Open main menu

Commons:گزیدن نگاره برگزیده

گذشتن و رسیدن به کاندید‌ها گذشتن و رسیدن به کاندید‌ها

گزیدن نگاره برگزیده


FPCandiateicon.svg

گزید نگاره برگزیده are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures.

Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and current month.

For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election.

Formal thingsEdit

NominatingEdit

Guidelines for nominatorsEdit

<translate> Please read the [[<tvar|link>Special:MyLanguage/Commons:Image guidelines</>|complete guidelines]] before nominating.

This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:

  • Licensing – Images licensed with solely "GFDL" or "GFDL and an NC-only license" are not acceptable due the restrictions placed on re-use by these licenses.

</translate> <translate>

  • ResolutionImages (with the exception of animations and SVGs) of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are strong mitigating reasons.

</translate> <translate>

Graphics on Commons are not only viewed on conventional computer screens. They may be used in high-resolution print versions, and the images may be cropped to focus on portions of the image. See [[<tvar|link>Special:MyLanguage/Commons:Why we need high resolution media</>|Commons:Why we need high resolution media]] for more information.

</translate> <translate>

  • Scans – While not official policy, [[<tvar|link>Special:MyLanguage/Help:Scanning</>|Help:Scanning]] provides advice on the preparation of various types of images that may be useful.

</translate> <translate>

  • General quality – pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality.

</translate> <translate>

  • Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer. Digital manipulation for the purpose of correcting flaws in an image is generally acceptable, provided it is limited, well-done, and not intended to deceive.

</translate> <translate>

    • For photographs, typical acceptable manipulations include cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and colour/exposure correction. More extensive manipulations, such as removal of distracting background elements, should be clearly described in the image text, by means of the {{Retouched picture}} template. Undescribed or mis-described manipulations which cause the main subject to be misrepresented are never acceptable. For images made from more than one photo, you can use the {{Panorama}} or {{Focus stacked image}} templates.

</translate> <translate>

    • For historic images, acceptable manipulations might include digitally fixing rips, removal of stains, cleanup of dirt, and, for mass-produced artworks such as engravings, removal of flaws inherent to the particular reproduction, such as over-inking. Careful colour adjustments may be used to bring out the original work from the signs of ageing, though care should be taken to restore a natural appearance. The original artistic intent should be considered when deciding whether it is appropriate to make a change. Edits to historic material should be documented in detail within the file description, and an unedited version should be uploaded and cross linked for comparison.
  • Valueour main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that:

</translate> <translate>

    • almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others,

</translate> <translate>

    • night-shots are pretty but normally more details can be shown on pictures taken at daytime,

</translate> <translate>

    • beautiful does not always mean valuable.
Artworks, illustrations, and historical documentsEdit

There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolours, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject.

Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the original painting are generally not considered featurable.

Works that may be scanned include most works created by processes that allow for mass distribution − for instance, illustrations published with novels. For these, it is generally accepted that a certain amount of extra manipulation is permissible to remove flaws inherent to one copy of the work, since the particular copy – of which hundreds, or even thousands of copies also exist – is not so important as the work itself.

Works created to serve a purpose include diagrams, scientific illustrations, and demonstrations of contemporary artistic styles. For these, the main requirement is that they serve their purpose well.

Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable:

  • Notable in its own right: Works by major artists, or works that are otherwise notable, such as the subjects of a controversy.

</translate> <translate>

  • Of high artistic merit: Works which, while not particularly well known, are nonetheless wonderful examples of their particular type or school of art.

</translate> <translate>

  • Of high historic merit: The historical method values very early illustrations of scenes and events over later ones. Hence, a work of poor quality depicting a contemporaneous historical event can be nonetheless important, even if the artistic merit is relatively low. Likewise, scans or photographs of important documents – which may not be at all artistic – nonetheless may be highly valuable if the documents are historically significant. The reason for the image's historical importance should be briefly stated in the nomination, for those reviewers unfamiliar with the subject.

</translate> <translate>

  • Of high illustrative merit: Works that illustrate or help explain notable subjects, for instance, illustrations of books, scientific subjects, or technical processes. The amount of artistic merit required for these will vary by subject, but, for instance, an illustration that makes the working of a complicated piece of machinery very clear need not be notable as a piece of artwork as well, whereas an illustration for a book might well be expected to reach much higher artistic standards.

Digital restorations must also be well documented. An unedited version of the image should be uploaded locally, when possible, and cross-linked from the file hosting page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced."

PhotographsEdit

On the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.

  • Focus – every important object in the picture should normally be sharp.

</translate> <translate>

  • Exposure refers to the shutter diaphragm combination that renders an image with a tonal curve that ideally is able to represent in acceptable detail shadows and highlights within the image. This is called latitude. Images can be on the low side of the tonal curve (low range), the middle (middle range) or high side (upper range). Digital cameras (or images) have a narrower latitude than film. Lack of shadow detail is not necessarily a negative characteristic. In fact, it can be part of the desired effect. Burned highlights in large areas are a distracting element.

</translate> <translate>

  • Composition refers to the arrangement of the elements within the image. The "Rule of thirds" is one useful guideline. Horizons should almost never be placed in the middle, where they "cut" the image in half. Often, a horizon creating a top or bottom third of the space works better. The main idea is to use space to create a dynamic image.

</translate> <translate>

    • Foreground and background – foreground and background objects may be distracting. You should check that something in front of the subject doesn't hide important elements and that something in background doesn't spoil the composition (for example that the streetlight doesn't "stand" on someone's head).

</translate> <translate>

  • Movement control refers to the manner in which motion is represented in the image. Motion can be frozen or blurred. Neither one is better than the other. It is the intention of representation. Movement is relative within the objects of the image. For example, photographing a race car that appears frozen in relation to the background does not give us a sense of speed or motion, so technique dictates to represent the car in a frozen manner but with a blurred background, thus creating the sense of motion, this is called "panning". On the other hand, representing a basketball player in a high jump frozen in relation to everything else, due to the "unnatural" nature of the pose would be a good photograph.

</translate> <translate>

  • Depth of field (DOF) refers to the area in focus in front of and beyond main subject. Depth of field is chosen according to the specific needs of every picture. Large or small DOF can either way add or subtract to the quality of the image. Low depth of field can be used to bring attention to the main subject, separating it from the general environment. High depth of field can be used to emphasize space. Short focal length lenses (wide angles) yield large DOF, and vice versa, long focal lenses (telephotos) have shallow DOF. Small apertures yield large DOF and conversely, large apertures yield shallow DOF.

On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, colour, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.

  • Shape refers to the contour of the main subjects.

</translate> <translate>

  • Volume refers to the three dimensional quality of the object. This is accomplished using side light. Contrary to general belief, front lighting is not the best light. It tends to flatten subject. Best light of day is early morning or late afternoon.

</translate> <translate>

  • Colour is important. Over saturated colours are not good.

</translate> <translate>

  • Texture refers to the quality of the surface of the subject. It is enhanced by side lighting… it is the "feel" to the touch.

</translate> <translate>

  • Perspective refers to the "angle" accompanied by lines that disappear into a vanishing point that may or may not be inside the image.

</translate> <translate>

  • Balance refers to the arrangement of subjects within the image that can either give equal weight or appear to be heavier on one side.

</translate> <translate>

  • Proportion refers to the relation of size of objects in picture. Generally, we tend to represent small objects small in relation to others, but a good technique is to represent small objects large contrary to natural size relationship. For example, a small flower is given preponderance over a large mountain…. This is called inversion of scales.
Not all elements must be present. Some photographs can be judged on individual characteristics, that is, an image can be about color or texture, or colour AND texture, etc.

</translate> <translate>

  • Noise refers to unwanted corruption of colour brightness and quality and can be caused by underexposure. It is not a desirable quality and can be grounds for opposition.

</translate> <translate>

  • Symbolic meaning or relevance … Opinion wars can begin here … A bad picture of a very difficult subject is a better picture than a good picture of an ordinary subject. A good picture of a difficult subject is an extraordinary photograph.

</translate> <translate>

Images can be culturally biased by the photographer and/or the observer. The meaning of the image should be judged according to the cultural context of the image, not by the cultural context of the observer. An image "speaks" to people, and it has the capacity to evoke emotion such as tenderness, rage, rejection, happiness, sadness, etc. Good photographs are not limited to evoking pleasant sensations …

You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the [[<tvar|link>Special:MyLanguage/Commons:Image guidelines</>|complete guidelines]] before nominating.

Video and audioEdit

Please nominate sounds at FSC.
Please see [[<tvar|link>Special:MyLanguage/Commons:Featured media candidates</>|Commons:Featured media candidates]] for video guidelines.

Set nominationsEdit

If a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set. A set should fall under one of the following types:

  • Faithful digital reproductions of works notable in their own right, which the original author clearly intended to be viewed as a set. Examples: pages in a pamphlet, crops (puzzle pieces) of a prohibitively large scan, a pair of pendant paintings. Not acceptable: Arbitrary selection of sample works by an artist.

</translate> <translate>

  • A sequence of images showing the passage of time. They could depict frames of a moving/changing object or a static object during different times of day or different seasons. Examples: diagrams illustrating a process, steps of a dance, metamorphosis of an insect, maps/drawings/photos of the same subject over the years (frame of view should be more or less the same).

</translate> <translate>

  • A group of images depicting the same subject from different viewpoints, preferably taken under the same lighting conditions when possible. Examples: Exterior and interior of a building, different facades of a building, different interior views, obverse and inverse of a banknote/coin. Not acceptable: A selection of different rooms in a skyscraper, the facade of a church plus an organ, any images of fundamentally different scopes.

</translate> <translate>

  • A group of images which show all possible variations of a particular class of object. Examples: Male and female versions of an animal (preferably in the same setting), all known species of a genus. Not acceptable: A few breeds of cats (unless they share a defining characteristic and represent all possible examples of that).

</translate>

Adding a new nominationEdit

If you believe that you have found or created an image that could be considered valuable, with appropriate image description and licensing, then do the following.

Step 1: copy the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg. Then click on the "create new nomination" button.

All single files:

For renominations, simply add /2 after the filename. For example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2


Step 2: follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save that page.

Step 3: manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list: Click here, and add the following line to the TOP of the nominations list:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg}}

Recommended: Please add a category from the list at COM:FP.

Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify him/her using {{subst:FPC-notice|Your image filename.jpg}} -- ~~~~.

VotingEdit

Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for his/her own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed.

You may use following templates:

  • {{Support}} (Symbol support vote.svg Support),
  • {{Oppose}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose),
  • {{Neutral}} (Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral),
  • {{Comment}} (Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment),
  • {{Info}} (Pictogram voting info.svg Info),
  • {{Question}} (Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question),
  • {{Request}} (Pictogram voting question-blue.svg Request).

You may indicate that the image has no chance of success with the template {{FPX|reason - ~~~~}}, where reason explains why the image is clearly unacceptable as a FP. The template can only be used when there are no support votes other than the one from the nominator.

A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above.

Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:

  • No reason
  • "I don't like it" and other empty assessments
  • "You can do better" and other criticisms of the author/nominator rather than the image

Remember also to put your signature (~~~~).

Featured picture delisting candidatesEdit

Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep It deserves to remain a featured picture
{{Delist}} Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist It does not deserve to be a featured picture anymore.

This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}} Symbol keep vote.svg Keep Do not replace the old image with the new image as an FP.
{{Delistandreplace}} Symbol redirect vote.svg Delist and replace Replace the current FP with the proposed replacement.

If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box:


In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include:

  • Information on the origin of the image (creator, uploader);
  • A link to the original FP nomination (it will appear under "Links" on the image description page);
  • Your reasons for nominating the image and your username.

After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list.

As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the original creator, uploader(s), and nominator with a link to the delisting candidate. {{subst:FPC-notice-removal}} can be used for this purpose.

Featured picture candidate policyEdit

General rulesEdit

  1. The voting period is 9 complete days counted from the nomination. After the end of this period the result will be determined. Votes added on day 10 and after are not counted.
  2. Nominations by anonymous contributors are welcome
  3. Contributions to discussion by anonymous contributors are welcome
  4. Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Exception: registered users can always vote in their own nominations no matter the account age and number of edits.
  5. Nominations do not count as votes. Support must be explicitly stated.
  6. Nominators and authors can withdraw their nominated pictures at any time. This is done by adding the following template: {{Withdraw}} ~~~~. Also, remember that if more than one version is nominated, you should explicitly state which version you are withdrawing.
  7. Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project.
  8. Rules of the 5th day based on vote counts on day number 5 (day of nomination + 5)
    1. Pictures are speedy declined if they have no support (apart from the nominator).
    2. Pictures are speedy promoted if they have 10 support votes or more and no oppose votes. (Note that if it takes more than five days to reach this threshold, the picture can be promoted as soon as it is reached.)
    3. Once either speedy criterion is reached, the voting period is considered closed, and no more votes may be added.
  9. Pictures tagged {{FPX}} may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied, provided there are no support votes other than that of the nominator.
  10. Pictures tagged {{FPD}} (FP-Denied) may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied.
  11. Only two active nominations by the same user (that is, nominations under review and not yet closed) are allowed. The main purpose of this measure is to contribute to a better average quality of nominations, by driving nominators/creators to choose carefully the pictures presented to the forum.

Featuring and delisting rulesEdit

A candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:

  1. Appropriate license (of course)
  2. At least seven Symbol support vote.svg Support votes (or 7 Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist votes for a delist) at the end of nine days
  3. Ratio of supporting/opposing votes at least 2/1 (a two-thirds majority); same for delist/keep votes
  4. Two different versions of the same picture cannot both be featured, but only the one with higher level of support, as determined by the closer. Whenever the closer is not sure which version has consensus to be featured, he/she should attempt to contact the voters to clarify their opinions if not clear from the nomination page.

The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5. There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations.

The FPCBot handles the vote counting and closing in most cases, current exceptions are candidates containing multiple versions of the image as well as FPXed and withdrawn nominations. Any experienced user may close the requests not handled by the bot. For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished. Also note that there is a manual review stage between the bot has counted the votes and before they are finally closed by the bot, this manual review can be done by any user that is familiar with the voting rules.

Above all, be politeEdit

Please don't forget that the image you are judging is somebody's work. Avoid using phrases like "it looks terrible" and "I hate it". If you must oppose, please do so with consideration. Also remember that your command of English might not be the same as someone else's. Choose your words with care.

Happy judging… and remember... all rules can be broken.

See alsoEdit

Table of contentsEdit

List may contain works considered Not Safe for Work (nudity).

Nominators are requested, out of courtesy, to include the {{Nsfw}} template with such images. Users may select the gadget in user preferences "Deferred display of images tagged with {{Nsfw}} on COM:FPC" to enable the template's effect of hiding the image until selected.

Contents

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache

Featured picture candidatesEdit

File:Panther chameleon (Furcifer pardalis) male Montagne d’Ambre 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2019 at 05:04:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panther chameleon (Furcifer pardalis) male, Montagne d’Ambre, Madagascar

File:Carretera Granma.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2019 at 01:51:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Granma highway near the border of Granma and Santiago de Cuba provinces.
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info: all by me -- СССР (talk) 01:51, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- СССР (talk) 01:51, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The shadow covering up the left side is distracting. -- King of ♠ 02:26, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per King of Hearts--Boothsift 04:01, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I actually like the contrast of light and shadow and don't really understand why that's considered so bad here. That said, I'm not sure about the photo in general. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:59, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per KoH – Lucas 07:19, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Kokerei Zollverein Essen - kühltürme - by db3em.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2019 at 18:17:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kokerei Zollverein Essen

File:Henri C. R. Presseq - Camille Erlanger - Le juif polonais.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2019 at 15:37:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Poster for Le Juif Polonais

File:De Groene Verbinding.pngEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2019 at 13:44:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

De Netkous
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Netherlands
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Robert Hertel - uploaded by Eatcha - nominated by Eatcha -- Eatcha (talk) 13:44, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Has wow -- Eatcha (talk) 13:44, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 14:04, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great combinaison of forms and colors. --Yann (talk) 14:14, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Sadly there are two cranes in the background that could have easily been cloned out. They are quite symmetrical but don't fit thematically for me. – Lucas 14:46, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I rather feel that the accidental (or if you prefer, found) symmetry of the cranes makes the photo better. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:20, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Indeed, wow (and I don't know this bridge) --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:50, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Boothsift 04:00, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg weak support works well but colors appear a bit overcooked --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:22, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Farul vechi din Sulina.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2019 at 04:33:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • I agree. Once a day has passed after the other one was FPXed, this nomination should be reactivated. And this photo is interesting and IMO deserves consideration. I'd prefer if it were de-noised just a bit, but it's a good photo. I would contest the FPD, but I'm not sure how to do that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:13, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Eatcha, per the rules, a FPX is still considered active as I can be contested anytime during 24 hours. A denied nom can also be removed from the list after 24 h, but as there is interest to continue voting I will remove my FPD after the deadline of the FPX has passed and I closed that other nom for good. – Lucas 07:24, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Lucas, please remove it before 13:00UTC otherwise the bot will close it. (24 hours limit at 08:28, 19 June 2019 (UTC)) -- Eatcha (talk) 07:33, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The colors seem overcooked and there are halos around the tower due to oversharpening. Coordinates would be nice. – Lucas 07:44, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak Support Street view here -- Eatcha (talk) 09:03, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:F18 aboard USS Carl Vinson.jpg,Edit

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2019 at 06:16:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

F18 aboard USS Carl Vinson
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Air transport#Military jet aircraft
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Rebecca Sunderland - uploaded by User:Cogaidh - nominated by Gbawden -- Gbawden (talk) 13:19, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Gbawden (talk) 13:19, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sorry only adding now, didn't read the instructions Gbawden (talk) 07:36, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like how part of the plane and another worker is obstructed by the worker in the front. Colors look overprocessed. – Lucas 07:46, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral because the wow factor is very high... but I really think the image should have a higher resolution.--Peulle (talk) 10:45, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I've commented out the the Bot closing since this has not been visible here until now. The nominator altered the timestamp on the nom, but the Bot keeps track of it anyway. If anyone has a better idea of doing this, please do so. --Cart (talk) 13:10, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Has WOW -- Eatcha (talk) 13:32, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol abstain vote.svg Abstain Will vote after another look later--Boothsift 04:00, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Lake. Light. Lovers. (27717526099).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2019 at 06:16:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Boat going through tunnel surrounded by lughts
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water transport
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Flickr User Godfried - uploaded by - nominated by Gbawden -- Gbawden (talk) 06:16, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Gbawden (talk) 06:16, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Even disregarding resolution/quality (FPX below), the composition leaves much to be desired with the arch being cut on both sides. Very distracting smartphone display visible on the bottom right. – Lucas 07:39, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info 24 h have passed since the FPX, please do not contest this now as I reopened another former FPD in favor of it. – Lucas 07:40, 19 June 2019 (UTC)


Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because with 1.5 MPx far below the minimum required 2 MPx with no apparent or explained "strong mitigating reasons". Metadata suggests this is a screenshot. – Lucas 07:39, 18 June 2019 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:St. Wolfgang kath. Pfarrkirche Pacher-Altar Sonntagsseite 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2019 at 04:33:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pacher-Altar
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Austria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info St. Wolfgang Altarpiece at the catholic parish- and pilgrimage church St. Wolfgang im Salzkammergut, Upper Austria. View for weekdays with closed wings. Michael Pacher, 1471–79, set up in 1481. All by me. --Uoaei1 (talk) 04:33, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 04:33, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Michael Pacher is a fantastic painter I wasn't aware of. The richness and depth of field in these paintings is wonderful! You captured them really well. You could add even more value to the photo if you can identify what scene each panel depicts. I could recognize some of them, but not all, and some people won't recognize any. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:08, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
    • @Ikan Kekek: Thanks for your suggestion. Indeed, this is work in progress, as I have some more images of this altar piece, which show the individual panels. But these still await final processing and upload. --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:37, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The window frames in the background suggest either the whole setup in the room was not right or the camera was off-center. IMHO in either case you should have seen this and corrected the camera position to make it look centered. The bottom crop is too tight for me, it barely clears the bottom of the wood structure. There are magenta CAs on the windows. – Lucas 07:22, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
    • I was standing right in the middle of the nave. These old buildings are usually not completely straight and rectangular. CAs are fixed. --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:01, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good! --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:20, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:43, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Michael Pacher, wow, he lets us forget some offset pixels! --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 12:38, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not easy to make but very well implemented--Ermell (talk) 13:04, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 13:58, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:05, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- B2Belgium (talk) 19:26, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Boothsift 04:00, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Oriental garden lizard eats robber fly.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2019 at 02:51:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Oriental garden lizard
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by AntanO -- AntanO 02:51, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- AntanO 02:51, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not enough resolution/detail, not enough DoF, too much is blurred. Colors look severely overprocessed to me. Slight chromatic abberations as well. – Lucas 07:06, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looks awesome as a thumbnail, but there are severe quality issues (see ↑) --El Grafo (talk) 07:59, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Lucas and El Grafo on this image. --Boothsift 03:59, 19 June 2019 (UTC)


Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because obvious quality deficiencies per oppose votes – Lucas 07:29, 19 June 2019 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:2017.07.10.-02-Wendisch Rietz--Kaisermantel-Maennchen.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2019 at 18:32:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Silver-washed fritillary - Argynnis paphia, male
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Let us make it clear from the start: If you like the background or not, I love the colour contrast of the butterfly to it. And there is no more room below so I had to crop it above in about the same distance. All by me. -- Hockei (talk) 18:32, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Hockei (talk) 18:32, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love that you have the guts to nominate a photo with such a "non-Commons" crop; filling the frame like that feels fresh. The total color experience is great, soft, warm and lovely. This could be a print on something in a high-end store. --Cart (talk) 20:02, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 21:07, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Really beautiful butterfly and very impressive resolution and sharpness! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:17, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. --Podzemnik (talk) 02:22, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 03:01, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 04:37, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cart and I like the background very much – Lucas 07:07, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:26, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cart is right, it feels fresh. Not because you filled the frame (that can look quite static and boring) but because of how you did it. The diagonal flower. The butterfly making its own diagonal that is not quite aligned with the flower but does provide some symmetry due to how the wing tips are positioned relative to the left and right edge. The composition is clearly structured, but still feels very dynamic. --El Grafo (talk) 08:11, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:23, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:42, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Crop not how I like it, but artistic impression and technical quality overcome this weakness. Charles (talk) 13:22, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 13:59, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- B2Belgium (talk) 19:27, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Boothsift 03:59, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Albert Einstein Head.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2019 at 18:16:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Albert Einstein

File:Yellow mite (Tydeidae), Lorryia formosa.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2019 at 07:08:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Yellow mite (Tydeidae), Lorryia formosa
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by United States Department of Agriculture / Eric Erbe; digital colorization by Chris Pooley, edited and uploaded by Lycaon, nominated by Yann (talk) 07:08, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Electron microscopy picture of a Lorryia formosa mite. Magnified about 200×. -- Yann (talk) 07:08, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 07:22, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:30, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hockei (talk) 10:33, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fairly old image, but still holds up.--Peulle (talk) 10:38, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 10:45, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Amazing! And I don't know if electron microscopy has advanced greatly in the last 11 years. Has it? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:08, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 12:46, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:32, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fluffy89502 ~ talk^ 18:18, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Impressive quality, great work! --PantheraLeo1359531 (talk) 20:48, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 03:01, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 04:35, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:22, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Charles (talk) 13:17, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fantastic --Boothsift 03:59, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:View from Mirador El Time - La Palma.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2019 at 07:01:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from Mirador El Time, La Palma
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info View from the Mirador El Time on the southwestern part of La Palma with the Caldera de Taburiente (left), the cities Los Llanos de Aridane, El Paso and Tazacorte, the Cumbre Nueva with the cloudfall, the Cumbre Vieja and the banana plantations along the coast; created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 07:01, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Llez (talk) 07:01, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - This looks really great at full-page size on my 13-inch laptop, but when I look at the file at larger sizes, I see what looks like one or more bad frames. I've marked their approximate location. It's striking because the buildings in the town look good but the greenhouses or areas of farm with tarpaulins over them to the right of the town look intensely blurry. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:16, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done You are right, some frames were not sharp. Fortunately I had made another Panorama from the same place which is sharp. I replaced the unsharp version by this second panorama --Llez (talk) 18:57, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Much better. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:21, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A bit unfortunate as I preferred the look of the other one, but nonetheless this one is deserving of FP. -- King of ♠ 03:04, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:11, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the weather conditions were not ideal, there is too much haze in the distance. Overall the colors and landscape aren't wowing for me. – Lucas 07:14, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info But only under these weather conditions you have the typical (and impressive) cloudfall at the Cumbre Nueva. --Llez (talk) 10:43, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 12:49, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 14:00, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Boothsift 03:57, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:San Francisco Columbarium Interior.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2019 at 22:27:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior (upper floors) of the San Francisco Columbarium
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#United_States
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This is a view of the interior (upper floors) of the San Francisco Columbarium. Since 1898, the building serves as a repository for human ashes, stored in niches along the walls. I first visited the building seven years ago, after stumbling upon a newspaper article describing Meet your neighbors-for-eternity parties. As I only had an iPhone at hand in 2012, I felt it was worth the time and effort to reshoot this place with my current gear. c/u/n by Frank Schulenburg.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 22:27, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 23:15, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fluffy89502 ~ talk^ 02:41, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:41, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent picture of an interesting place. Cmao20 (talk) 06:42, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really good photo. This is so weird to me since we don't have anything like this where I live, but it is the beauty of Commons to learn about other customs. --Cart (talk) 07:51, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:42, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 09:22, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cart. --Aristeas (talk) 11:34, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A different piece of architecture --Poco2 17:17, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Podzemnik (talk) 02:26, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Quite a beautiful interior. Unusual subject. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:09, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:03, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:24, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:07, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Boothsift 03:57, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Saint Martin church in Naucelle 10.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2019 at 21:54:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pipe organ in the Saint Martin church in Naucelle, Aveyron, France

File:Donald Trump official portrait.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2019 at 17:51:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Donald John Trump's official portrait
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Poco, your oppose is just as invalid as one without any reason as you are not critiquing the photo itself. An {{Abstain}} is the better option for you and anyone with a similar view. – Lucas 18:30, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Ok, not problem, in that case: the facial expression is unpleasant --Poco2 19:23, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The picture frame is encroaching on him too closely and the decorative multi-color string on the flag is too distracting. Also something feels weird about how his chest gets more in shadow/darker further down. Size is quite small and noise levels too high for a studio shot. – Lucas 18:37, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- Distorted perspective, as indicated by the picture frame to the right of the photographer. Fluffy89502 ~ talk^ 18:40, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support Sharp and overall a good portrait, but the resolution isn't great. I think it clears the bar overall, but it might do better at FP on Wikipedia where encyclopaedic value is prized somewhat more than on Commons. Cmao20 (talk) 19:40, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As presidential portraits go, this is rather bleak and uninteresting. Ok, we were spoiled with good photos during the Obama administration, but still... It lacks depth and the background is distracting (he is standing too close to the wall), including a cord that makes him look like a jumping jack. --Cart (talk) 20:23, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose He looks strange - this is not his face as we usually see it. --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:14, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Agreed with Uoaei1, this is probably how Trump wants to be seen (ie encclopedic value at most), not how he is most of the time. -- KennyOMG (talk) 08:26, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Distracting background with the picture frame and the ugly wall paper. The overall image seems to be a bit underexposed and oversharpened which brings the noise to a visible and disturbing level. --Granada (talk) 08:39, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose At first sight it's just a pretty boring portrait that just doesn't manage to stick out among the gazillions of pictures of US-government people in front of US flags we have here at commons. That alone would be reason to oppose. If you actually start to analyze it … well, when it was released PetaPixel and Jared "Fro" Polin (among others) already did that job so let's just say they did not think it was a "good" portrait. --El Grafo (talk) 08:51, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Neither a great quality nor representative. Sorry --A.Savin 10:19, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Granada and El Grafo. The photographer, Shealah Craighead, is a professional, so I assume she knows how to do a high-quality portrait. This one gives the impression he just said, "Look, I'll just stand here. You can take this dumb "official portrait" you keep going on about right now... I don't care if you don't have any of your "lighting kit" with you. My guys take great photos with just their cell phones. Your camera must be really dumb if it needs lighting kit to take a good photo." -- Colin (talk) 13:56, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Hmm... I'm not so sure, although I could well imagine him saying something like that. She may be working as a photographer, but professional (I mean as in "highly skilled")?? Have you looked at her other work? It's all bad angles, strange crops and photos in existing light. Looks like the best US photographers are democrats. ;-) --Cart (talk) 16:37, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • „working as a photographer, but professional?“: isn't that the definition of professional? – Lucas 17:29, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • To my knowledge there can be a difference in the English language between "working as" and "being a pro" in everyday parlance. It is similar to the ranking system we have here on Commons. On your user page you have the userbox stating "This user is able to take professional quality photographs." In that sense the word "professional" is used for quality level rather than occupation. "Being a pro" can simply mean that s(he) knows what s(he) is doing. --Cart (talk) 18:11, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes there are many meanings to "professional", though with photography I think it is mainly used to distinguish from "amateur" in the sense of making money, earning a living at it. I would expect a professional to be able to reliably deliver acceptable quality to time/budget, and that the more you pay the higher the expectations. Another mark of a professional is to take and absorb a whole lot of grief from the client, and to deliver what the client wants, rather than to their own taste. Given the number of "great, highly talented" people he's hired and then fired, she must be doing something right to still have a job. -- Colin (talk) 19:13, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I have amended my comment to clarify what I mean. I think most people got it but precise meaning is obviously imperative here in such an important discussion. --Cart (talk) 19:28, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Someone once said "Explaining a joke is like dissecting a frog. You understand it better but the frog dies in the process." I got your point and the word-play. -- Colin (talk) 20:42, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination -- Eatcha (talk) 18:11, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Yukon mirror.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2019 at 16:20:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nameless lake in the woods of Yukon.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#Yukon
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Nameless lake in the woods of Yukon. Captured, uploaded & nominated by me, Jakub Fryš (talk) 16:20, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jakub Fryš (talk) 16:20, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 19:30, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Serene composition. Cmao20 (talk) 19:38, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Too much sky IMO --Llez (talk) 21:41, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Category? Reflection? -- Eatcha (talk) 03:22, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:39, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose The compo is a little bit too simple. That much almost white(blank) sky and its reflection doesn't work for the photo. It's probably one of those times when the real life experience was awesome but it doesn't translate to the photo. Sorry. --Cart (talk) 07:37, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I think part of the air needs to be cut off. To balance the photo.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:03, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose It clearly needs a perspective correction and although the lighting is good there is too much sky on the top, it would definitively benefit from a crop to achieve better symmetry with the lower portion. If both issues adressed I would reconsider to change this opposing vote Poco2 17:15, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I agree that there's too much sky for my taste, but I also think there's too much water. This is indeed a peaceful scene, but to my eyes, the image more or less just sits there, with the exception of the obvious broadening from left to right. The piece of driftwood helps a little, and there's one cloud that subtly points to the right, but it's not enough for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:15, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan, it just feels too empty as a whole. – Lucas 09:39, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan especially --Boothsift 03:57, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Solitary sandpiper in swamps.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2019 at 16:15:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Solitary sandpiper in Yukon.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Solitary sandpiper relaxing by the water in a warm afternoon. Taken somewhere in the swamps of Yukon. Captured, uploaded and nominated by me, Jakub Fryš (talk) 16:15, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jakub Fryš (talk) 16:15, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 16:55, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A lovely capture, nice and sharp, and with relatively little noise. Some might complain that the bird is too small in the frame, but I think it can be seen as an image of the bird in its natural habitat and so the background is valuable to have. Cmao20 (talk) 19:37, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Cmao20: Thanks. This is the original size, uncropped. I have one more cropped so the bird is like 40 % of the frame but I decided to use this one on Wiki precisely because of the habitat/environment around and keep the informative value. Otherwise, I like the crop better, esthetically. -- Jakub Fryš (talk) 22:19, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great capture of a bird in its natural environment. The sandpiper is quite small but the resolution and the quality are very good. I'd probably prefer to crop a bit from the bottom and even more from the top to place the bird in the middle - but it's good as it is anyway :) --Podzemnik (talk) 20:03, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Podzemnik: Thanks, as per above. Btw you can check the crop version on my profile at F***** to compare (don't wanna publish the link for the service here). -- Jakub Fryš (talk) 22:19, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cart (talk) 20:33, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The vertical composition helps emphasize the shallow depth of field and the various features of the habitat. -- King of ♠ 21:38, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:58, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- B2Belgium (talk) 22:18, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 03:22, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per King --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:38, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Too much background for a small bird. I would have cropped the image more tight to the bird in a landscape aspect ratio and with the eye right in the vertical center of the image. --Granada (talk) 08:45, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Podzemnik. --Aristeas (talk) 11:36, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support See Granada note.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:09, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Granada Poco2 17:19, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Granada – Lucas 17:30, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:25, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not good enough quality to crop. Charles (talk) 13:19, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Boothsift 03:56, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:African Cape Daisy (Osteospermum barberiae).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2019 at 13:36:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

White Cape Daisy
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by AntanO -- AntanO 13:36, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- AntanO 13:36, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice and simple. -- King of ♠ 15:04, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per KoH Poco2 17:05, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Sorry but this doesn't seem completely sharp to me, at least not as sharp as some other flower pictures I've seen round here. Cmao20 (talk) 19:29, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - It would be nice to know what the diameter of the flower is (AntanO, you might add that information to the file description if you have it), but it's sharp enough for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:13, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:58, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 03:23, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely and simple. --Gnosis (talk) 05:20, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 07:33, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Boothsift 03:56, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Cladophora glomerata in a wave at Govik 4.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2019 at 11:45:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cladophora glomerata in a wave at Govik
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Other lifeforms#Algae
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info This algae is usually one of the slimiest and ickiest ones in Swedish waters, but like this when it's new and the sun is shining on it as it is moving within a lapping wave, I think it is rather beautiful. -- Cart (talk) 11:45, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cart (talk) 11:45, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I have an urge to put this up on a wall—despite my hate of these ... plants? ;) – Lucas 11:58, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A lovely abstract. Cmao20 (talk) 13:01, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support outstanding in so many ways! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:54, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Fluffy89502 ~ talk^ 14:21, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wonderful abstraction. -- King of ♠ 14:22, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jakub Fryš (talk) 15:36, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 16:54, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice! --El Grafo (talk) 18:31, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support So awkward but so good. --Podzemnik (talk) 19:57, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per nom and others. Cart, once again, you have a really good eye to have noticed that this composition was available to you. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:15, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:58, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 03:23, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:39, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:04, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 10:16, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Martin. --Aristeas (talk) 11:37, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support An artwork from mother nature. But you have to see it.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:50, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:05, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Boothsift 03:56, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Oberbaumbrücke November 2013 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2019 at 11:24:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

*Symbol support vote.svg Support though the sky could be cropped a little bit --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:55, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not balanced IMO; too much sky making the composition bottom-heavy, and also right-heavy as well. -- King of ♠ 14:23, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I will support both versions when a suitable crop is made to the foreground, to eliminate the little bits of something (boats?) toward the left. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:18, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Poco below. – Lucas 07:16, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Alt: cropEdit

Oberbaumbrücke November 2013 01 (crop).jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info crop by me. Tomer T (talk) 15:26, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Also fine. Cmao20 (talk) 19:42, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 21:33, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:59, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:01, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 03:24, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Gnosis (talk) 05:23, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I prefer this version --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:35, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:38, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:01, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aristeas (talk) 11:37, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thank you for nomination and votes. 6 years later, I'm still very happy with my photos from Berlin.--ArildV (talk) 16:22, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good quality but the shadow on the left is not helping and the crane in the middle is just spoiling the image. The Oberbaum bridge does definitely have FP potential but I'd really enjoy seeing it here free of cranes and with a more interesting light, sorry. Poco2 17:23, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - For what it's worth, the crane is just another perpendicular to me and doesn't damage the composition. To each his/her own. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:07, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Poco – Lucas 07:16, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:27, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose more or less per Poco. The shadow spoils it for me. -- B2Belgium (talk) 19:31, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Boothsift 03:55, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:22, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Helgoland - Blick vom Lummenfelsen zur Langen Anna.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2019 at 09:31:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from the "Lummenfelsen" called rock on the island of Heligoland to the Lange Anna with a large number of Northern gannets
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info View from the "Lummenfelsen" called rock on the island of Heligoland to the Lange Anna. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 09:31, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Milseburg (talk) 09:31, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment maybe a bit underexposed? --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:05, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like it, interesting scene and good composition. Cmao20 (talk) 12:59, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The midsummer 2PM lighting causes shadows to appear where you don't want them to appear, and the lit portions to be less vibrant than ideal. Also plenty of blown whites at the bottom. -- King of ♠ 14:25, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Fine shot . --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:35, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Good, interesting composition, and extremely well-executed as usual. I have no problem with the shadows. Blown whites (bird excrement, I believe), if indeed blown, are minimal in context. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:25, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good quality but the lighting could have been more pleasant, sorry --A.Savin 23:54, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - You have a good point. Your photo is better. Why don't you nominate it? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:41, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Because it´s oversaturated. --Milseburg (talk) 13:01, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I for myself have a rather low tolerance for overdone saturation, normally I take the green of the grass and/or the blue of the sky as reference and reduce the level. But whereas it is easy to reduce the whole saturation or chosen channels at any time afterwards, you cannot add much more light to your picture when you have taken it in weak light, and the beauty of Heligoland cliffs (including the colours) is only seen entirely when it is sufficiently lit. Anyone who juxtapose both picture see the difference immediately. Your picture may be correctly saturated, but the colours that I would like to see are definitely lost there. --A.Savin 13:35, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 03:24, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad light. -- -donald- (talk) 07:35, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:31, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:51, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per KoH and A.Savin – Lucas 12:51, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I can spend more light to the shadows if wanted, but I think in general shadows give more vividness to the relief as everywhere the same lighting. --Milseburg (talk) 13:01, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
    Shadows of course add dimensionality - if they are in the right direction. Here the shadows go straight down unfortunately, making the scene look flat to me. -- King of ♠ 14:58, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Boothsift 03:55, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Since I !voted for A. Savin's picture that didn't pass, I will say that this is just as good. Daniel Case (talk) 04:17, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de La Compañía, Quito, Ecuador, 2015-07-22, DD 125-127 HDR.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2019 at 07:21:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Main nave of the Church of the Society of Jesus, Quito, Ecuador.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Main altar of the Church of the Society of Jesus (La Iglesia de la Compañía de Jesús), a Jesuit church in Quito, Ecuador. The exterior doesn't give an idea of the beauty of the interior, with a large central nave, which is profusely decorated with gold leaf, gilded plaster and wood carvings, making of it the most ornate church in Quito. The temple is one of the most significant works of Spanish Baroque architecture in America and considered the most beautiful church in Ecuador. c/u/n by me, Poco2 07:21, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 07:21, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 08:22, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Taken in 2015, but still holds up as an FP today. I'd reduce the highlights a bit, and there is something - some kind of light streak - down in the centre by the altar that could be looked at.--Peulle (talk) 09:09, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Peulle: I've reduced the highlights and corrected a slight tilt. Regarding the light streak I'm not 100% sure what you mean. Could you please add a note? Poco2 19:21, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Note added. Not sure what it is. The image is still good enough, though.--Peulle (talk) 10:39, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Peulle: I've removed the light streak (and the note) Poco2 16:53, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A bit too ornately baroque for my taste, but clearly FP and beautiful on its own terms. Cmao20 (talk) 09:16, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support though this specific variant of baroque is a bit too much even for me - and I'm really into baroque generally --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:01, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Fluffy89502 ~ talk^ 14:22, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Magnificent. -- King of ♠ 14:26, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:36, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 16:51, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Resplendent and a fine photo! You have one or two other FPs of this cathedral's interior, don't you? I recall they were of different views, but it would be good of you to link them in this thread. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:28, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sharp and detailed --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:51, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 21:30, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 03:25, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:57, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Boothsift 04:50, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:10, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:17, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Lake Mary Mammoth September 2016.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2019 at 02:40:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lake Mary, Mammoth Lakes, California

File:Lake Benmore, New Zealand.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2019 at 01:31:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lake Benmore, New Zealand

File:Driftwood on the beach north of Kaikoura, Canterbury, New Zealand 02.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2019 at 01:37:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Driftwood on the beach north of Kaikoura, Canterbury, New Zealand

File:Domaine de Maizerets park, Québec city, Canadá 09.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2019 at 17:15:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Domaine de Maizerets park, Québec city, Canadá
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Canada
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 17:15, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Was ready to oppose at first, but the detail at full resolution is excellent. I still think it's a bit low on wow, but overall worth a feature. Cmao20 (talk) 06:59, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow mainly due to the overcast day, the random people and big empty lawn in the foreground. The right crop is unsatisfying, the brown gravel field should have been included fully. – Lucas 10:02, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As per Lucas. -- Jakub Fryš (talk) 15:46, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Lucas, disturbing trees on the left/portion of the maze missing, uninteresting lighting, cluttered compo (what is the main element?) Poco2 17:08, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
No todas las composiciones necesitan tener un sujeto principal, sin embargo, en este caso es el laberinto. Muchas gracias por tu pregunta --Wilfredor (talk) 23:28, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 03:27, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I can see why the photographer might have taken the image, but it doesn't work. There are just too many things here trying to be the subject, helped by the dull light. Perhaps the maze by itself from this angle might have worked. Daniel Case (talk) 16:23, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Yuri Gagarin (1961).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2019 at 14:37:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Yuri Gagarin, first human in space
Perhaps he's calling attention to some clichéd aspect of the photograph Face-smile.svg. Daniel Case (talk) 16:10, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Cart--Boothsift 17:51, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Yeah, I like his happy, youthful appearance, though I agree with Cart, especially on the composition. But how historically important is this particular portrait? It seems to be the best one we've got on Commons, and he's obviously an exceedingly important historical figure. We do have this reproduction of a painting, too, but it's below the normal minimum size for FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:49, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
    • I would say it is unique and unmatched in EV. Gagarin's face was scarred when he fell jumping off a balcony while escaping from his wife who had caught him cheating in September 1961. In case you are not aware, he became the first human in space in April 1961. So this is the only photo likely to be available of how he looked pre-incident and best representation of his appearance while he was on his historic first mission to space. It may also be the best/only clear portrait of him we have in general because he died in 1968. I do not know how to clean up the scratches around his chin. If any one is good at that I would welcome it. Coffeeandcrumbs (talk) 20:42, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Of course I'm very much aware of Gagarin's pioneering voyage in space, which is why I wrote that "he's obviously an exceedingly important historical figure". -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:54, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • The italics was not intended for you. The dates are more important to answering your question. Coffeeandcrumbs (talk) 08:56, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Yes, and it did help to answer my question. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:31, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Cart as the lamp shade and chin shadow are serious photographical flaws and Commons FP are centered around photographic excellence. IMHO this fits far better with the goal of Wikipedia FP. – Lucas 21:52, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Lucasbosch, as this particular image doesn't appear to be that significant (he was the subject of lots of pictures, and this one doesn't stand out), and it's got the problems mentioned above. And I agree on en:WP:FP: "unmatched in EV" doesn't matter here as much as there. We can promote images passing COM:SCOPE even if they're not currently in use anywhere, while great educational value can't salvage a not-so-good photo. Nyttend (talk) 00:03, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - Do you have any thoughts about another photo of him that would be a better FP candidate? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:30, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Tentative Symbol support vote.svg Support, pending a satisfactory answer to this question. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:09, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above, but quite sure it is a Wikipedia FP. Cmao20 (talk) 06:57, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Cart and the pose. The side glance and the weird smile undermine the dignity of his uniform and make the picture an unresolvable contradiction (Perhaps, per my remark to Cart, that's what's being lampshaded! Bah-DUMP-ump ... crasssssshhhhh! Daniel Case (talk) 16:13, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

File:BNSF GE Dash-9 C44-9W Kennewick - Wishram WA.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2019 at 14:09:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mixed BNSF freight train between Kennewick and Wishram, WA
  •  I'm not an expert on trains, but train tracks do have some banking in curves (some more than others) and some trains are also able to mechanically lean to the side. This photo at least shows the track banking for sure. – Lucas 20:22, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per that explanation, etc. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:10, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Baikal ice on sunset.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2019 at 16:32:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lake Baikal in winter
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Russia#Siberian_Federal_District
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Lake Baikal in winter. Created, uploaded and nominated by Sergey Pesterev -- Sergey Pesterev (talk) 16:32, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Sergey Pesterev (talk) 16:32, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Piotr Bart (talk) 16:37, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Please don't pixel-peep this to death. At that latitude in January you need high ISO at sunset since the ice is probably moving a bit with the waves. The big size of the file makes up for it. I wouldn't mind an English description though. --Cart (talk) 16:56, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks Cart for the explanation on the circumstances. Often reviewers don't know why or even if certain settings were chosen. – LucasT 18:18, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Rather noisy, but very spectacular --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:07, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support I agree that this is a very spectacular photo and overall worth a feature, but it is (understandably, as Cart explains) quite noisy, and even downsized to 5000px across some noise is still visible. It's not terrible though, so I still support. Cmao20 (talk) 20:20, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Noisy but still good enough for FP --Boothsift 23:28, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:07, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - It's spectacular, but I don't understand why we are not asking for it to be de-noised before we support a feature. It's already problematic at 250% and slightly at 200% of my 13-inch laptop screen. And in this case, I don't think the size of the photo is an argument for a feature, because it looks bad at full size and we probably shouldn't be looking at it at that size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:09, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Ikan, FYI, zoom levels above 100 % usually denote zooming in further than the 1:1 pixel level, so picture pixels would actually get upscaled on your monitor. I'm sure you meant the opposite, being zoomed in a moderate amount, still above pixel level, approx. 50 % zoom or less. – LucasT 07:33, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Lucas, you didn't read my remark carefully. I'm talking about percentages of the size of my 13-inch laptop screen, not percentages of the huge size of the image. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:40, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Ikan, when you get noise at high ISO levels, de-noising will often ruin the photo. The de-noising programs can only merge and extrapolate the "missing" information so far. The result is often a smooth and plastic-looking photo since you lose all sharp edges and in most places the "noise grains" will bunch together and form artifacts instead. A photo like this will lose some of its crispness. Even a slight noise reduction would make it look over-processed or like taken with a cheap mobile. --Cart (talk) 08:43, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • That's a pity. Do you think there could have been a way to get a little more sharpness and less noise when the photo was taken? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:47, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • You could probably have taken it with that time and a lower ISO and added the light in post-processing; that would have made it less noisy but instead you would have lost bright colors and details in the ice. Or you could have sacrificed the DOF and made only the nearest ice sharp; that way you could do a less noisy photo. In some cases, everything is a compromise. --Cart (talk) 09:21, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I see. Thanks for explaining. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:46, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Ikan and others, this is a version of the photo downsized to "normal"/acceptable size with a bit of noise reduction (you can do NR on a high ISO photo if you downsize it first). It is nicer to look at when opening at full size, BUT in the process a lot of information is now lost. It has gone from 19.05 MB to 4.08 MB. Isn't it better to have the full original version? --Cart (talk) 12:08, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • The original is much nicer to look at, the world has plenty of mushy noise-reduced images already. – Lucas 12:38, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I agree, I just wanted to show how it would look since not all voters are used to how post-processing works. --Cart (talk) 12:50, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the demonstration. I agree that the original is superior to the edited version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:14, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aasish Shah (talk) 07:08, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:51, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 14:14, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It needs denoising. At least selective denoising. Great lighting and compo but the noise is just too much. Poco2 14:29, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 17:40, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Fluffy89502 ~ talk^ 05:46, 16 June 2019 (UTC) Thanks providing me with my new desktop background!
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice photo but somewhat overcooked. (1) Noise is not the issue here. Noise is the most overrated problem here on FPC ever. That said, I think at 38mm focal length an aperture of f/5.6 would have done it, too. Then it would have been possible to lower the ISO to 200 which would have reduced the noise significantly. However, it is always easy to critize such a photo sitting at home in front of your computer. On location you sometimes don't have the time to try different settings or you don't immediately see a flaw that can be seen on a computer screen. Additionally EXIF says that the exposure has been increased somewhat (+0.57) in postprocessing which may explain the amount of noise since the D800 IMO would normally not create so much noise at only ISO 800. (2) EXIF also says that the author increased clarity, vibrance and saturation which was for my taste somewhat too much, that's why I vote neutral here. --Code (talk) 07:04, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Poco --Milseburg (talk) 09:10, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 13:30, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:59, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too noisy. --Rbrechko (talk) 23:41, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 03:28, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 07:43, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose could be mitigated by denoising --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:23, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aristeas (talk) 11:40, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, Too much noise for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:59, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, largely per Code; image quality issues unfortunately go beyond what should have been easily tamed ISO noise. It seems that a combination of heavy-handed sharpening and NR have created an unpleasant and artificial-looking grain. –Juliancolton | Talk 13:07, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful oppose due to the noise. Daniel Case (talk) 14:22, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Bloemknoppen van Eryngium giganteum 'Miss Willmott's Ghost' 04-06-2019. (d.j.b). 04.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2019 at 15:23:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants #Family Apiaceae.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Flower buds in development of Eryngium giganteum 'Miss Willmott's Ghost'.
    All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:23, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:23, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great compo and good quality Poco2 16:19, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow! --Cart (talk) 16:47, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Coloring that one green blur on the top right brown would turn this to perfect. – LucasT 18:16, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:12, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great quality as usual for your close-up photos. Cmao20 (talk) 20:18, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- B2Belgium (talk) 21:16, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 21:26, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Miss Willmott's Ghost is an interesting name...--Boothsift 23:28, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:08, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aasish Shah (talk) 07:09, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 07:41, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:51, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 17:39, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:40, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support refreshingly different! --El Grafo (talk) 18:29, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Pretty amazing composition. It'd be nice to add a geo reference and clone out that green spot in the upper right corner. --Podzemnik (talk) 19:50, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 21:25, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:59, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Especially the background is really well done --A.Savin 00:01, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 03:28, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:22, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:52, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Seven Pandas (talk) 01:28, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Petra Jordan BW 2009-11-10 12-33-49.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2019 at 12:45:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Jordan
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created - uploaded - nominated by -- Berthold Werner (talk) 12:45, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Berthold Werner (talk) 12:45, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Boring centered composition, distracting tree covering up a large part of the subject, bad depth perception due to the light direction, distracting tourists. Low pixel detail and humongous CAs in the lower right. – LucasT 15:24, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's a good photo on the whole, but the tree is a bit distracting, and I agree about the CAs. I think we can probably do a bit better for such a commonly photographed monument. Cmao20 (talk) 20:17, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Boring centered composition as Lucas notes, the tree is also fairly distracting IMO. --Boothsift 23:27, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - What other direction would be better for this motif than straight-on and centered? I'm confused by that criticism. I think that there are other factors at issue but not that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:11, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The tree in front sort of spoils it for me.--Peulle (talk) 13:22, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others.--Vulphere 17:39, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not boring! I would not have expected trees in the dry area. It does not bother me at all to see this documented. The motive is worth seeing and the quality is very good. --Milseburg (talk) 09:15, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A fine shot. I don't mind the tree, it adds some colour to the rather monochrome main motif. --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:42, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Because of the severe CAs in the lower right --Llez (talk) 21:24, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 03:29, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, the tree ruins it for me --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:21, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Having been to Ad-Dair myself, it's really hard to say what the best possible angle is (I like this one if we're going to go with the frontal angle). But I do think that as appealing as it is to shoot from that Bedouin café which is never in any images of the place, you probably should not have the tree. Daniel Case (talk) 02:50, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Riga Cathedral Nave, Riga, Latvia - Diliff.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2019 at 10:51:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The nave of Riga Cathedral in Riga, Latvia.

Quedlinburg CastleEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2019 at 10:13:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Quedlinburg Castle and Collegiate Church at early evening and the same view at dusk after sunset ----- all by me, --A.Savin 10:13, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 10:13, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Piotr Bart (talk) 10:37, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose These are lovely but for FP of such a set there should have been at least a good attempt made to align the two images to each other, right know too much is changing position most noticeable on the sides. Sadly the focal lengths and dimensions are not uniform and the camera position was shifted vertically between the shots by a significant distance. These last two points are of lesser importance though. – LucasT 10:40, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Overall, absolutely brilliant. Lucas is right that they could be aligned to each other a little bit better, but not enough to stop me supporting. Lovely, sharp, high-resolution photos of the castle from an excellent angle, and good to have a night and a day view. You could choose to denoise the sky a bit in the night photo, but again it's not a very serious issue for me. Cmao20 (talk) 10:45, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't mind the small difference. The human eye perceives things differently at day vs evening/night too. --Cart (talk) 17:00, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hockei (talk) 17:06, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:20, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- B2Belgium (talk) 21:18, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Boothsift 23:26, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aasish Shah (talk) 07:11, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:52, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 17:39, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 01:24, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:11, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It'd be cool to have the photos aligned better but still great :) --Podzemnik (talk) 19:46, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 21:22, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 03:30, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 11:39, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:02, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support The noise on top of the blue hour image could be cleaned up a little more, as well as the CA in the same area of the daylight image, though. Daniel Case (talk) 01:07, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

File:עץ על אי מלח באמצע ים המלח.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2019 at 09:18:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Eranrez - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:18, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:18, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Quite an unusual image, but I'd feel happier if the sky were de-noised. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:39, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose Interesting image but there are question-marks over the quality, especially the sky as Ikan points out but more generally there's a bit of colour noise. It also looks to me like there's a bit of barrel distortion, with the horizon visibly curving up at one end and down at the other. Cmao20 (talk) 10:43, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A very nice composition but the quality is not enough for such a small photo. A GoPro camera is not ideal for FPs. And as the description says, it's a tourist destination so not that hard to get to for someone with a fairly good camera. (I've been there myself but that was pre the tree.) --Cart (talk) 21:54, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Cart--Boothsift 23:26, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Moving to Symbol support vote.svg Support now after I had a better look--Boothsift 04:27, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan and Cmao20 – LucasT 07:38, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I seldom see images as particular as this one here in FPC. Denoising would be good but the wow effect is compensating that. To be honest, I don't understand why this picture is not getting more support. Poco2 14:31, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Ok, I gave the file some TLC and removed some of the color noise and corrected the barrel distortion a bit, not all the way though since the shore curves slightly. Please revert this if you don't like it. 'Pinging' voters about the change: Ikan Kekek, Cmao20, Boothsift, Lucasbosch and Poco. Myself I'm changing to Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral after this. I hope Eranrez and Tomer T are ok with this, otherwise I apologize. --Cart (talk) 15:31, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
    Cart: Now that we're in the process to improve the image, don't you think that we should reduce the vignetting on the top left? I can give it a try if you like. Poco2 18:03, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Poco, I already did some vignetting adjustment in my edit, I think the gradient is due to natural light since it stayed after the correction and it follows the way the shadow of the tree points. I see such phenomena a lot in my photos taken on clear days over water. Let's leave it as it is now, I think it is acceptable. We should be as respectful as possible to the author. The dark sky matches the darker water on that side well. --Cart (talk) 18:52, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 17:39, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 17:43, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I don't know. I see the improvement, but the tree was sharper and bigger in the original, and the photo is still fairly noisy. I like the composition, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:18, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Like I said in the ice photo, you will always lose some sharpness with NR. That's the downside of it. --Cart (talk) 18:58, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Ok, second and final edit from me. I reverted only the tree since it didn't go well with the NR as Ikan pointed out. Cart out. --Cart (talk) 19:15, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Thank you, Cart. I wish it were less noisy, but I like it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:55, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:47, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rbrechko (talk) 23:52, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 03:30, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not perfect but it's definitely got the wow. Daniel Case (talk) 00:59, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Célestin Nanteuil - Jules Massenet - Don César de Bazan.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2019 at 00:55:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Don César de Bazan


Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:49, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Non-photographic media

File:Rhönschaf-Weidberg bei Kaltenwestheim HBP-2019-04-28.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2019 at 21:15:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Rhönschaf (an old breed of sheep native to the Rhoen, itself part of the Central German Uplands), on a pasture near the town of Kaltenwestheim.
How do you do define the direction from where the light is coming, Ikan? I actually had the sun, for what was shining through some clouds, behind me. So I'd expect that the head is as lit as possible... Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 06:33, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Well, the brightest thing in the picture is the sky, and the sheep's head is very dark indeed, and I don't mean just that it's black. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:12, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --СССР (talk) 04:00, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:35, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A good, well-composed QI but I think it doesn't have the extra something special for FP. The light is all a little bit dull. Cmao20 (talk) 10:39, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan.--Vulphere 11:36, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan --Boothsift 23:25, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Cmao20 – LucasT 07:36, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support the head of the animal is black and we cant change it --Wilfredor (talk) 17:17, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Wilfredor --Llez (talk) 21:20, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Wilfredor -- Eatcha (talk) 03:31, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, not outstanding enough --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:18, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose per CMao20
    — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel Case (talk • contribs) 22:45, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Praporec (v zime) 001.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2019 at 19:21:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Praporec (Slanské vrchy) v zime
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Milan Bališin - uploaded by Milan Bališin - nominated by Milan Bališin -- Milan Bališin (talk) 19:21, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Milan Bališin (talk) 19:21, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support Interesting composition, maybe a bit too much in shadow, but on balance I think it works. Cmao20 (talk) 19:28, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too many trees and branches in the foreground --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:01, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per above--Boothsift 23:25, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - the foreground in shadow contrasts nicely with the direct light on the mountain, making for a dynamic scene. I have no problem with the composition, which manages the chaotic forest environment quite well – see for example how the group of evergreens on the right balances out the cluster of tall trees on the left. –Juliancolton | Talk 00:52, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Being a slightly cluttered composition and with too many distractions it doesn't work for me. – LucasT 07:41, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others.--Vulphere 17:38, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Juliancolton -- Eatcha (talk) 03:32, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:17, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow; the kind of view hiking guidebooks describe as limited. Daniel Case (talk) 14:22, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Paisaje en Sutton, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-22, DD 98-106 PAN.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2019 at 17:53:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landscape in Sutton, Alaska, United States.

File:Hohenmirsberg P7171141-Pano.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2019 at 06:42:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from the lookout at Hohenmirsberg
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info A panorama of Hohenmirsberg, a district of the town of Pottenstein in northern Bavaria. Created by Ermell - uploaded by Ermell - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 06:42, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 06:42, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looks all right, but since many of the houses are obscured due to the angle and the light is a bit boring, I don't see the big wow factor.--Peulle (talk) 09:05, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Peulle, 对不起--Boothsift 01:20, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for the nomination.--Ermell (talk) 08:36, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It nicely captures the village nestled into the surrounding countryside and the layers of fields, houses, forests and sky. -- B2Belgium (talk) 21:25, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The uninteresting yellow strip in the foreground ruins it. -- King of ♠ 01:25, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the yellow strip. It gives a stroger feeling of rural scene --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 08:07, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per B2Belgium. I find it nice to look at. Interesting layering compositon. --Podzemnik (talk) 19:41, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose I appreciate the work that clearly went into making this, but it just doesn't wow me, perhaps because not only as Peulle points out the light is unremarkable, but also because the WB is too much on the warm side. Daniel Case (talk) 02:03, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 03:35, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, sorry --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:16, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support First I thought that the light was boring, but looking again at the photo I consider it a good example what to make from such lighting. I second B2Belgium’s remarks. --Aristeas (talk) 20:29, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Paracanthurus-hepatus-paletten-doktorfisch.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2019 at 06:05:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Paracanthurus hepatus (regal tang)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Holleday - nominated by Boothsift -- Boothsift 06:05, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Boothsift 06:05, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not the highest resolution, but all the resolution we have is sharp and crisp. Very good overall. Cmao20 (talk) 06:50, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nice. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:51, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 07:11, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very attractive.--Vulphere 11:30, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The crop is very close, can this be changed? --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:05, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:13, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As the camera has 4.752 × 3.168 Pixel, a lesser close crop should be possible --Llez (talk) 11:04, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 21:32, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Great quality but tight crop, strong shadows and aquarium picture Poco2 14:46, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 14:29, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:03, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose tight crop and unsightly shadow behind the fish. – Lucas 21:26, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 03:35, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Jharkot Village-Upper Mustang Trek-1281.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Jun 2019 at 09:09:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per below. – Lucas 21:25, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks harmonious and well-composed to me. Cmao20 (talk) 09:41, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Brown jagged shapes offset the blue smooth shapes very nicely. In most human habitations it is hard not to cut something and you will have to go with "the lesser of two evils", but please remove the red CA mostly at the bottom. --Cart (talk) 10:17, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 12:26, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Please have a look at the red borders of the white flags (CAs and artefacts), especially at the house in the left lower corner and the unsharpness in the same region. --Llez (talk) 14:31, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cart. --Aristeas (talk) 16:14, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Boothsift 00:13, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose To me it's interesting, but not necessarily good. You have a lot of layers (brown, dark brown, blue, blue-brown) but they just don't come together as a whole and present a cohesive message to me. Sorry. -- King of ♠ 02:19, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 07:07, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Llez and King of Hearts. -- B2Belgium (talk) 07:15, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aasish Shah (talk) 07:10, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Cart has the best support argument IMO but the opposers are also right; I'd like to see the red CA removed as well before I can make up my mind. Daniel Case (talk) 02:33, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 13:44, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Baden Königshöhe 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 Jun 2019 at 04:01:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Königshöhle
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Austria#Lower_Austria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Königshöhle (King's Cave) near Baden bei Wien, Lower Austria. All by me. --Uoaei1 (talk) 04:01, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 04:01, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 06:40, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 07:26, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 07:35, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Bijay chaurasia (talk) 09:01, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral It's very well-composed and good quality, but it just doesn't inspire me somehow. But I won't oppose seeing everyone else seems to like it. Cmao20 (talk) 09:42, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:05, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ermell (talk) 12:05, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:46, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Rbrechko (talk) 21:08, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as I share Cmao20's sentiment. The camera position is pretty ordinary and I'm missing more clear compositional clues so it looks like casual mid-day tourist shot to me. It's a pity the sunlight landing on the ground is obscured by that rock, another angle would have shown that better. – LucasT 21:55, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Boothsift 00:13, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poco2 17:28, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 20:20, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:10, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 10:58, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:29, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:51, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 13:42, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Tarian Gandrung sewu 02.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2019 at 21:40:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gandrung Dance
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Candra Firmansyah - uploaded by Candra Firmansyah - nominated by Mimihitam -- Mimihitam (talk) 21:40, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mimihitam (talk) 21:40, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support Another good one of these, but I can't shake the feeling that it would be a better picture if there wasn't that sign in the top-right corner (I know the sign is related to the event, but even so). Cmao20 (talk) 21:52, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose That sign is very problematic, it looks like a very blurry watermark. Otherwise, this image is good enough for FP. --Boothsift 00:05, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support nice image but per Cmao20 the sign in the top-right is distracting.--Vulphere 03:49, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Boothsift --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:26, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Boothsift --Cart (talk) 08:35, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Boothsift sorry ---Bijay chaurasia (talk) 08:58, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose but not just the sign, pretty much all the background elements are going haiwire in all directions so distract from the main subjects. One of them is visually growing out of the woman in front. The bottom crop on her and the one cut in half face further behind aren't very satisfying either. – LucasT 21:59, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Boothsift. Daniel Case (talk) 22:00, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Boothsift. --Gnosis (talk) 07:08, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Boothsift. --Eatcha (talk) 13:41, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Ëures Resciesa Mont de dora Crist Gherdëina.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2019 at 17:24:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Porphyr rocks on the alpine pasture Resciesa in Gherdëina, South Tyrol - Unesco World Heritage Dolomites, Puez-Geisler Nature Park.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Italy
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 17:24, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 17:24, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another beautiful one, and with the immense resolution typical of your work. Cmao20 (talk) 21:28, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Seven Pandas (talk) 22:04, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Boothsift 00:05, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cmao20. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:19, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 03:50, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Technically it's great, the weather is nice and the nature is wonderful. But I'm missing a clear subject or compositional idea. --El Grafo (talk) 08:14, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The subject are the porphyr cliffs as written in the description --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 08:38, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per El Grafo and I find the mid-day light too boring. Also the focus was set too far the far mountains are rendered much sharper than the slightly blurry foreground with the tourists. – LucasT 08:57, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment What you say, pardon me, does not make sense. How can the tourists, several hundred meters away, be out of focus and the background be in focus with an aperture of f/11? --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 18:05, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes, right, this shouldn't be the cause but still there is a clear difference in sharpness. My oppose doesn't hinge on that, the other points are more important to me. – LucasT 18:36, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't think Lucas is imagining this, I can see it too. I think you have a heat haze area hanging over the nearer sunlit rocks on the left. It will do very strange things with your photos. Take a look at how distorted/blurry the houses on the right side in this photo are, while this photo taken from the same point of a location over four times as far away, but over the cooler sea, is not very affected. That day, the photos taken towards the sea were acceptable but I had to throw away all the photos taken inland of the town. I had gone there to make a panorama of the old town in Lysekil (to the right of the houses in the first photo and further inland), but they turned out beyond bad. --Cart (talk) 16:36, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Well, no, I was commenting on this photo (providing link for clarity). Perhaps you somehow misunderstood what I wrote. Lucas mentioned a "slightly blurry foreground with the tourists" and I provided a possible explanation for it using my own photos/experience as examples. Nature can play tricks on us even if we have extraordinary cameras. Anyway, I will not be offended by you striking my comment since it is your nomination. --Cart (talk) 17:47, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:07, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:59, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I lacks wow, sorry Poco2 17:10, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 13:40, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Área Recreativa de Arenas Negras 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2019 at 10:14:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Public picnic table at the "Arenas Negras" recreational area on Tenerife (Spain).
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Other_objects_in_landscapes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- El Grafo (talk) 10:14, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- El Grafo (talk) 10:14, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 10:23, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support – LucasT 10:39, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love seeing such an ordinary object depicted as if it was an ancient monument. --Cart (talk) 12:08, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - This is a case in which I demur on the basis that I don't see much there. I mean, yeah, I get that there's somewhat of an idea there, but it's not a very interesting subject to me, and there are large dark areas that do very little for the composition. The areas of light make it something, but not something great to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:53, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support.--Vulphere 14:52, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mostly per Cart. If it wasn't for the fact that we know what it really is (and also the small bit of tree trunk in the background to provide some degree of context), this could be some sort of giant, ancient Stonehenge-type monolith. Cmao20 (talk) 21:27, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Seven Pandas (talk) 22:05, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♠ 23:51, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Boothsift 00:05, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support works astonishingly well... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:24, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:43, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Cart. --Aristeas (talk) 10:09, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan.--Ermell (talk) 12:08, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice light for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:52, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 07:10, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Ikan.--Tournasol7 (talk) 20:17, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Llez (talk) 10:55, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The mundane made transcendent, per Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 15:28, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Eatcha (talk) 04:16, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry just a boring subject and dark too Gbawden (talk) 07:26, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Beijing New Airport.jpgEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Jun 2019 at 05:56:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aerial photographs of Beijing Daxing International Airport
@Ikan Kekek: It is processed by original author in order to give highlight to the subject (airport terminal building) itself. The photo was taken in real color, and then processed into grey-scale in most area except the terminal building. David290 (talk) 06:42, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
OK. I get the point but find it quite odd and will think about it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:59, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There are blue borders, dots and areas which are caused by processing, especially in the part I marked by a note, but also elsewhere --Llez (talk) 06:32, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:17, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Obvious signs of the processing per Llez, also the orange was not masked properly at a lot of places. The file page needs the Template:Retouched_picture that explains in detail the manipulations made to it. – LucasT 08:44, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's very dramatic, but I am not personally a fan of this kind of heavy manipulation. Cmao20 (talk) 09:27, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose It's a really cool image, looks like it's influenced by some dystopian online game. I don't mind a few photos with selective color IF the processing is well done. That is not the case here per Llez, plus the BW part is rendered way too uniformly dark. --Cart (talk) 11:04, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per other opponets. -- Karelj (talk) 14:14, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As per others. But I like the idea. -- Jakub Fryš (talk) 20:31, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others above--Boothsift 23:58, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --SH6188 (talk) 08:34, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Cart - too dark and dystopic. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:21, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Cmao20 and Cart. It looks to me like the w:Cingular fleet is attacking. Daniel Case (talk) 06:19, 14 June 2019 (UTC)


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)Edit

Fri 14 Jun → Wed 19 Jun
Sat 15 Jun → Thu 20 Jun
Sun 16 Jun → Fri 21 Jun
Mon 17 Jun → Sat 22 Jun
Tue 18 Jun → Sun 23 Jun
Wed 19 Jun → Mon 24 Jun

Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)Edit

Mon 10 Jun → Wed 19 Jun
Tue 11 Jun → Thu 20 Jun
Wed 12 Jun → Fri 21 Jun
Thu 13 Jun → Sat 22 Jun
Fri 14 Jun → Sun 23 Jun
Sat 15 Jun → Mon 24 Jun
Sun 16 Jun → Tue 25 Jun
Mon 17 Jun → Wed 26 Jun
Tue 18 Jun → Thu 27 Jun
Wed 19 Jun → Fri 28 Jun

Closing a featured picture promotion requestEdit

The botEdit

Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below. However after the bot has counted the votes a manual review step is used to make sure the count is correct before the bot again picks up the work.

Manual procedureEdit

Any experienced user may close requests.

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|category=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}}
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    featured or not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    becomes
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. If it is featured:
    • Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate category of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
    • Also add the picture to an appropriate subpage of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images.
    • Add the template {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
      • If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
      • If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessments template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
      • Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
      • The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
      • You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
    • Add == FP promotion ==
      {{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.
  5. As the last step (whether the image is featured or not; including {{FPX}}ed, {{FPD}}ed and withdrawn nominations), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/June 2019), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.

Closing a delisting requestEdit

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    '''Result:''' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg)
  2. Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
    delisted or not delisted
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted ===
  3. Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/June 2019.
  4. If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
    1. Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
    2. Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes). Also, remove the image from all categories like Featured pictures of ....
    3. Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.
  5. If this is a Delist and Replace, the delisting and promotion must both be done manually. To do the promotion, follow the steps in the above section. Note that the assessment tag on the file page and the promotion tag on the nominator's talk page won't pick up the /replace subpage that these nominations use.

Archiving a withdrawn nominationEdit

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    In the occasion that the FPCbot will not mark withdrawn nominations with a "to be reviewed" template and put them in Category:Featured picture candidates awaiting closure review just like if they were on the usual list, put the following "no" template:
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=X|oppose=X|neutral=X|featured=no|category=|sig=--~~~~}}
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    becomes
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], not featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. Open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/June 2019), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.