Commons:Featured picture candidates

(Redirected from Commons:FPC)
This project page in other languages:
Skip to current candidates Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates


Featured picture candidates 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, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021 and current month.

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

Formal thingsEdit


Guidelines for nominatorsEdit

Please read the 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.
  • Resolution – Raster images of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are strong mitigating reasons. This does not apply to vector graphics (SVGs).
    • 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 Commons:Why we need high resolution media for more information.
  • Scans – While not official policy, Help:Scanning provides advice on the preparation of various types of images that may be useful.
  • General quality – pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality.
  • 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.
    • For photographs, typical acceptable manipulations include cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and color/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.
    • 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 color 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:
    • almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others,
    • night-shots are pretty but normally more details can be shown on pictures taken at daytime,
    • beautiful does not always mean valuable.
Artworks, illustrations, and historical documentsEdit

There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolors, 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.
  • Of high artistic merit: Works which, while not particularly well known, are nonetheless wonderful examples of their particular type or school of art.
  • 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.
  • 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 description page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced."


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.
  • 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). 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.
  • 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.
    • 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).
  • 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.
  • 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, color, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.

  • Shape refers to the contour of the main subjects.
  • 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.
  • Color is important. Over saturated colors are not good.
  • Texture refers to the quality of the surface of the subject. It is enhanced by side lighting… it is the "feel" to the touch.
  • Perspective refers to the "angle" accompanied by lines that disappear into a vanishing point that may or may not be inside the image.
  • Balance refers to the arrangement of subjects within the image that can either give equal weight or appear to be heavier on one side.
  • 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 color AND texture, etc.
  • Noise refers to unwanted corruption of color brightness and quality and can be caused by underexposure. It is not a desirable quality and can be grounds for opposition.
  • Symbolic meaning or relevance … Opinion wars can begin here … A bad picture of a very difficult subject is better than a good picture of an ordinary subject. A good picture of a difficult subject is an extraordinary photograph.
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 complete guidelines before nominating.

Video and audioEdit

Please nominate videos, sounds, music, etc. at Commons:Featured media candidates.

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.
  • 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).
  • 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.
  • 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).

Simple tutorial for new usersEdit

Tutorial: Nominate on COM:FPC
How to nominate in 8 simple steps









NOTE: You don't need to worry if you are not sure, other users will try their best to help you.

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

All set nomination pages should begin "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/", e.g. "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/My Nomination".

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}}

Strongly recommended: Please add a gallery page and section heading from the list at Commons FP galleries. Write the code as Page name#Section heading. For example: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports

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

Note: Do not add an 'Alternative' image when you create a nomination. Selecting the best image is part of the nomination process. Alternatives are for a different crop or post-processing of the original image, or a closely related image from the same photo session (limited to 1 per nomination), if they are suggested by voters.


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

You may use the 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 a 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 when the bot has counted the votes and before the nomination is finally closed by the bot; this manual review can be done by any user 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.

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

Featured picture candidatesEdit

File:Estrella roja del Mediterráneo (Echinaster sepositus), Parque natural de la Arrábida, Portugal, 2020-07-31, DD 110.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 May 2022 at 13:07:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Murga La Corre y Vuela en Encuentro de Murgas de Mujeres y Mujeres Murguistas edited.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 May 2022 at 07:47:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
  •   Info created by Camilo Lopez-Moreira - edited and uploaded by Radomianin - nominated by Kritzolina -- Kritzolina (talk) 07:47, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Kritzolina (talk) 07:47, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Impressive event (carnival) photo and portrait. I like the interplay of light and shadows, the colours, the gesture which speaks directly to me. For an event photo taken under difficult conditions the quality is good. There is some grain (which is just natural: the photographer had to use ISO 3,200), but IMHO a bit of grain is better than mush, and Radomianin (thank you very much for editing the photo!) has found a very good balance in reducing the grain and improving the colour balance. --Aristeas (talk) 09:31, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:51, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support per Aristeas. The English-language description could use some tweaking; I may try my hand at that later, but it would be better for someone with a greater command of Spanish to have a look. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:59, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support per Aristeas. A bit of luminance noise is fine under these conditions, and I'd like to point out that there is practically to zero chroma noise (which would be much more annoying). --El Grafo (talk) 10:17, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:50, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Moody capture at the right moment; the grainy look adds a level of charm. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:44, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support--Ermell (talk) 17:22, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Cmao20 (talk) 13:25, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

File:Chestnut-headed bee-eater (Merops leschenaulti) Yala.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 May 2022 at 22:44:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:John Campbell Dancy, Recorder of Deeds, Washington, D.C..jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 May 2022 at 18:18:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Masai Mara National Reserve 20 - Mara river crossing.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 May 2022 at 17:35:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Oroblanco (sweetie) fruits.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 May 2022 at 16:39:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Fixed, thanks. --Ivar (talk) 18:45, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --Aristeas (talk) 19:02, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ermell (talk) 21:43, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Another great photo in this series. These are really some of the best FP/QI/VI photos. Please nominate them all to com:vic, or maybe I will get around to that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:15, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Ikan Kekek please, be my guest, since I'm not active at VIC. --Ivar (talk) 15:01, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support, though would a second cut to show the seeds have been a good idea as well, think you? More an idea for next time; this is certainly the more æsthetic cut. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:44, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:49, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:18, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:49, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:39, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 10:39, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cayambe (talk) 05:37, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

File:Renfe Mercancías 333.338 Samper de Calanda - Central térmica de Andorra.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 May 2022 at 16:36:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Monsoon in the Western GhatsEdit

Voting period ends on 27 May 2022 at 00:57:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Weather
  •   Info created and uploaded by Arne Hückelheim - nominated by UnpetitproleX (Talk) 00:57, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 00:57, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose If there were QI sets, this would pass easily, and both these photos are likely to be good VIs if nominated, but to me, the fact that both images are hazy (which I think is more reasonable for the rainy season one) makes this not have wow. Compare some of User:Basile Morin's images of the rainy season in Laos to see why, while these are good pictures and a good series that I like, they are not among the very best images of their type on Commons. I do understand why this was nominated; I thought of the idea, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:11, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Great idea for a set, but there's some very obvious cloning in the lower corners of the green image. Once you know it's there, you can even see it from the thumbnail. --El Grafo (talk) 07:11, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Comment Yeah, I see that. That's not good. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:00, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Comment For me the wow comes from the juxtaposition of the two images, and I like the set very much. However, as El Grafo pointed out, there is noticeable cloning on the green image, and unfortunately such a large area isn't exactly something you can fake. -- King of ♥ 21:36, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   I withdraw my nomination UnpetitproleX (Talk) 21:39, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

File:Weißdornblüte Crataegus monogyna -20220509-RM-104145.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 May 2022 at 20:39:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sacred Heart Church, WimbledonEdit

Voting period ends on 26 May 2022 at 19:00:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#London
  •   Info Two views in opposite directions of Sacred Heart Church in Wimbledon, an interesting example of decorated Gothic revival given the Diliff treatment. I could add the sanctuary which seems like an FP as well to me but wasn't sure whether that would really fit into the set - thoughts? created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 19:00, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 19:00, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support. I don't think the closeup of the sanctuary fits in this set. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:14, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Very good. (The closeup of the sanctuary is excellent, but IMHO it’s rather a photo on its own and would not fit well into this set.) --Aristeas (talk) 19:00, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the feedback on the sanctuary Ikan Kekek, Aristeas; I shall nominate it but not as part of this set Cmao20 (talk) 23:00, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

File:Kirchwarft (Hallig Hooge)-msu-2021-9297-9509.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 May 2022 at 19:01:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:2022-05-13 Bahnradsport, Steherrennen, Sparkasse Steher Grand Prix 1DX 8860 by Stepro.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 May 2022 at 09:27:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports
  •   Info panned shot; created, uploaded and nominated by -- Stepro (talk) 09:27, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Stepro (talk) 09:27, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Unfortunately the shutter speed was too low to freeze the cyclist's movement. Background is distracting too, especially the dark top of a stand. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:39, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Also makes me dizzy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:49, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Comment Bad crop at the bottom. Intrusive line -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:42, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

File:Vermont State House Montpelier October 2021 HDR.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 May 2022 at 07:45:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Otto von Friesen - Runsten Sö 113 Kolunda, Stenkvista socken - Alvin record 110815.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 May 2022 at 23:40:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • But it's not a picture, and the picture isn't that old. I guess I'm misunderstanding the intended meaning of this category. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:14, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
    Honestly, it's really, really hard to know where to categorise it. Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:56, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Being the current “housekeeper” of the gallery pages, I like to add my 50 cent ;–). We usually put Adam’s excellent restaurations of old portrait photographs into the Portrait gallery page, i.e. we handle them just like contemporary photos. Per analogy this would mean that we should handle this historical photograph like a modern photograph of that runestone, because it’s a photograph (and not a painting, drawing, etc. which would go into some of the Non-photographic media galleries). So I would put the runestone photo either into the Sculptures#Other gallery or into the Other objects in landscapes gallery … depending on the disputed question whether a runestone is a sculpture or not (for me, it is ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 09:03, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
    Aye, that's the problem: It's not exactly a sculpture, but it's not exactly not one. This one was atop a burial mound, so maybe it counts as a gravestone.... but does that help us at all? Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:58, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Gravestones would usually be considered a type of sculpture, I think, unless they were mere markers. Was the shape of the runestone culturally significant, and did it vary much? By the way, the reason I haven't voted is that I haven't been able to decide how to vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:34, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
  • As a Swede with some knowledge of our runestones, I'll add a few words. They are almost always erected in honor of someone. (See article Runestone) They are not grave stones, but Viking monuments. The texts on them are variations of "XX erected/carved this stone after/in memory of warrior/son/husband/battle/whatever..." The correct gallery is Monuments and memorials, where dolmens, pyramids, etc. are kept. Now fixed. --Cart (talk) 10:40, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
And to answer Ikan's question, the shape is not that significant. They are usually sort of phallic, but it seems they took a good stone with an oblong shape and one relatively flat surface and carved the runes on it. Vikings on the Swedish mainland were carvers, not stonemasons, and the stones are made from hard durable stone. Picture stones are different since the are mostly found on Gotland and made of softer limestone (the bedrock of the island), which is easier to work. They are distinctly phallic in shape. --Cart (talk) 10:54, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

File:باغ فتح اباد.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 May 2022 at 18:15:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Iran
  •   Info created and uploaded by Ebi.eftekhari - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 18:15, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- IamMM (talk) 18:15, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Question Has wow, but why is the ground floor less sharp than the 2nd floor? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:05, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support The gate in the centre is unusually less sharp than the rest (so much so that the reflection of it seems sharper?), but for me the scene makes up for it. Would love to hear what other, more experienced voters have to say. -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:50, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Comment it's really as if bits of the reflected centre area were used to patch the actual centre. Strangely also more noisy than the surroundings. - Benh (talk) 13:44, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Very nice motif and colours but IMO too much of it is out of focus for FP Cmao20 (talk) 19:13, 17 May 2022 (UTC)

File:Tongerense Heide, (Veluwe). 30-08-2021. (actm.) 06.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 May 2022 at 15:29:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Pinaceae
  •   Info Irregularly shaped Pinus sylvestris on a rough moor.
    All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:29, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:29, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:42, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose A tree with cut branch, unexceptional content to me. Boring sky -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:25, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support I understand the objection, but somehow I am nevertheless impressed by that tree, exactly because of its broken branch – this tree stands like a brave veteran in its place. The cloudy sky is not that dramatic, but very apt as a background drapery for the tree. --Aristeas (talk) 14:14, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:03, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support I like the big wall of cloud behind the tree somehow Cmao20 (talk) 19:11, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support impressive shot of damaged nature --Kritzolina (talk) 19:16, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- IamMM (talk) 03:31, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay 💬 09:38, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 10:32, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Weak support I admit I had to look at this for a little bit. But I came to like the way that bite out of the sky at upper right sort of mirrors the damage to the tree. And the whole thing makes you curious: What happened to the tree? Why is it on its own out here and not in the background with the others? Daniel Case (talk) 03:14, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

File:Schachbrett (Melanargia galathea) im FFH-Gebiet "Sandgebiete zwischen Mannheim und Sandhausen" 17.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 May 2022 at 12:55:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Відьомські пороги на світанку.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 May 2022 at 06:57:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Ukraine
  •   Info created and uploaded by Vian - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 06:57, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:57, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support, but more categories are needed (e.g. sunrises, rapids). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:15, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Very dramatic.--Ermell (talk) 10:41, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support per Ermell. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:00, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --A.Savin 13:18, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   SupportRhododendrites talk |  13:19, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --Fischer.H (talk) 15:13, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:31, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Excessive artificial vignetting, over-processed -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:37, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Very impressive. Sure, a lot of post-processing - but that's ok here in this case --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:38, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- King of ♥ 07:39, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support This type of shot basically requires relatively strong processing if you want to get even remotely close to a first-hand experience. That is difficult to get right and in the past we've seen many people going totally overboard with this. For a while, it seemed FP had developed a collective allergy against any kind of HDR-y landscapes and vignetting. But different styles of photography are useful for different things, and even in an educational context it is sometimes necessary to address the emotional side of things. It seems we're opening up a bit in that direction, and I'm glad about that.
Personally, I think I'd also prefer the vignetting to be dialed down a bit. But as it serves a purpose and is much less apparent in the full size view (our thumbnailer tends to exaggerate these kinds of things), I'm fine with it as an artistic choice. --El Grafo (talk) 07:59, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support per Martin and El Grafo. --Aristeas (talk) 08:36, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 08:52, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I agree there should be a place for digitally enhanced art works with vignetting and colour manipulation, but the file description should say this and use the appropriate template. The category is wrong as it states 'natural' which is misleading. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:45, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
    FWIW, "Natural" is a misleading term anyway. There's hardly any place left on earth that has not been affected by human activites in one way or another [1], probably none if you consider climate change (well, maybe the deep sea). Some of the most species rich habitats existing in Europe today never would have developed without humans cutting down the trees so their livestock could graze. Now we turn them into nature reserves. "Nature" is an illusion - or at least highly subjective, as is can mean nothing, everything, and anything in between. El Grafo (talk) 09:17, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Not even the deep sea. They've found microplastics in the Marianas Trench. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:35, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:52, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 12:56, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support a bit dark, but lot of wow - Benh (talk) 13:50, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basile. --Ivar (talk) 15:07, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support--Llez (talk) 17:23, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Purely artistic photo but a good one Cmao20 (talk) 19:08, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay 💬 09:39, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:47, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Looks like a painting. Daniel Case (talk) 17:06, 19 May 2022 (UTC)


Voting period ends on 24 May 2022 at 19:40:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Food : Processing, preparing and cooking
  •   Info all by me Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 19:40, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Ezarateesteban 19:40, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Likely a useful image, but there technical/"wow" parts are not quite there for me. — Rhododendrites talk |  13:07, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support For my part I like it -- it's appetizing, unusual, and has good quality. Hope our Muslim and Jewish colleagues are not offended here --A.Savin 13:22, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Unusual, interesting and educational --Kritzolina (talk) 18:37, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose This feels like the prototype Wikipedia image: It is indeed unusual, interesting and educational. It is also mostly fine technically. But photographically speaking, it is just a straight snap shot with the primary compositional idea being to fill the frame with as much of the subject as possible. VI, maybe QI, possibly Wikipedia FP, but no Commons FP for me. --El Grafo (talk) 08:14, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:15, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose like El Grafo --Stepro (talk) 09:37, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others, very illustrative but IMO the image quality is not there. Cmao20 (talk) 19:08, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Far too noisy even if it were aesthetically striking enough. Daniel Case (talk) 16:55, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
I don't see noise in the picture Ezarateesteban 17:13, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
Me too would be curious to know where noise is. --A.Savin 18:45, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
I thought the picture noisy at first glance as well, but then realized that it is the hot air from the fire that is creating these effects. Could it be that this is also what you see as noisy, Daniel Case? Kritzolina (talk) 06:02, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support I looked at this picture several times and each time I find it more interesting. There is wow for me. -- IamMM (talk)

File:Lilly Walleni in Daria at Kungliga Operan 1907 - SMV - NV059.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 May 2022 at 18:06:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • I agree you shouldn't do any cropping. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:37, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
    • Given there isn't an exact edge to a negative like this - it's progressively more and more damaged at the edges (especially the right edge on this one), so any crop is somewhat of a judgement call - I'd say that this includes (more or less) all usable parts of the original negative. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:48, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

File:Watzmann mit Schönfeldspitze.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 May 2022 at 17:13:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#Bavaria
  •   Info The Watzmann in the Berchtesgaden Alps, seen from north. On the left in the background the Schönfeldspitze. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 17:13, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Milseburg (talk) 17:13, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support I picture I've always wanted to take myself --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:53, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Very nice scenery, fog, and colors. However, I'm not sure I like the composition; it seems that the mid-foreground does not have any elements connecting it to the rest of the image. -- King of ♥ 07:41, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:35, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support good composition for me --Stepro (talk) 09:39, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:46, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 12:57, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:07, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support--Llez (talk) 17:21, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:06, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support There's a lot that's good about this photo, and if there's any doubt, the labeling puts it over the top. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:03, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support I'd love to use this photo for my wallpaper ;-) --SHB2000 (talk) 08:17, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ermell (talk) 14:26, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:17, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:54, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

File:Mating posture of Ampittia dioscorides (Fabricius, 1793) – Bush Hopper DSC 1041.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 May 2022 at 16:24:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Peacock Dancer with Body Art -2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 May 2022 at 15:20:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Eurasian coot (Fulica atra) with chicks.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 May 2022 at 13:46:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Iglesia de San Julián, Setúbal, Portugal, 2021-09-09, DD 62-64 HDR.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 May 2022 at 21:00:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Doors
  •   Info Church portal of St.Julian's Church, in Portuguese "Igreja de São Julião", located on the centric Praça de Bocage (town hall quare), Setúbal, Portugal. The church was originally built in the second half of the 13th century in medieval style and was rebuilt at the beginning of the 16th century by order of King Manuel I in Manueline style. In 1531 a strong earthquake struck Setúbal and the church was damaged; the building was considerably modified in Mannerist style and reinaugurated in 1570. The original church was almost completely destroyed by the Great Earthquake of 1755 and was greatly rebuilt and redecorated in the last third of the 18th century following the late Baroque style. From this stage date the general appearance of the façade, the inner wooden roof, the painted tiles, the main and lateral altarpieces and the main chapel. Today it is the main church (matriz) of the city classified as National Monument in 1910. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 21:00, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:00, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Thanks for the interesting history. Very striking photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:14, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support per Ikan and excellent image quality Cmao20 (talk) 23:15, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- IamMM (talk) 02:19, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 06:03, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:44, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay 💬 13:52, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Question Wouldn't the door look better if lightened? Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:02, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Well, I don't feel to be the right person to answer that, rather the heritage responsible in the city council, but I consider the portal around the door much more interesting and ornamental (and probably worthy in terms of legacy) than the door itself. There is not much texture in the door, that's probably the reason why they didn't focus there, and the few features of the door are already subtle lit and can be perceived IMHO Poco a poco (talk) 17:59, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too dark, it might have helped to use a Maglite or similar, to put some additional light on the door. --A.Savin 19:41, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
  • No, sorry, not an option to me adding on my own any additional lighting to get some areas more lit. Please, assess the image the way it looks in reality. If I add a maglite by myself I could understand that some reviewers opposed because of manipulation. Poco a poco (talk) 20:19, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
    ok so if you add flash, it's a manipulation? What about all the underwater pics you take with flash then? Benh (talk) 09:24, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
  • That's a different animal, Benh. If I light a scene underwater or push the luminance bar to the top during processing I'm not changing the composition. If I add a light to the door it does. That would be a change of the apperance, a change of the ornamental view of the portal. That's at least the way I see it. Poco a poco (talk) 09:38, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
  • The title leads me to conclude it's an HDR photo, so you have already manipulated reality haven't you? I downloaded your image then reduced shadows and highlights in Photoshop and I liked the result. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:42, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Like Alexander says below, it's the same. You are (quoting you) "adding additional lighting to get some areas more lit". As long as u don't par away too far from reality, it's fine in my view. Sometimes it even gets you closer to what your eyes can actually see. - Benh (talk) 15:37, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Artificial light (be it the exterior illumination of a structure, flashlight of a camera, or anything else) is always a manipulation of reality, if you like. However I don't see any problem about it. --A.Savin 12:35, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:14, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451532 07:33, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too dark, IMHO, adding a bit of dynamic range would help make this look less dark. Such an alteration should be acceptable. It's just my opinion and I'm not necessarily right. --Wilfredor (talk) 00:10, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Has sort of a horror-movie quality to it. Daniel Case (talk) 02:36, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Wilfredor. -- Karelj (talk) 13:15, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

File:Ankara asv2021-10 img73 Republic Museum.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 May 2022 at 12:33:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Menjemur Kerupuk Ikan.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 21 May 2022 at 08:27:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Танцюючі тополі.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2022 at 08:19:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Ukraine
  •   Info Gentle evening sunlight in a riparian forest at the riverbank of the Southern Bug in the Buzk’s Gard National Nature Park, Mykolaiv Oblast, Ukraine. Created and uploaded by Vitalii Bashkatov – nominated by --Aristeas (talk) 08:19, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support A common criticism of landscape images nominated here is that the photographer has overprocessed them. Therefore, I would like to nominate this picture for a change ;–). It is a very atmospheric autumn scene, but IMHO at the same time very natural and realistic. I can almost feel the warm evening sun breaking through the thinning canopy of leaves and bathing the forest in golden light. The fact that there is a slight reduction of contrast in the upper left (almost inevitable due to technical reasons) is not a fault: it contributes significantly to the sunny mood of the picture. --Aristeas (talk) 08:19, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support as per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:28, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support some may call it ordinary but I've always admired sunlight filtering through woods. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 12:13, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support as per Aristeas. The way you can zoom in and not see any sort of compression makes it seem as if you could look at this image forever and continue noticing things. This image is amazing, how did it go two years on commons without even being nominated for anything? Lallint⟫⟫⟫Talk
  • Lallint, it's great that you are enthusiastic, but please don't use that double symbol. The Bot won't be able to read it and your vote may not be counted. Please use the normal {{s}} and all will be well. --Cart (talk) 14:13, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Ok for me. --Milseburg (talk) 13:20, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry but my brain is revolting against the washed out shadows. A scene like this should be more punchy, imho. -- KennyOMG (talk) 17:13, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice, but, please, check the tilt, the pond in the middle is tilted, water would flow down to the right Poco a poco (talk) 18:50, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Comment Thank you for the hint! However, I understand the picture differently: I believe that this is a stream that actually flows to the right (towards the river Southern Bug) and that its streambed is just largely hidden by the somewhat sloping banks and is only visible in the centre of the picture. Therefore I think there is no tilt. --Aristeas (talk) 06:46, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
  • I see, ok, I cannot discard that possibility Poco a poco (talk) 08:20, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support per nom, Poco, et al. Good composition, pleasant. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:44, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:50, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 10:32, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:50, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:42, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:27, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ermell (talk) 20:41, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:10, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay 💬 13:55, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Some of my best memories of hiking are in situations like this, days where it's clearly fall now but the leaves want to remind you of the summer that was, an evening you must await to see glorious the day truly was, so to speak. Well captured. Daniel Case (talk) 03:38, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451648 07:32, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   SupportRhododendrites talk |  13:28, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support -- King of ♥ 07:42, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:10, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Ukraine

Timetable (day 5 after nomination)Edit

Sun 15 May → Fri 20 May
Mon 16 May → Sat 21 May
Tue 17 May → Sun 22 May
Wed 18 May → Mon 23 May
Thu 19 May → Tue 24 May
Fri 20 May → Wed 25 May

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

Wed 11 May → Fri 20 May
Thu 12 May → Sat 21 May
Fri 13 May → Sun 22 May
Sat 14 May → Mon 23 May
Sun 15 May → Tue 24 May
Mon 16 May → Wed 25 May
Tue 17 May → Thu 26 May
Wed 18 May → Fri 27 May
Thu 19 May → Sat 28 May
Fri 20 May → Sun 29 May

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")|gallery=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]] ===
    === [[: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 gallery 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 gallery and section 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/May 2022), 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/May 2022.
  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. Edit the picture's description as follows:
      1. 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).
      2. Remove the image from all categories beginning with "Featured [pictures]" (example: Featured night shots, Featured pictures from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, Featured pictures of Paris).
      3. Remove the "Commons quality assessment" claim (d:Property:P6731) "Wikimedia Commons featured picture" from the picture's Structured data.
    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.

Manual archiving of 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:
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    === [[: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/May 2022), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.