Commons:Featured picture candidates

Skip to current candidates Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates


FPCandiateicon.svg

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 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

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.
  • ResolutionImages (with the exception of animations, videos, and SVGs) of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are 'strong mitigating reasons'. Note that a 1600 × 1200 image has 1.92 Mpx, just less than the 2 million level. A 1920 × 1080 image, commonly known as Full HD, has 2.07 Mpx, just more than the 2 million level.
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 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 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:
    • 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 documents

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.
  • 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 hosting page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced."

Photographs

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). 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.
  • Composition refers to the arrangement of the elements within the image. The "Rule of Thirds" is a good guideline for composition and is an inheritance from the painting school. The idea is to divide the image with two imaginary horizontal and two vertical lines, thus dividing the image into thirds horizontally and vertically. Centering the subject is often less interesting than placing the subject in one of the "interest points", the 4 intersection between these horizontal and vertical lines intersect. Horizons should almost never be placed in the middle, where they "cut" the image in half. The upper or lower horizontal line is often a good choice. 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, colour, 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.
  • Colour is important. Over saturated colours 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 colour AND texture, etc.
  • 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.
  • 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.
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 audio

Set nominations

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).

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}}

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}} ~~~~
  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 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 are 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:Rocks at Bodega Head on a foggy morning.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2016 at 01:48:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the California coast at Bodega Head, Sonoma County, on a foggy morning

File:Momento Espacial II.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2016 at 22:20:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunrise taken in Alambari, São Paulo state, Brazil
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Elias Andréo Gimenes - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:20, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support "Just a sunrise", but I like the sun's way of trying to fit in this composition. Tones and shapes make this photo look like a painting. A good an example of using the rule of thirds too. -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:20, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Nice snap but not a great picture, in my opinion. Most of the picture just sits there and looks very flat. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:11, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Santa Cristina (Parma) - Ceiling.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2016 at 21:19:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Santa Cristina (Parma) - Ceiling

File:Red granite cliffs at Stångehuvud.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2016 at 19:56:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Red granite cliffs at Stångehuvud
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Sweden
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Since pink rocks seem to be in vogue, I took the camera down to the shore to join the tourists gawking at the cliffs in the Stångehuvud nature reserve in south Lysekil. Noted and coveted for their color and large glittering crystals, these rocks were saved from quarrying by a, then 'eccentric' now conservationist, rich lady and the quarries moved further north up the fjord. Much of the granite went to buildings and monuments in Germany. I also laughed when I also saw this, reminiscent of a previous pic here at FPC and could not resist taking a shot. :) All by me. -- w.carter-Talk 19:56, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- w.carter-Talk 19:56, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 20:06, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:38, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good image, but nothing special, no wow. --Karelj (talk) 20:44, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice rock, however, I can see nothing special --The Photographer (talk) 20:49, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but for Karelj --LivioAndronico (talk) 21:40, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I basically agree with The Photographer: The rocks at the center of the picture are nice, but the composition, overall, is good but not outstanding to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:16, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Dutch Panzerhaubitz fires in Afghanistan.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2016 at 19:50:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Dutch Panzerhaubitze 2000 fires a round in Afghanistan.

File:Sacsayhuamán, Cusco, Perú, 2015-07-31, DD 05.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2016 at 19:13:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of a row of corners belonging to the Saksaywaman walls, a citadel on the northern outskirts of the city of en:Cusco, historic capital of the Inca Empire, today Peru.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info View of a row of corners belonging to the Saksaywaman walls, a citadel on the northern outskirts of the city of en:Cusco, historic capital of the Inca Empire, today Peru. The first sections of the citadel were first built by the Killke culture about 1100 and expanded by the Inca from the 13th century. The dry stone walls are composed of huge stones, which boulders are carefully cut by workers to fit them together extremely tightly without mortar. All by me, Poco2 19:13, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support So, Martin, I followed your proposal -- Poco2 19:13, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:28, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:46, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good job Martin Poco. --w.carter-Talk 20:21, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I enjoy that picture. The sky may be a tad noisy, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:18, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Bishkek 03-2016 img11 Chuy Prospekt.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2016 at 16:21:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bishkek/Kyrgyzstan: state Honour guards at Ala-Too Square
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Standing_people
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- A.Savin 16:21, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 16:21, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Good picture, the red on the carpet seems oversaturated. Too much empty space on the right though for a balanced composition, crop suggestion added. I usually don’t like the habit of alternatives in here but I’ll make an exception in this case :-) --Kreuzschnabel 16:29, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like the composition as is but would of course consider an alternative if it's offered. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:24, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Philippe Echaroux - Portrait de Zinedine Zidane.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2016 at 16:05:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Philippe Echaroux - nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 16:05, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 16:05, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Looks great but lacks quality. Insufficient DoF, most of the face is unsharp (in fact, only eyebrows and nosetip are sharp). Cutout line visible around the head. --Kreuzschnabel 16:11, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose false focus point and/or DoF. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 17:05, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 19:06, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I wasn't sure, but the cutout line that Kreuzschnabel pointed out clinches my opposition to a feature for this portrait. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:30, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:12099 on Severn Valley Railway.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2016 at 14:45:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

British Rail Class 11 12099 diesel-electric shunting locomotive on the Severn Valley Railway

File:Philippe Echaroux - Portrait de Jonny Wilkinson.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2016 at 13:37:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Philippe Echaroux - nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 13:37, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 13:37, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I don't know... the metal-shiny texture of his skin brings to mind words like "Iron man" or "Man of steel"... not necessarily bad associations for the man, but for a portrait... hmmm. w.carter-Talk 15:02, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support what a great portrait! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:03, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Similar as other nomination: Great image but there are quality issues. Eyes are in focus here but DoF is still too shallow, his nose is too unsharp for me. Bokeh looks artificial, showing hard edges from selection to be blurred. --Kreuzschnabel 16:14, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel. INeverCry 19:08, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I agree with Martin. The intense facial expression really makes this portrait stand out to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:26, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:2015 Ribblehead Viaduct 1.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2016 at 12:44:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ribblehead Viaduct
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by -- Kreuzschnabel 12:44, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Ribble Head Viaduct, Yorkshire Dales, England. I had in mind to just look for a good point of view but once I was there halfway up Whernside, the light became fascinating miraculous, changing rapidly. Unfortunately, I couldn’t catch an instant with both the viaduct being sunlit and a train running over it. Still, I think it’s a very good image of the structure and its surrounding. --Kreuzschnabel 12:44, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kreuzschnabel 12:44, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 12:52, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sky is a bit light but I can live with that, always tricky to get the right light on a wide vista with the clouds moving about. I also like the way the arches of the viaduct sort of "mirror" the bluff. This photo's got more curves than Mae West! ;) w.carter-Talk 12:57, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:51, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:12, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad DoF (2,8) and what are all those white dots on the mountains? not good quality and bad light. Low Wow for me --LivioAndronico (talk) 21:36, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I like the viaduct, but the glary light in the sky and distant ridge unfortunately spoils it for me, and since that ridge is such an important part of the picture, I don't think cropping it out would be a good idea. I hope you have a chance to take photos of this view again. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:00, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Galite-Galiton 119.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2016 at 08:32:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of Galite island

File:Galite-Galiton 127.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2016 at 08:22:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The lighthouse of Galite island
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by -- IssamBarhoumi (talk) 08:22, 26 July 2016 (UTC) - uploaded by -- IssamBarhoumi (talk) 08:22, 26 July 2016 (UTC) - nominated by IssamBarhoumi -- IssamBarhoumi (talk) 08:22, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- IssamBarhoumi (talk) 08:22, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol support vote.svg Support - I'm honestly not convinced, but I find the motif interesting enough, along with the light and shadows on the cliffs, to say that it probably belongs on the front page. I don't know whether or how many others will agree. It's not a slam dunk (totally obvious choice) to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:37, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lacks wow, and quality issues (noise reductioned and oversharpened, I guess – crisp sharp edges but no details on areas) --Kreuzschnabel 12:17, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hello everybody certainly I will improve my photos thank you for your kind comments --IssamBarhoumi (talk) 15:35, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Withdraw your nominations then and re-nominate after rework to avoid voting mixup between versions. Thanks! --Kreuzschnabel 16:15, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Ceriagrion cerinorubellum-Kadavoor-2016-04-11-002.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2016 at 03:56:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Damselfly intra-male sperm translocation
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Odonata
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Prior to copulation, male odonates transfer sperm from the genital pore on abdominal segment 9 to the accessory genitalia on segment 2 (intra-male sperm translocation), a type of behavior peculiar to this order of insects. Males may transfer the sperm to their secondary genitalia either before a female is held, in the early stage when the female is held by the legs or after the female is held between the terminal claspers. Most damselflies do it just after grasping the female in tandem as shown here. Created, uploaded and nominated by Jkadavoor -- Jee 03:56, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jee 03:56, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 05:02, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:15, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support for great educational and encyclopedic value. Although I wish the picture could be clearer, it's still really good timing (and/or great patience) and a great moment captured by the photographer. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:09, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the thorough review. I too wish if it could be better and if I can cover the entire subject inline. But there were a lot of challenges: 1. Though the damselflies are much friendly while mating, they are not so friendly until a wheel posture is established. So we photographers patiently wait till then. Here I broke that rule as I had many wheel posture of these damselflies earlier. I've nothing to loose than one single chance even if they get disturbed and fly away. 2. There is lot of motion as the male is applying a lot of force to bend/lift his abdomen, still carrying the female. 3. This (the transfer or charging the secondary genitalia) lasts only seconds and soon they advance to the wheel position. 4. There were foliage between the lens and subject, and I just found a view even if it was not fully inline. :) Jee 06:41, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Understood, and thanks for recounting that, which makes it more impressive that you were able to capture this moment. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:23, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mö1997 (Questions ?!?!) German-Language-Flag.svgRegiowikiat-logo-vorschlag3.png 06:39, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support While I'm normally not wowed by photos of insects/bugs/etc.(please forgive the bad terminology), I think that capturing such a brief event, the photo has good educational value. w.carter-Talk 07:15, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Certainly most interesting and VI for sure but the composition (plenty of space on top but bottom insect cut off) and lighting lacks photographic excellence for me. I am aware this is not a studio shot and there was no time to choose better light and/or framing, but then we judge the result, not the circumstances. --Kreuzschnabel 12:21, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:20, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I just made a google search and found one image available. Uploaded. Jee 13:48, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • And where did you find a notice saying that that new pic was in Public Space and totally copyright free? I can't find one so please direct me to the right place. w.carter-Talk 16:19, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • In the source, expand "author and article information". It is mentions in terms to as the entire site is CCAL. Jee 16:39, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Sentry box shadow lamp Christiansborg Copenhagen Denmark.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Aug 2016 at 22:01:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sentry box, shadow. Christiansbotg, Copenhagen, Denmark
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 22:01, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support at Christiansborg palace, Copenhagen, Denmark. -- Jebulon (talk) 22:01, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:54, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Fun but doesn't really wow me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:06, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan. INeverCry 05:06, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I can't help but like it! It is refreshingly unassuming and simple, but them again I like my photos not too complicated. w.carter-Talk 07:08, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I see the nice idea behind this but am not quite sold yet on it. Lighting a bit harsh, the whites nearly blown and poor in detail. Maybe gradient curves drawn too steep in postprocessing? --Kreuzschnabel 12:23, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For me work --LivioAndronico (talk) 21:29, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Полярное сияние.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Aug 2016 at 21:36:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Excavator KU 800 Lom ČSA Czech Republic 2016 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Aug 2016 at 20:54:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Excavator KU 800 for lignite mining, Lom ČSA, Czech Republic
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Karelj -- Karelj (talk) 20:54, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Karelj (talk) 20:54, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's really cool piece of machinery and I can understand why you want to show it. Unfortunately there are CA on stones and wires, everything is tilted and the clouds are blown out. If you take a picture like this and wonder if it is good enough for FP, I suggest that you first nominate it for Commons:Quality images candidates to get it reviewed. That way you will get advice and can correct things before you nominate it here. Best, w.carter-Talk 21:08, 25 July 2016 (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 of overall quality issues as mentioned above, plus perspective distortion and blown clouds. Sorry. 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:Gymnocephalus cernuus Pärnu River Estonia 2010-01-06.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 Aug 2016 at 13:08:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gymnocephalus cernuus in Pärnu River
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Tiit Hunt - nominated by Kruusamägi
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Eurasian ruffe in Pärnu River in Estonia. This is a renomination.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 13:08, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:13, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - On balance, yes, I think this merits a feature. Pretty fish, very nice picture as a whole at full-page size, and it's fun to look at the fish at full size. Overall, I like the clarity of the picture, too. I don't even feel inclined to suggest cropping closer on top, because I like the background and it's clear enough to give a depth of field. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:19, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 17:59, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:02, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:11, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMö1997 (Questions ?!?!) German-Language-Flag.svgRegiowikiat-logo-vorschlag3.png 20:20, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --B. Jankuloski (talk) 20:28, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice that some of the iridescence on the fish was captured. w.carter-Talk 20:56, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Earth tones work really well here. Daniel Case (talk) 06:57, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A very difficult subject to shoot. I wish the POV was a little bit lower, but given the circumstances this is an excellent shot, imho. --El Grafo (talk) 12:24, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Bologna Panorama.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 Aug 2016 at 10:51:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bologna, Italy. View from the top of the Basilica di San Petronio.

File:Проводящий пучок Pteridium aquilinum.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 2 Aug 2016 at 21:39:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Amphycribral Vascular Bundle of a Fern Rhizome - Pteridium aquilinum / Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Anatoly Mikhaltsov - uploaded by Anatoly Mikhaltsov - nominated by JukoFF -- JukoFF (talk) 21:39, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- JukoFF (talk) 21:39, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 22:01, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Attenuated Symbol support vote.svg Support as striking. The top crop is regrettable as it cuts off the endoderm ring. I also think that the parenchyma and phloem cells should be identified, presumably by color, so that viewers know what they're looking at. Preferably, every type of visible cell should be identified, for optimal educational value. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:03, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
    I will be very grateful to you if you do this. JukoFF (talk) 21:32, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • I lack the knowledge to identify each type of cell by appearance! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:57, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Complejo San Francisco, Arequipa, Perú, 2015-08-02, DD 79-81 HDR.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 2 Aug 2016 at 09:41:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Night view of the religious complex of San Francisco, Historic Centre of Arequipa, Peru.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Night view of the religious complex of San Francisco, Historic Centre of Arequipa, Peru. The complex, founded in 1552 and of mixed style, consists of a Franciscan church, a convent and a minor temple known as the Third Order. Its simple but robust construction made possible that it conserves very good for over 400 years in spite of the frequent earthquakes. Poco2 09:41, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 09:41, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:08, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question It's a really good photo and the two guys with their bottle are part of the composition, perfectly positioned under the doorway btw, but is it possible to remove three or four of the other rubbish (can, mugs, cig pack, bottle cap)? w.carter-Talk 11:32, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
    W.carter, I've edited it and uploaded a new version, but I don't feel 100% comfortable about this kind of edits. As it was a Sunday night I assume that it was dirtier than otherwise and that's why I guess it's ok. Poco2 12:09, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Dearest Poco, it really was just a question not a command, hence the 'question'-template. :) Any good reason for not doing the edit, such as the one you provided above (authenticity), would have been legitimate and acceptable. If you don't want to alter a pic, just say so. I think most editors here would agree, if the reason was solid. Anyway:
Symbol support vote.svg Support Face-smile.svg --w.carter-Talk 14:48, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 14:46, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:56, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 18:39, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Imo, the composition is uncomfortably tight at the bottom. Was that intentional or did you run out of space? --DXR (talk) 20:34, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
    DXR: I couldn't go further back as there was a road with a lot of traffic. Otherwise I'd had looked for a futher position. There were also some cars parked around the place, so, I didn't have that freedom. I could though offer a more generous crop at the bottom but the stairs will still be cut off and I'd also lose a bit on both sides. Poco2 20:46, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
    I see. It's a bit unfortunate. --DXR (talk) 07:43, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Reguyla (talk) 23:22, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't know, but the composition just doesn't work for me. The black sky and the rather ugly fence don't help either. Sorry. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:49, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mö1997 (Questions ?!?!) German-Language-Flag.svgRegiowikiat-logo-vorschlag3.png 20:20, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 06:18, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Terrasse Taisho - Les saveurs du Japon mises à l'honneur.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 Aug 2016 at 04:57:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Web-master77 - uploaded by Web-master77 - nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 04:57, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 04:57, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mö1997 (Questions ?!?!) German-Language-Flag.svgRegiowikiat-logo-vorschlag3.png 06:07, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, for me this is far from being one of the very finest images on Commons. As for composition: too much space on left but the napkin cut off on the right, the far plate is partly covered by an entirely unsharp glass of juice, arrangement looks random. As for quality: Large parts of the dish are unsharp (bottom dish show some motion blur as well), insufficient DoF. --Kreuzschnabel 07:18, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The unsharp orange glass and very bright knife and fork spoils it for me. Would have been better on a non-glass table as well. w.carter-Talk 08:27, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. I don't think this could pass at Quality Image Candidates, either. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:10, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per W.carter. -- Zcebeci (talk) 17:46, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per W.carter. INeverCry 18:42, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but the composition doesn't work for me. --PierreSelim (talk) 06:23, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I can see what the photographer was thinking, again, but the background's too busy, and the crop in the napkin could have been avoided. Daniel Case (talk) 20:33, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Камениот мост во Зовиќ.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Aug 2016 at 23:25:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Stone Bridge in the village of Zoviḱ, Macedonia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Petrovskyz - uploaded by Petrovskyz - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:25, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:25, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Others may have detailed criticisms, but for me, this is beautiful. Only one criticism from me: I might prefer if the tree on the left weren't cut off. But so be it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:14, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Ikan Kekek. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 01:15, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mö1997 (Questions ?!?!) German-Language-Flag.svgRegiowikiat-logo-vorschlag3.png 05:58, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The cut-off trees and building spoil it for me. Nice place, certainly, but this framing is not the best one can get. --Kreuzschnabel 07:20, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Very lovely place but at least the right tree could have been spared a cutting, and maybe loose the person on the bridge. w.carter-Talk 08:32, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Kreuzschnabel, W.carter: The only way to take this image is to stand on a rock in the river and there is not much choice on the angle and the arrangement of objects. The ideal view without cropping the tree wold have been possible if the photographer was standing in the river, while it is not possible to eliminate the object to the right because it will spoil the view of the bridge. I agree about the man standing on the bridge (though it does not seem to change too much) but the other things are simply as they are. Here is a view from the bridge to the side of the river where the image was taken from.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:18, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Or perhaps turn the camera 90 degrees and take a 4:3 standing pic. Anyway, here at the FPC all photographers are asked to do the impossible such as walk on water, hover in the air or go through locked iron fences. That's standard. ;) w.carter-Talk 09:28, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Or choose a shorter focal length. Anyway, we judge images as they are nominated without taking the circumstances into account. Sometimes it’s just not possible to take an FP :-) --Kreuzschnabel 19:50, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 18:42, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Just borderline on the saturation, and after all that might just be a natural event. But ... I agree with others about the cut tree. I can see that the photographer wanted to include the bend in the stream, but it didn't work. Either frame the image to include the whole tree or crop out the left third so that we would only expect to see the part of the tree that we would be seeing. Daniel Case (talk) 20:31, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Männikjärve raba vana laudtee.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Aug 2016 at 21:18:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Old boardwalk at Männikjärve bog
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Abrget47j - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 21:18, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 21:18, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:36, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Good, but not special enough for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:40, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Special for me. Compostion, light and mood are impressive. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 01:17, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Colours are nice, I like the contrast of green and purple even in dull lighting. But the image appears to have suffered from severe noise reduction, then tried to re-sharpen (foreground grass blades look oversharpened to me while most parts are still soft and lack detail). As for composition, I’d have taken a viewpoint more to the right to get the boardwalk(?) more diagonally into the frame instead of having it run straight away from the viewer. --Kreuzschnabel 07:26, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Zcebeci (talk) 17:56, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 06:09, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Msaynevirta (talk) 19:55, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Agra 03-2016 14 Agra Fort.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Aug 2016 at 19:13:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Agra Fort in Agra, India

File:CAESAR firing in Afghanistan.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Aug 2016 at 15:12:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

French soldiers conduct a live-fire exercise, with their Nexter Systems Caesar self-propelled wheeled armored vehicles, outside of Bagram Airfield, Afghanistan, August 14, 2009.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not enough room at top. INeverCry 18:29, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per/INeverCry JukoFF (talk) 18:59, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:46, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unfortunately for the pic, they were shooting a little high that day. w.carter-Talk 20:56, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose boommm. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:10, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A little grainy, and besides I'm not really wowed. It would have to have about the same effect on me that the weapon would have on the enemy. And still leave me in one piece. Daniel Case (talk) 01:57, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Mö1997 (Questions ?!?!) German-Language-Flag.svgRegiowikiat-logo-vorschlag3.png 05:58, 24 July 2016 (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 of the overly close crop on top and other reasons noted above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:10, 25 July 2016 (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:Росочка Река 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Aug 2016 at 14:52:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rosoki River in the western part of Macedonia

File:Wadi Al Hitan1.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 Aug 2016 at 07:49:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

Featured picture on Arabic Wikipedia.created by Clr202 - uploaded by Ori~ - nominated by ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 -- ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 07:49, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 07:49, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Fascinating and good quality. I was interested and had a look at w:Dorudon. I think I'll link that article in the English-language description. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:08, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 11:21, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cool and unusual pic. Reminds me of this. w.carter-Talk 11:23, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:08, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The skeleton looks great, but the empty space in the left corner and the big bank of dirt with shadow at top don't help the composition overall. INeverCry 18:35, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose While I half expect to see C-3P0 walking up on the side and spotting the Jawa sandcrawler, I agree with INC that the composition isn't wowing enough. Also it's a little unsharp and perhaps posterized in the background. Daniel Case (talk) 20:35, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mö1997 (Questions ?!?!) German-Language-Flag.svgRegiowikiat-logo-vorschlag3.png 20:21, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good image. --B. Jankuloski (talk) 20:32, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 21:06, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Sant'Andrea (Mantua) - Dome.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2016 at 17:51:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sant'Andrea (Mantua) - Dome.jpg
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by LivioAndronico (talk) 17:51, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LivioAndronico (talk) 17:51, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:52, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like the photo. I haven't been there, so I'll trust you on the colors. A Google Image search results in images that are much grayer, but that just seems to me to be an overall difference in how they took the photos. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:22, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Should be perfectly centered, in my opinion.--Jebulon (talk) 20:40, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I was sure you'd say that Jebulon, unfortunately (as you can see here [1]) I can not take a picture with a perfect center because there is a fence, thanks--LivioAndronico (talk) 23:18, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Of course, I'm sure there is a good reason for that non-centered image. But not every place is worth a picture, and not every place is worth a Featured Picture.--Jebulon (talk) 07:50, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Sure Jebulon but we do not change the subject, what you said? It is not centered ... and I responded to that. Then you should upgrade your opposition to what you really believe and not just "is not centered". Everything else is subjective and surely you would not have responded if I had just written to me (which you did not) I do not like etc.. thanks --LivioAndronico (talk) 11:53, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I understand about these fences. Daniel Case (talk) 07:03, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above. Jebulon's right, theoretically, but this picture is too good not to support. It works despite being not perfectly centered. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:15, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMeiræ 14:27, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support it works for me too. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:01, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Msaynevirta (talk) 15:16, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 18:31, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not centered. And that's really the point of such pictures. - Benh (talk) 20:20, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
Surprise...a your negative vote. Strange for the Centered Featured pictures. Trust me the point is just another --LivioAndronico (talk) 21:30, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
Stop focusing on others' opposes behaviour. - Benh (talk) 08:55, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
I have no problem with the opposes I have problems with those who invent the things. When you end I'll finish.--LivioAndronico (talk) 13:44, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:28, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Besides the issues mentioned by the other opposers, it’s certainly overprocessed to me. Looks as if motion blur has been tried to be fixed by sharpening. Fine double contours on all the details. --Kreuzschnabel 07:36, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Sure,sure...--LivioAndronico (talk) 13:44, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
You don’t need to argue. By nominating, you virtually asked me for my opinion about the image, and there it is. Try to say thanks. And pleeeeease try not to take any oppose as a personal insult. --Kreuzschnabel 06:26, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
You must be more calm, I ask an opinion but possibly objective and unspoken things at raaaaaaaaaaaaaaandom. I insulted you? just that you say it is false --LivioAndronico (talk) 12:13, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
You dind’t at all insult me, and I assure you it takes much more to upset me. I just wonder why you – please excuse for my choice of words – seem to feel so pissed off any time someone opposes your nominations. Nobody else in here behaves that way (except Spurzem from time to time). If you plan to keep others from opposing: Won’t work at all. --Kreuzschnabel 21:23, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
I do not want to upset you and do not care. Simply you tell falsehoods, the others, in fact, do not share. That's all. p.s. Spurzem is a good guy--LivioAndronico (talk) 21:56, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Sure he’s a good guy, I never said nor meant he wasn’t. He just shares your habit of going spare on any opposing vote. And I am expressing my personal opinion, which is just an opinion. Please keep from tagging it as "false", since your personal taste is not a general standard of wrong or right. It would be false if I wrote things I do not really think, but I don’t. --Kreuzschnabel 12:35, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
If a photo is "certainly overprocessed" isn't a opinion but you say it as if it were a certainty....but is false! --LivioAndronico (talk) 21:32, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
Please do us all a favour and look up the meaning of to me in your favourite dictionary. Thank you. --Kreuzschnabel 21:42, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Papilio machaon Mitterbach 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2016 at 16:39:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Old World swallowtail (Papilio machaon)

File:Crested lark singing.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2016 at 17:22:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Liège-Guillemins Station, Calatrava.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2016 at 17:18:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Bert Kaufmann - uploaded & nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 17:18, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support the picture was nominated before and deleted per legal issues, but now file was restored per legal considerations changing. -- Tomer T (talk) 17:18, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Mesmerizing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:29, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Amazing! --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:35, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WoW --LivioAndronico (talk) 17:53, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Very OOOooooh!! I actually had to triple check that it had the right license since it is one of the more restrictive licenses (CC BY 2.0) but that seems to work. Someone check again just to be sure, please. Also, looking at the place on Google Maps, I can't tell if this place really looks like this or if the pic has been created by mirroring one element twice (which I suspect since all shadows are identical) in which case this should be mentioned in the file description. w.carter-Talk 17:54, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support WOOOOOOHOWWWWW! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 18:54, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as it is against the rule: "Digital manipulations .... Undescribed or mis-described manipulations which cause the main subject to be misrepresented are never acceptable." --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 21:18, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - What's the manipulation? The blue color or something else? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:07, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • The manipulation is that this exact place does not exist. One half of it is how the building looks, the other half is just a mirror image of the place. Like in a kaleidoscope. As an example, I took this image and used the same technique to create this more stunning image. w.carter-Talk 23:37, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks. Well, I think it's a great picture, but the description should indicate what manipulation was done. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:36, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • I mentioned it in the file. It can be verified by the tags in Flickr. Tomer T (talk) 08:15, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • I don't think we should expect everyone to click the Flickr link, so I'm glad you added "This picture uses mirroring" to the English-language description (someone should translate that into French). That having been explained, I have no further objection. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:48, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
* The main subject is misrepresented. Therefore it can not be a FP. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 18:12, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 21:21, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:21, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support seems fine --Mile (talk) 07:45, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Winifred Carter.--Jebulon (talk) 07:53, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Well frère J, I haven't opposed it! ;) Don't get me wrong, I'm just as wowed by this image as anyone else, I only want to get all the technicalities and Formal things right before I vote for it. You know all the boring things that have to be right before we can call a pic Featured. One of these is what category this should be in. We promote images of fantasy places in paintings all the time, but should this really be in the /Places/Interiors category? Not everyone are as savvy as we when it comes to image manipulations and someone may see this and want to go and have a look at this amazing place only to find that it does not actually exist. And it can hardly be in the /Non-photographic media/Computer-generated or...? w.carter-Talk 09:39, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support An interesting and highly artistic approach to a place that deserves more photographic interest now that fop finally seems to be established in Belgium. I've been to that station many times but didn't have time to take pictures yet. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:24, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per/Villy Fink Isaksen JukoFF (talk) 10:46, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
    • JukoFF, it is mentioned in the file description. Tomer T (talk) 21:27, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Mirroring image... --Laitche (talk) 10:50, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice art, but we are here not in a photo community forum. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 13:46, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - What would you say to the argument that a great photo with mirroring is not only beautiful but also educational in showing what can be done with that technique? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:17, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMeiræ 14:28, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Mirroring image... Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:21, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, since there is no category in FP for digital experimentation. It is very cool, but apparently FPs should correspond with objects in a more encyclopedic way. w.carter-Talk 16:33, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yes, it's very cool. We probably should create categories for this kind of artistic photos, if it is not there already. what pop up in my mind is this picture File:Allébron September 2014.jpg, but it is a long exposed one and not manipulaited. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 20:38, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Yep, that was just a long exposure of a tram/local train going by. And that place actually exists, bridge railing and all. Funny you should choose a pic of a place where I've lived so I can vouch for the correctness of the view. Problem would probably be that with digital manipulations the possibilities are endless and we would be swamped with "cool" and "cool-wannabe" pictures. As our Alchemist-hp pointed out, this is not what Wikimedia is for. There are plenty of photo sites for that. I vote for this remaining an encyclopedia. And there is already the Category:Digitally manipulated photographs, it's just not linked to FP cats in any way. w.carter-Talk 20:53, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - It's entirely proper to discuss the aesthetics of this site, what they are and should be, but it's not correct to call Commons an encyclopedia. This site is a repository of photos for the use of any Wikimedia project and also for per se educational reasons. It is not simply an annex to Wikipedia. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:45, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Don't worry, I know that. I oversimplified right here and now only to be brief since this is not the place for such a lengthy discussion. w.carter-Talk 02:25, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

*Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others.--Jebulon (talk) 22:09, 25 July 2016 (UTC)Sorry, I can't oppose twice...--Jebulon (talk) 22:10, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Reynisfjara and Reynisdrangar, Iceland.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2016 at 06:32:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Reynisfjara and Reynisdrangar as seen from Dyrhólaey, Iceland
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - For what it's worth, the word I'd use is "subtle". This isn't an immediate "WOW!" Instead, I found that in looking at it longer, I really enjoyed the subtle gradations of texture and color and the forms. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:48, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. Does for cool colors what Poco's Andean landscapes do for earth tones. Daniel Case (talk) 15:41, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 17:53, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMeiræ 14:29, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 18:38, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no wow. Kruusamägi (talk) 20:16, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 14:53, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful image, perhaps some noise in the clouds.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:47, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Cabeças de águia do Parque Estadual do Guartelá.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2016 at 22:43:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Formations in sandstone that resemble heads of eagles in the Guartelá State Park

File:Betty Friedan 1960.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2016 at 16:58:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Betty Friedan
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Fred Palumbo - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:58, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:58, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good job with another photo of a historically important woman, at the time when she most gained her fame. I wish it didn't have the flash shadow, but there's only so much you can do, and frankly that just came with toning down the blown background. I also love the very contemporary expression on her face, like she wouldn't a mind a cigarette, a drink or preferably both after the photographer's done. Daniel Case (talk) 20:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Daniel said it best. It's great that you've been doing such a service by restoring and nominating pictures of historically important women. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:32, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
    • @Daniel Case, Ikan Kekek: Expect that trend to continue for some time. At the moment, I have twelve photos of important women in the queue to nominate once a space opens up. =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:00, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:39, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --w.carter-Talk 22:10, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support for historical reasons --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:55, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I can't see why this would be among "our fines images". The hard shadow on the wall behind her, the cut hand … To me it looks like something in-between a planned shooting and a casual snapshot, it lacks something special. In other words: No "WOW" for me. --El Grafo (talk) 09:50, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Without knowing her, the photo gives no indication of her activities and is ordinary in all other aspects. IMO not outstanding enough to be featurable. --DXR (talk) 13:36, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - The description gives a link to the Wikipedia article about her and describes her as an "American feminist and writer". If you don't know who she was, I suggest you read the linked Wikipedia article to start with. She was a very important feminist writer and was highly visible in the media in the U.S., to the point that her name would be one of the first that someone, or at least someone around my age (51) or older would mention if asked to name feminist leaders. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:31, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
Of course, I looked her up and of course, she is notable. But frankly the argument, look her up to see her notability defeats the point of a Commons FP. This is a bland photo of a woman, who happens to be important. That may be a very good justification for an enwiki feature. Equivalently, I would not support a feature of a boring picture of some house somewhere, in which something important happened. I expect something more from the picture itself, something which is there here, for example. --DXR (talk) 08:02, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I appreciate your argument. It makes sense. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:45, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Maybe some value although I did not know her (not a criteria of course, even for a 56 years old fellow here), but the quality of the picture is not excellent IMO (harsh shadow for instance).--Jebulon (talk) 20:47, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per/Jebulon JukoFF (talk) 10:44, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose good work, but not featured for me: the countenance isn't ok for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 13:48, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 18:40, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Nikola Tesla, with his equipment EDIT.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2016 at 16:23:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

This is the restored version of File:Nikola Tesla, with his equipment Wellcome M0014782.jpg

This is the restored version of File:Nikola Tesla, with his equipment Wellcome M0014782.jpg

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lošmi (talk) 16:23, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Looks like a still from Frankenstein. Daniel Case (talk) 20:11, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg STRONG SUPPORT reminds me The Big Bang Theory [2] and [3]. One of the geniuses who ever lived and little appreciated (not Edison). Hovewer a Big WOW --LivioAndronico (talk) 20:30, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • I'll Symbol support vote.svg Support, but did you do anything to the picture other than removing the text (which I'd rather were still in the photo, as it's nice to see his handwriting and its placement doesn't come close to seriously damaging the photo) and decreasing the whitening of the surrounding area? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:39, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Nothing except the area with text. If you like, add an alternative nomination with the original image. --Lošmi (talk) 13:28, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
      • No-one has yet addressed the question of whether someone can offer an alternative while they have two active nominations of other pictures, so I don't know whether I am allowed to offer an alternative or not. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:34, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 23:52, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:55, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ok for historical reasons, Tesla was a cool guy. w.carter-Talk 07:42, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 20:00, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Elon Musks favourite. --Mile (talk) 07:44, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Msaynevirta (talk) 15:17, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 18:41, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mö1997 (Questions ?!?!) German-Language-Flag.svgRegiowikiat-logo-vorschlag3.png 06:02, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Benzol (talk) 09:49, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 14:54, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --B. Jankuloski (talk) 20:33, 25 July 2016 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 21:03, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:GSI Mariner beached on banks of the Mackenzie River, Inuvik, NT.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2016 at 15:43:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

GIS Mariner beached on the shores of the Mackenzie River near inuvik in the Canadian Arctic
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water transport#Ships
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Daniel Case - uploaded by Daniel Case - nominated by Daniel Case -- Daniel Case (talk) 15:43, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I have been inspired by some of the recent successful nominations of shipwrecks to nominate this one. More a beached ship than a wrecked one, though. -- Daniel Case (talk) 15:43, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hehe! :) Now this is right up my alley, so pardon me for being a bit picky Daniel. It needs a bit of perspective adjustment. The walls of the crew cabins right below the pilothouse as well as those of the aft cabin under the railing, should be just as straight as those of a house. Right now they are leaning a bit into center. The antennae are probably tilted IRL due to wind activity. Swab up the deck pic, ye landlubber! w.carter-Talk 17:56, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done At least to the extent that I could without cutting off the top of the mast. I hope that's enough of a bit. Daniel Case (talk) 18:14, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good enough. Lucky it was red boat since it makes a good contrast + complementary color with the foliage. w.carter-Talk 18:39, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I fail to see anything outstanding in this photograph. The bush on the left foreground spoils the composition entirely. --Kreuzschnabel 20:30, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For me is outstanding ,funny and very curios --LivioAndronico (talk) 20:37, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very cool picture. I like the bush on the left, which I find good for the composition. A bit of the foreground is somewhat unsharp, but in the entire context, complaining about that feels like nitpicking to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:11, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting composition. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:45, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. A different take on the usual fare of shipwrecks. —Bruce1eetalk 05:12, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:54, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:58, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No FP/ JukoFF (talk) 10:47, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment No FP? JukoFF can you explain your vote? Normally here the people talk. Thanks --LivioAndronico (talk) 18:55, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • I do not see in the picture is nothing outstanding. This is not the Titanic :) JukoFF (talk) 18:58, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support @Daniel Case: I bet this'd be a cool place to live if you fixed it up right. Face-wink.svg INeverCry 18:43, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
I think that would be the only realistic way to use it. I thought its registration would have run out by now, but according to Transport Canada, it was renewed for another three years. So who knows? Daniel Case (talk) 02:07, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really like this one! Love the atmosphere. Shadows seem a bit overbrightened, but it's not objectionable. -- Thennicke (talk) 09:27, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 14:55, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --B. Jankuloski (talk) 20:34, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Locatie, Lendevallei. Petgat 04.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2016 at 13:33:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lendevallei in Netherlands. Petgat.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:33, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - It's no secret that I love Dominicus' sensibility, and I think this photo with its wonderful reflections and gradations of light, reminiscent of Netherlandish landscape painting of yesteryear, is a great work. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:33, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:36, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • question: ArionEstar are you OK with the new version of this photo?--Famberhorst (talk) 10:06, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

*Symbol support vote.svg Support See comment below. Mmmm... When is the next flight to this place leaving? :) w.carter-Talk 14:03, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support Lovely composition; clouds at upper right are a little overxposed ... this may be fixable. Daniel Case (talk) 14:54, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • question: Daniel Case are you OK with the new version of this photo?--Famberhorst (talk) 10:06, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
@Famberhorst: Yes; if I werern't I would have changed my !vote. Daniel Case (talk) 03:25, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done. Small correction. Thank you.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:27, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - It actually might be too dark now; I'd split the difference. However, I would understand that your priority would be to address the concerns about the colors below. I don't see the problem - the colors look real to me. But that's beside the point. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:16, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It seems far too yellow for an image taken in the middle of the day. Are the colors ok? Kruusamägi (talk) 19:10, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • question: Kruusamägi are you OK with the new version of this photo?--Famberhorst (talk) 10:06, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Yes, that is better. Not enough wow for me to support the nomination but I see no reason to oppose. That's a fine image. Kruusamägi (talk) 19:06, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment for me too --LivioAndronico (talk) 20:38, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • question: LivioAndronico are you OK with the new version of this photo?--Famberhorst (talk) 10:06, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done. Slightly less yellow. Could possibly turn back to the first version.

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I'm perfectly happy with this version, and I actually consider it the best of the three, providing that the colors are now accurate. You really should ping everyone, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:21, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • There's a "ping" template, but I would just put their usernames here, like so: Arion, W.carter, Daniel Case, Martin Falbisoner, Kruusamägi and LivioAndronico, are you OK with the new version of this photo? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:29, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The new version is fine with me --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:30, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Totally ok with me. And to add: 'Ping' is a Wiki-slang/jargong for the notice you get when another user mentions you on a page, other than your own, to get your attention like Ikan just did here. This is necessary when you alter an image during review so those who have already voted can say if they approve the new version as well. (There is a discussion about this on the talk page.) w.carter-Talk 07:52, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- -donald- (talk) 06:18, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 09:45, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose very average image of nothing. Could be any puddle with any grass, in a very normal day... nothing wow, special... -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton 14:29, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Ahem... it doesn't hurt to be polite even when you oppose to something. w.carter-Talk 16:17, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • I see nothing impolite in the statement. And I feel quite the same (it’s a nice picture, a bit soft and noisy, some grass blades pixelated on the right side, I suspect oversharpening – all in all I don’t see an outstanding piece of photographic art here) but that has become quite normal. On FPC, we used to consider, "is this really one of the very best images on Commons?", now it seems to be rather "well, it’s not too bad, so I’ll support it" for many voters. Well, if this is the direction things develop here, I know I am free to leave. It’s just the FP star rapidly losing its meaning for me. --Kreuzschnabel 19:47, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Different people respond differently to different photos. For example, there is a core constituency for macro photos with bokeh. I like some of them but have a lot less tolerance for unsharpness and especially vertiginous backgrounds than others. That doesn't make pictures I oppose "nothing" or cause the star to lose its meaning because others like photos I oppose. And some viewers don't respond to this kind of landscape photo the way I do. It sucks when, as has often happened, the photographer takes offense at opposition per se and posts petulant remarks, but I do think we should all, while expressing our opinions, try to be polite, and I realize there are cultural differences, as New Yorkers tend to be blunter than people from many other parts of the U.S. and my experience so far has been that Germans are much blunter than New Yorkers (not to mention French people, for whom etiquette tends to be quite important). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:44, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sure Famberhorst (ping Face-smile.svg) --LivioAndronico (talk) 17:44, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose 100% with Kreuzschnabel, even if Rodrigo maybe forgot that there is a person who took the picture...--Jebulon (talk) 20:51, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
    • And I think this nomination has supported to many transformations since the beginning of the evaluation process, per the debate mentionned above.--Jebulon (talk) 20:55, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Jebulon. --Karelj (talk) 21:29, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeThis is not any of the original two versions I voted for. It has lost some of its fairy tale glow and become a more ordinary photo for me. Even if I liked this version I would withdraw my support just because of all the significant changes being done with the photo during the voting process. It is simply too confusing. w.carter-Talk 21:56, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:14, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mö1997 (Questions ?!?!) German-Language-Flag.svgRegiowikiat-logo-vorschlag3.png 06:02, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I see a nice image but nothing outstanding here. --Kreuzschnabel 07:43, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good illustration of a biome; nice composition and so on. The wow for me comes mainly from the clouds. -- Thennicke (talk) 09:32, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm sorry, but mid-day light isn't appealing. And photo is a bit overprocessed (plants are looking unnatural on the background). --Ivar (talk) 18:33, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Olustvere mõisa viinavabrik ja härjatall.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Jul 2016 at 18:04:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Olustvere
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Iifar - uploaded by Iifar - nominated by kasir -- Kasir (talk) 18:04, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kasir (talk) 18:04, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:07, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The reflection is not perfect, looks like it was a windy moment when the picture was taken. The whole picture looks somewhat overexposed, too. The light situation is not that interesting and the colours are very pale. In other words: No wow. --Code (talk) 05:25, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I respect this picture and feel a little like a stinker for opposing it. My reasons are different from Code's: I feel like there's too much water in the picture, and from this viewer's point of view, I feel like I'm sort of drowning in it, maybe partly because of the angle. I'd like the photo a lot more and might very well support it if it were cropped to just in front of the reflection of the building on the right, because I like the sky and would feel like that's the right amount of water. I admit that this isn't fully thought through and might not be a completely logical point of view, but it's more substantive than if I just wrote "no wow". -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:11, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral To quote another good Wikipedian: "Meh..." --w.carter-Talk 11:59, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
*@W.carter: Wouldn't en:Meh automatically mean oppose because "no wow"? ;-) --El Grafo (talk) 10:05, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
*Not by default, since it could also include a bit of uncertainty about the tech quality which has very little to do with the wow-factor. :-P w.carter-Talk 10:40, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:18, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Tilted (the chimney and its reflection do not align vertically, so either the water surface or the camera are slanted) --Kreuzschnabel 07:46, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

File:International Commerce Centre on Victoria Harbour.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2016 at 22:33:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

International Commerce Centre on Victoria Harbour

File:Agapanthus 'White Heaven', ingetogen schoonheid van de ontluikende bloemknop. Locatie, Tuinreservaat Jonkervallei 03.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2016 at 16:33:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants # Family Agapanthaceae.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Agapanthus 'White Heaven', understated beauty of budding flower bud. Location, Tuinreservaat Jonkervallei in the Netherlands. created by Famberhorst - uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by Famberhorst -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:33, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:33, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:53, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support w.carter-Talk 17:45, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:08, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Normal good quality image, no reason for FP. --Karelj (talk) 20:48, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Much more than normal good quality to me. That plant is beautiful! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:22, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely shades of green, subtly deployed. I would have cropped tighter, but I defer to the photographer's choice here. Daniel Case (talk) 18:25, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't understand Karelj...hovewer and 7 --LivioAndronico (talk) 18:47, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good and sharp. However, I do not like the crop, as the right half of the image is empty. If possible, you should move the bloom to the right. --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:02, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • I think having the stem starting at the corner adds to the pic. It is just budding and just "comming in from the left" as if it is a bit shy. Yes I know, poetic nonsense to most, but we are allowed to be subjective here, that is what beauty is all about. w.carter-Talk 12:05, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

*Note: The photo I obviously can crop so that the bud is right in the middle. Personally, I find it so playful and in my opinion the proportions. But the review is to you all.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:05, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Holy Trinity Cathedral - Niš.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2016 at 11:59:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fragment of the Holy Trinity Cathedral in the city of Niš
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I find the symmetry beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:34, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In this case I find the symmetry correct --Llez (talk) 11:11, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as for symmetry, both towers should be in bright light. And this sky is very dark and weird. And as for educational purpose, we don't have scale. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton 14:34, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton. --Karelj (talk) 21:35, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose QI, yes. But I have personaly dozens of such pictures of similar views to submit here... This is not original neither outstanding. For those who don't know, FP reviewers are kindly requested to review some quality image candidates, then they could see the difference, and what is expected here in FPC.--Jebulon (talk) 08:00, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - That request is certainly well taken. However, I do look at QIC quite regularly. We simply have a difference in taste. I'd like to see the dozens of similar photos you've taken. Perhaps I'd find them more appealing than other photos that have been featured. And so be it. Differences in opinion make things much more interesting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:14, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:23, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Lac de Tunis Sud 19.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2016 at 07:38:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sight on Lake of Tunis

File:Winter Palace Panorama 4.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2016 at 05:47:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Winter Palace in Saint Petersburg, viewed from Palace Embankment
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Florstein - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:47, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I find this composition very restful and pleasant for the eyes, and the Winter Palace is a lovely building. Surprisingly, there is as yet no Featured Picture of this palace. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:47, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Colours look severely oversaturated for me, especially the blue water and the red things in front of the building. Unbalanced composition with an adjacent building to the left and none to the right, a bit more slanted perspective from the right could compensate for that. --Kreuzschnabel 07:32, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support works for me --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:38, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Photographer (talk) 22:44, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 01:56, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Kreuzschnabel; it also looks to me like it might be slightly tilted. Daniel Case (talk) 02:46, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I didn't notice. Florstein, if you notice anything, feel free to edit with notice to everyone. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:26, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment No, I'm sure that the picture is not tilted, but the embankment sagged a bit in the center. And no, I can't build a building in the right side to make symmetrical composition. :) And no - we need strictly frontal view for this building. --Alex Florstein (talk) 18:56, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It is OK for me --Llez (talk) 11:16, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment About stitching errors. Alas, stitch a running water without errors at all is almost impossible, I bet you know. However, these smallest flaws are hardly visible and attempts to clone up the seams may equally affect the quality. This is a very big niggle, I guess. --Alex Florstein (talk) 19:19, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 20:08, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:24, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --KSK (talk) 11:31, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --B. Jankuloski (talk) 20:35, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Cataratas do Iguaçu - Vista de cima.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2016 at 23:15:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Iguazu Falls - view from the observation deck.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Mayravbf - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:15, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:15, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 23:20, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I feel this picture is missing some wow, compared to other photos in the same category, such as [4] (spectacular but a bit noisy), [5] (a fine picture but with less sky than this one) and my favorite: [6]. For my money, the last one is the one we should feature, and in fact, I'll put it in my FPC cue in case no-one nominates it first. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:04, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: Perhaps because of the rainbow. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:08, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Yes, the rainbow makes the pictures more spectacular. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:15, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Qualified support The horizon could be sharper, but on the whole this stands out among waterfall pictures. Moving my support to the edited version below. Daniel Case (talk) 17:14, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Photographer (talk) 22:57, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Alt version

Iguazu Falls - view from the observation deck.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info WB, shadowns, noise, sharpening were altered. --The Photographer (talk) 22:57, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Photographer (talk) 22:57, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Superb! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:06, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Those edits did it. This version is great. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:15, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Thennicke (talk) 04:07, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The colors are better here. Daniel Case (talk) 16:04, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 11:18, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --w.carter-Talk 12:08, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose this is very explored place to photograph, even us have better photos, sample, in the end of rain season, in a better hour to shoot... This photo is in the dry season, less water, less power, with a longer expose, the cloud could go away, a huge area of pure artefacts (note), and the lack of sharpness let me think that this is just a snapshot, not a FP. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton 14:25, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
    • Only a litle note, remember that it's a compact camera (no posible do a long exposition with this camera, for example) --The Photographer (talk) 14:38, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
And the equipment not been adequate, is not a excuse to us classify as a good photo, or give more credited for this. ;) Actually, with technique even me know how to suppress the limitation of using a compact camera to create a long exposure look... -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton 15:03, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
I know this camera and how is difficult create a long exposure, basically you need hack the camera installing another operative system, also the sensor problem that impact the image quality. In this image composition the zoom is irrelevant imho --The Photographer (talk) 19:50, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Again:
"Canon PowerShot SX40 HS is a superzoom [camera], and have a M mode. (see?}"
"And the equipment not been adequate, is not a excuse to us classify as a good photo, or give more credited for this. ;) Actually, with technique even me know how to suppress the limitation of using a compact camera to create a long exposure look... "-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton 15:03, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
And I didn't say that we need 30s of exposure, just that a longer exposure could clear the clouds, the image is average to bad. And the editions added a huge amount of artefacts -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton 14:21, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Rodrigo. INeverCry 19:27, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
Long exposition version

Iguazu Falls - view from the observation deck.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Long exposure version is a decompiling of the original version and what could be done in the first moment, thanks to Rodrigo comments. --The Photographer (talk) 16:52, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I don't know whether I would have supported this version if it had been the only one offered, but I find the shorter-exposure version clearer and more alive. Both versions have merit, but I don't get what the advantage of this version is supposed to be, and whatever it is, it's lost on me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:40, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Regulation of gene expression.svgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2016 at 21:28:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Regulation of gene expression
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Computer-generated
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by, uploaded by and nominated by Ali Zifan. It also passed under the W3C validator without any errors and warnings. Ali Zifan 21:28, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ali Zifan 21:28, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think it's oversimplification. Getting through the membrane isn't that simple and protein hormones (like insulin) just connect to membrane proteins, that then pass on the signal with a cascadal process via mediator molecules. Ok, steroid hormones do enter the cell (not that there is any reference that this is the case with this drawing), but just binding to the receptor and then entering to the nucleus without anything happening to the receptor should be rather uncommon (like why should it float in the cytoplasm and then miraculously decide to enter the nucleus if nothing hasn't changed? there should be at least some conformational change in the receptor). And often there are some co-regulators. And then there is amplification, that is totally taken out from the equation in here. P.S: It might be more practical to base your diagram on some specific gene regulation example. You can do the drawing, but I'm not convinced on the scientific backstory. Kruusamägi (talk) 22:40, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
    • This diagram actually shows regulation of gene expression by steroid hormone receptor. Hormones that are fat soluble (like steroid) are able to pass through the cell membrane directly and produce their effect by binding to receptors inside the cell. So as you mentioned, and I thank you for that, every regulation of genes won't be the same, and this diagram exclusively display gene expression by steroid hormones. Since Steroid hormone receptors directly regulate gene expression, they would enter the nucleus and it doesn't mean that it will be done "miraculously". I also change the description of the file and requested to rename a file to "Regulation of gene expression by steroid hormone receptor". Ali Zifan 01:48, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
And as I mentioned before, then there are other issues beside the type of hormone depicted. So naturally I'm not going to change my vote (as if it would had been only that, I would just have suggested to add that "steroid" part into it). And with that "miraculously" I meant that ligand binding usually induces a conformational change in a receptor protein (i.e. there is a reason why it enters the nucleus after binding the hormone). I can't see that in your image. There is just this weird dark hole that is filled. And then again, all of this could be told in an image description and not on the image itself, but there isn't much of a description at a moment.
So, I would definitely wish for a better image description, as at a moment there is more text on the diagram, than on the descriptional part of it. And I'm not fully sure about the used terms as well ("extraocular fluid"(?); and I'd prefer "cell membrane"; and why don't you mention the ribosomes). I don't mind the simplified depiction itself, but without a good textual part to back it up, then it just ain't enough. It is still an encyclopedia. Kruusamägi (talk) 21:42, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral for now. It is an exellently executed image, with the requisite option for several languages, but even the two paragraphs of bio-speak above gives me a headache... As soon as someone with more knowledge than I assures me that the science behind it is right, I'll change my vote to support. w.carter-Talk 13:07, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support If Daniel says so. ;) BTW, I like the purple, it makes the pic pop. Wish I'd had illustrations like this on my school books. w.carter-Talk 21:10, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per nominator's explanation above; it sounds good enough for me. However, I do think a better color could be chosen than that strong purple, which I see as kind of distracting. Daniel Case (talk) 16:01, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Daniel --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:09, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 01:36, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:32, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment What are you exactly voting for? Just if the image is pretty or not? As an university student in the field of genetic engineering, this image is a clear no go for me due to the inaccuracies it has. And this nominator's explanation just says that yeah, I had no clue that there are also peptide hormones and I have now updated the image description. How does that "sound good enough"? Kruusamägi (talk) 20:31, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
    • What do you even mean?! if it was wrong and inaccurate I would definitely withdraw with my nomination; I promise! As I said ,and will say again, this diagram just shows the general steps and basic process of gene expression regulation by steroid hormone receptor. It does not mean that it must depict every single thing going on in the process, because that is not the goal. If those steps were critical to show it would definitely be added. You've already give your opposition and thoughts in here and I don't really know why you are insisting to mislead others about it. Ali Zifan 23:35, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
      • Ok, lets start from the top. What a hack is "extraocular fluid"? Did you meant "extracellular fluid"? Kruusamägi (talk) 09:19, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Thanks for pointing that out. Until that's corrected or explained, I will oppose. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:20, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
Ali, do you see now, why I'm so reluctant to support this?
And if you are already making changes, then please change "hormone" to "steroid hormone" and add marking for "ribosomes". Kruusamägi (talk) 23:22, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

File:A small boy tries to look mean for the camera in Afghanistan.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2016 at 19:27:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A small boy tries to look mean for the camera in Afghanistan
Ikan Kekek When I saw the picture the intense look on the kids face along with the clarity of the image struck me and made me think it would be a good candidate for FP. Reguyla (talk) 19:13, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
On reflection, and after looking at the photo again, I think you're right. The photo is rather memorable. I also can't understand using the idea of the photo being good for Time or Life as a reason to oppose a feature. I Symbol support vote.svg Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:45, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the idea but I wonder if perhaps the boy's expression is him registering his displeasure with being cropped so tightly. Daniel Case (talk) 06:14, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This may be a pic for Time or ye olde LIFE magazine, but it has nothing FP for me. w.carter-Talk 12:53, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support If it's good enough for ol' LIFE, then it's good enough for me. And FPC ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:10, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice quality, pretty sharp, and powerful eyes, 3x2 is weird uh, I would crop tighter, and vertical, or a square, square would work here... -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton 14:35, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Alt

A small boy tries to look mean for the camera in Afghanistan (edited).jpg

  • It's a quote used by those nerds who love that movie too. :) Just a small innocent addition in case there are some of them here. I know that there are many movie enthusiasts at Commons. It's nothing important. w.carter-Talk 18:52, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

File:CRS-9 mission (28348649546).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2016 at 14:30:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SpaceX CRS-9 start and landing
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Space exploration
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by SpaceX - uploaded by MsaynevirtaIMG - nominated by Ras67 -- Ras67 (talk) 14:30, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wow for the new technical possibilities, also high educational value. Ras67 (talk) 14:30, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • This pic has everything I don't want in a FP. It is too small, too grainy, not sharp enough, everything is tilted and the lights are posterized. Even so, I will Symbol support vote.svg Support it since it is a very unusual image of one of the first, major, successful start and first-stage landing captured in the same image. That is wow enough for me. w.carter-Talk 20:08, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - W.carter's points are well taken, but I think either some more background information or a link to a page that specifically explains the mission would be needed for the picture to have sufficient informative value for me to feel that a feature is justified. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:03, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Links now provided at the file's page + an artist's rendition as "other version". The whole thing happened today. Thanks for noticing Ikan. w.carter-Talk 21:20, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Thank you. I now Symbol support vote.svg Support a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:31, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:36, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 23:22, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support for historic importance. Daniel Case (talk) 04:15, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mö1997 (Questions ?!?!) German-Language-Flag.svgRegiowikiat-logo-vorschlag3.png 06:59, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:30, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This is an incredible long exposure shot in itself, with a very impressive wide view. But what it shows is even more remarkable. All in a single, non composited, 9min shot, which really helps understanding the process. - Benh (talk) 15:01, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 20:41, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Llez (talk) 11:21, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMeiræ 14:38, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too out of focus. Picture has definitely some educational value, but IMO the File:ORBCOMM-2 (23815832891).jpg (similar picture from December's Orbcomm flight) is a better candidate for FP. --Msaynevirta (talk) 16:17, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --B. Jankuloski (talk) 20:36, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Sant'Antonio da Padova all'Esquilino - Interior.jpgEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2016 at 22:31:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sant'Antonio da Padova all'Esquilino - Interior
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment what you mean for "dusk image"?--LivioAndronico (talk) 23:22, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the muted light. The mural at the back looks properly lit. INeverCry 01:03, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I actually find that fresco a bit too bright, particularly at full size, but overall, the room looks quite good and I think this is a successful picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:34, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:50, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm not convinced by the composition. There's too much floor and not enough space at the top. Then the benches in the foreground are too dark, they look nearly black. I also notice some pincushion distortion. The floor doesn't look straight but is leaning out on both sides (and so does the top part of the picture). A good QI but not one of our finest church interiors, I think. --Code (talk) 08:10, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, I have to agree with Code, especially about the composition. I need more "up" and less "down".--Jebulon (talk) 17:49, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done for the distortions,however this church is famous for the ground and more the up is only white....thanks --LivioAndronico (talk) 19:25, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good true light, nice true view! I'm feeling the interior from the church. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:51, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:37, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 23:22, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A little dim but that in this case means that everything appears more realistic, with minimal post-processing visible. Daniel Case (talk) 03:32, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Milseburg (talk) 06:49, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's good, but I'm not convinced it's one the finest church interior images we have. Kruusamägi (talk) 08:33, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose very distorted image, especially at the right side. The altar is not sharp, and weird shadows are present. Capture One is the best fixer for that. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton 14:48, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Benzol (talk) 09:43, 24 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. Little wow. - Benh (talk) 08:29, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Eight windows wrapped in plastic.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2016 at 18:54:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Stretch-wrapped windows
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me -- w.carter-Talk 18:54, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- w.carter-Talk 18:54, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like this photo. It's not an extremely complicated motif, but it is fun to look at and strikes me as having some of the experimental spirit of early periods of photography, exploring the power of the medium to observe objects and the way light shines through them. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:46, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support great, thanks! Absolutely per Ikan --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:49, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The brightness at top left is my one small quibble, but I like this overall. A creative idea that works 95% for me. INeverCry 06:11, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks! :) I totally understand your point since I also fought with the decision on whether I should keep the very bright left or tone it down or crop it out. In the end I decided to keep it since the frames form a sort of "color sample gradient" and those usually go from absolute white to the darkest of the color. w.carter-Talk 07:24, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support We might be looking at the next MS Windows default wallpaper ;) - Benh (talk) 09:10, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • LOL!!! Face-grin.svg It would be appropriate for Windows 8... w.carter-Talk 09:27, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 12:33, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeThe wrapping spoils it for me. If there were just 8 windows getting greener without any distracting element, that would be nicer. Less is more here. --Kreuzschnabel 13:31, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I was to support with enthousiasm, but I notice that the extreme left vertical up line is overexposed or blown up. No details are visible. Maybe a crop would help ? Anyway, something "fresh" here !--Jebulon (talk) 17:54, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • As you can see from my comment above to INC, I have been debating this thing with myself. I did a version (not uploaded) with that toned down where details are visible. Still not 100% sure what to do... w.carter-Talk 18:49, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Dilly-dallying done. I made a very bold move, given the discussion going on at Commons talk:Featured picture candidates about altering a pic during nomination. Hope this is still ok, or should I 'ping' everybody? The little troublesome white part is now toned down just enough so that details begin to show, at least at full size. Thank you Jebulon for kicking my butt sufficiently to make this alteration. :) w.carter-Talk 19:46, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - That's a very subtle difference to my eyes. It couldn't hurt to ping, of course, but I wonder whether it would make the difference between a supporting and an opposing vote for anyone. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:08, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I feel a bit stupid: I did not read the discussion with INC before writing my own comment...But well, I see that we were at least three (including you), with the same idea, so we are not wrong ! About the change during the nomination: I agree with Ikan Kekek. A) the change is minor, B) it results of a debate, C) it is an obvious improvement, D) and I thik it would/should not change any vote. All is correct for me. Let's feel a real and free minded enthousiasm for this picture. I think the wrapping adds in composition, by the way !--Jebulon (talk) 21:22, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Je vous embrasse, monsieur! I also think the wrapping adds to it, sort of like "speed-blur" on an otherwise rather large and just green area as the windows swoosh through space. w.carter-Talk 21:30, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ali Zifan 21:24, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely textures and shades. Glad to see this very different image here ... I had intended to be the one to promote it to QI but was prevented from doing so by an edit conflict. At that time I suspected we'd see more of it ... obviously I was right. Daniel Case (talk) 21:56, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good idea --Llez (talk) 11:22, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportMeiræ 14:39, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Mö1997 (Questions ?!?!) German-Language-Flag.svgRegiowikiat-logo-vorschlag3.png 20:25, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - The question in this case is why you oppose. A reason is generally given. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:18, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I do not see here anything so exceptional for PF nomination. --Karelj (talk) 09:49, 26 July 2016 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 11 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 21:03, 26 July 2016 (UTC)


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)Edit

Fri 22 Jul → Wed 27 Jul
Sat 23 Jul → Thu 28 Jul
Sun 24 Jul → Fri 29 Jul
Mon 25 Jul → Sat 30 Jul
Tue 26 Jul → Sun 31 Jul
Wed 27 Jul → Mon 01 Aug

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

Mon 18 Jul → Wed 27 Jul
Tue 19 Jul → Thu 28 Jul
Wed 20 Jul → Fri 29 Jul
Thu 21 Jul → Sat 30 Jul
Fri 22 Jul → Sun 31 Jul
Sat 23 Jul → Mon 01 Aug
Sun 24 Jul → Tue 02 Aug
Mon 25 Jul → Wed 03 Aug
Tue 26 Jul → Thu 04 Aug
Wed 27 Jul → Fri 05 Aug

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 (except to add categories on the file page, because need a non-bot user to do it). 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 {{Featured picture}} or {{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.
    • Add on the file page its respective categories for Featured pictures of... like Category:Featured pictures of objects, Category:Featured pictures of landscapes, of people, of Germany, of Paris, etc. This is the only part of the process that needs a user who is not a bot to complete it.
  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/July 2016), 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/July 2016.
  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.
Read in another language