim Torres-Garcia - Museu Nacional d'Art de Catalunya
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ercé (talk) on 2023-12-07 08:25 (UTC)
Scope:
Acrocephalus palustris eggs (marsh warbler) eggs

  Comment Scope-cateogory link of "Category:Acrocephalus palustris eggs" seems more appropriate here. --GRDN711 (talk) 17:44, 7 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Done thanks --Ercé (talk) 12:35, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Atudu (talk) on 7 December 2023
Scope:
Odina decoratus (Zigzag Flat), dorsal
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2023-12-07 19:39 (UTC)
Scope:
Church of San Giovanni Battista dei Fiorentini (Rome) - Facade
Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2023-12-08 05:57 (UTC)
Scope:
Portrait of doge Francesco Morosini, by Bartolomeo Nazari, Museo Correr in Venice

  Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 18:35, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Open for review.
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2023-12-08 05:58 (UTC)
Scope:
Retrats d'Elena i Maria amb vestits valencians antics - Joaquim Sorolla - Museu Nacional d'Art de Catalunya

  Best in Scope --Palauenc05 (talk) 18:36, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Open for review.
 
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
MIGORMCZ (talk) on 2023-12-08 12:18 (UTC)
Scope:
Category:Ozubnicová železnica Štrba - Štrbské Pleso
Used in:
cs:Štrbské Pleso
cs:Štrbské Pleso (nádraží)
de:Zahnradbahn Štrba–Štrbské Pleso
en:Štrbské Pleso–Štrba rack railway
en:Motor coach (rail)
es:Coche automotor
fr:Ligne 182 (chemin de fer slovaque)
hu:Csorbatói Fogaskerekű Vasút
it:Ferrovia Štrba-Štrbské Pleso
ja:シトルブスケー・プレソ - シトルバ線
pl:Szczyrbskie Jezioro (miejscowość)
sk:Železničná trať Štrbské Pleso – Štrba
sk:Železničná stanica Štrbské Pleso
uk:Зубчаста залізниця Штрбське-Плесо — Штрба
Reason:
Quality image used most often in connection with the Štrba - Štrbské Pleso rack railway or Štrbské Pleso train station -- MIGORMCZ (talk)
Open for review.
 
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Palauenc05 (talk) on 2023-12-08 18:33 (UTC)
Scope:
So-called Schrotmaul at the historical building Brückenstraße 9 in Trier.
  •   Question Do you have an English translation of Schrotmaul? Google says shotmouth but it doesn't seem to be an English word. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:35, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review.
 
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2023-12-06 09:24 (UTC)
Scope:
Euphaedra crockeri crockeri (Crocker's forester) underside
Open for review.
 
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2023-12-08 21:09 (UTC)
Scope:
Euphaedra janetta (Janetta forester) underside
Open for review.
 
Review it! (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2023-12-08 21:23 (UTC)
Scope:
Papilio cynorta (Mimetic swallowtail) underside
Open for review.



Pending Most valued review candidates edit

agouti edit

   
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charles (talk) on 2019-08-05 09:38 (UTC)
Scope:
Dasyprocta punctata (Central American agouti)
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:44, 12 August 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2023-03-24 15:31 (UTC)
Scope:
Dasyprocta punctata (Central American agouti)
  •   Comment
     
     
    We already have a VI in this scope and I see at list one more image of comparable quality, and both are used. Should we start MVR for this scope?
  •   Comment Yes it is better to go through MVR. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:23, 28 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Best in Scope now and used --LexKurochkin (talk) 05:41, 30 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Central Park Tower edit

   
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
—Percival Kestreltail (talk) on 2022-01-09 17:44 (UTC)
Scope:
Central Park Tower - view from 30 Rockefeller Plaza
  •   Best in Scope. Very good image, useful and often used -- Spurzem (talk) 20:38, 9 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 01:19, 14 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Best in scope to me. Much more details and there aren't CAs on this one. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 09:15, 15 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Comment At low resolution, this image works best of the three because the entire building is more clearly and more evenly separated from the background.--Cartoffel (talk) 06:49, 7 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
—Percival Kestreltail (talk) on 2023-05-01 20:16 (UTC)
Scope:
Central Park Tower - view from 30 Rockefeller Plaza
Reason:
Some minor finishing touches were put on the building since I took the current VI back in April 2021. I have two versions here with slightly different lighting. -- —Percival Kestreltail (talk)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
—Percival Kestreltail (talk) on 2023-05-01 20:17 (UTC)
Scope:
Central Park Tower - view from 30 Rockefeller Plaza
  •   Comment This is the best of the three, but there are other candidates, and I am not up to looking through all the alternatives right now and might not be in the future. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:34, 5 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment Yeah, I thought of that, too. That might be a good thing to do. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:52, 5 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose The building stands out worse against the slight cloudy sky than on the current VI. Also the resolution is lower. --Milseburg (talk) 14:41, 1 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Maoricolpus roseus manukauensis edit

   
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2013-10-22 06:45 (UTC)
Scope:
Maoricolpus roseus manukauensis (Rosy Screw Snail), Shell

  Support : useful. --JLPC (talk) 07:45, 22 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 16:45, 26 October 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Llez (talk) on 2023-05-20 08:13 (UTC)
Scope:
Maoricolpus roseus manukauensis (Rosy Screw Snail), Shell
Reason:
Better specimen in a better photographic quality. -- Llez (talk)

  Comment I don't really see why this one is better. Better resolution and sharpness maybe ? --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 06:51, 9 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Symphytum ×uplandicum (Russian Comfrey) edit

   
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Slaunger (talk) on 2009-06-03 21:32 (UTC)
Scope:
Symphytum ×uplandicum (Russian Comfrey)
Reason:
It is the only image on Commons which shows the entire plant. Parentage: S. asperum × S. officinale. In Denmark, it was previously used as food for pigs, thus it can now be found in clusters here and there. The black roots should be sweet and edible - a property which is also hinted to from the Danish vernacular name, "Foder-Kulsukker", which means "Coal sugar for eating". -- Slaunger (talk)
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Yann (talk) 15:18, 14 June 2009 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Cartoffel (talk) on 2023-06-06 10:45 (UTC)
Scope:
Symphytum ×uplandicum (Russian Comfrey)
Reason:
I think a cropped version of VI Symphytum xuplandicum plant 2009-05-20.jpg is clearly preferable for reasons of image composition. This here is a somewhat conservative crop and maybe an even more aggressive crop could be even better. -- Cartoffel (talk)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Portrait of Vicente Guerrero edit

   
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Aurelio de Sandoval (talk) on 2021-01-21 17:47 (UTC)
Scope:

Retrato Vicente Guerrero por Anacleto Escutia en Palacio Nacional (Mexico)

(Portrait of Vicente Guerrero by Anacleto Escutia in Palacio Nacional (Mexico))

Previous reviews

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
ErickTErick (talk) on 2023-10-31 21:45 (UTC)
Scope:

Retrato póstumo del presidente Vicente Guerrero en el Museo Nacional de Historia, Ciudad de México

(Posthumous portrait of President Vicente Guerrero in the National Museum of History, Mexico City)
Reason:
The version of this image which currently considered the most valuable within its scope is of much lower quality than this newer version. In addition, the name given to the scope is factually wrong about the location of the painting (it is not within Palacio Nacional) and Mexico's Spanish name is misspelled (it's México, not Mexico). -- ErickTErick (talk)
  •   Comment There is already an image promoted in VI: you have to go to Pending Most valued review candidates --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:58, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  Done Started MVR ErickTErick (talk) 19:15, 1 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

El Aficionado - Antonio Casanova y Estorach edit

   
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ezarateesteban on 2023-11-26 22:02 (UTC)
Scope:
El Aficionado by Antonio Casanova y Estorach
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 
Review Page (edit)
Nominated by:
Ezarateesteban on 2023-11-26 22:00 (UTC)
Scope:
El Aficionado by Antonio Casanova y Estorach
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 21:40, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
To initiate a most valued review, please go to the dedicated MVR sub page.
Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache

All open candidates in an MVR have to have their status set as "discussed" while the review is ongoing. Only when all candidates are due for closure can the MVR be closed.

Refer to Most valued review, the promotion rules and the instructions for closure for details.

Pending valued image set candidates edit

  This section has been deactivated because of technical issues. Please do not add any VI set candidate.
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Valued_image_candidates&oldid=751225986"