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.
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 one useful guideline. Horizons should almost never be placed in the middle, where they "cut" the image in half. Often, a horizon creating a top or bottom third of the space works better. The main idea is to use space to create a dynamic image.
    • Foreground and background – foreground and background objects may be distracting. You should check that something in front of the subject doesn't hide important elements and that something in background doesn't spoil the composition (for example that the streetlight doesn't "stand" on someone's head).
  • Movement control refers to the manner in which motion is represented in the image. Motion can be frozen or blurred. Neither one is better than the other. It is the intention of representation. Movement is relative within the objects of the image. For example, photographing a race car that appears frozen in relation to the background does not give us a sense of speed or motion, so technique dictates to represent the car in a frozen manner but with a blurred background, thus creating the sense of motion, this is called "panning". On the other hand, representing a basketball player in a high jump frozen in relation to everything else, due to the "unnatural" nature of the pose would be a good photograph.
  • Depth of field (DOF) refers to the area in focus in front of and beyond main subject. Depth of field is chosen according to the specific needs of every picture. Large or small DOF can either way add or subtract to the quality of the image. Low depth of field can be used to bring attention to the main subject, separating it from the general environment. High depth of field can be used to emphasize space. Short focal length lenses (wide angles) yield large DOF, and vice versa, long focal lenses (telephotos) have shallow DOF. Small apertures yield large DOF and conversely, large apertures yield shallow DOF.

On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, 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}} ~~~~. Also, remember that in case of withdraw only a alternative nomination you need comment explicitly which one you are withdrawing.
  7. Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project.
  8. Rules of the 5th day based on vote counts on day number 5 (day of nomination + 5)
    1. Pictures are speedy declined if they have no support (apart from the nominator).
    2. Pictures are speedy promoted if they have 10 support votes or more and no oppose votes. (Note that if it takes more than five days to reach this threshold, the picture can be promoted as soon as it is reached.)
    3. Once either speedy criterion is reached, the voting period is considered closed, and no more votes may be added.
  9. Pictures tagged {{FPX}} may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied, provided there are no support votes other than that of the nominator.
  10. Pictures tagged {{FPD}} (FP-Denied) may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied.
  11. Only two active nominations by the same user (that is, nominations under review and not yet closed) are allowed. The main purpose of this measure is to contribute to a better average quality of nominations, by driving nominators/creators to choose carefully the pictures presented to the forum.

Featuring and delisting rulesEdit

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

  1. Appropriate license (of course)
  2. At least seven Symbol support vote.svg Support votes 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:The light blue fishing hut.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 9 May 2017 at 12:01:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#Denmark
  •   Info A light blue fishing hut in a small cluster of similar buildings near the pier on the great sandy beach in Nørre Vorupør, Denmark. All by me, -- cart-Talk 12:01, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- cart-Talk 12:01, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

York Minster Nave, Nth Yorkshire, UK - DiliffEdit

Voting period ends on 9 May 2017 at 11:05:01 (UTC)

  •   Info created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Colin -- Colin (talk) 11:05, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Colin (talk) 11:05, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 12:05, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Code (talk) 13:12, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Jee 13:21, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support for the set too ! --PierreSelim (talk) 14:37, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - Sure. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:09, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:53, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Melanitis leda-Kadavoor-2017-04-26-001.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 9 May 2017 at 09:16:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera
  •   Info Melanitis leda, Common evening brown, is a species of butterfly found flying at dusk. This is wet season form. All by Jkadavoor -- Jee 09:16, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- As the common name suggests this butterfly is active only in evening or in a cloudy environment. During the daytime they rest in the undergrowth and so difficult to get a clear view. This is the first time I get a good photo though chasing them since 2010. And surprisingly this is wet season form though the wet season is just starting. So probably this is from the first batch of this year. Jee 09:16, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:42, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support nice shot. Charles (talk) 09:58, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 10:42, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Colin (talk) 11:09, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --cart-Talk 12:53, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Turbo intercostalis 01.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 9 May 2017 at 07:15:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Свети Стефан Дечански (Манастир Јасеновац).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 9 May 2017 at 05:36:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:DTU Danchip by moonlight.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2017 at 21:00:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Riigikogu hoone, Kaupo Kalda foto, 2016.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2017 at 19:37:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Pied-winged swallow (Hirundo leucosoma).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2017 at 18:45:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:York Minster Nave 1, Nth Yorkshire, UK - Diliff.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2017 at 18:20:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

@Colin: With both agree --Kasir (talk) 09:24, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

  I withdraw my nomination @Kasir, Daphne Lantier, Johann Jaritz, Daniel Case, Ikan Kekek:@Moheen Reeyad, PierreSelim, Martin Falbisoner, XRay: Seems to be consent, along with nominator Kasir, to change this to a set. See Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/York Minster Nave, Nth Yorkshire, UK - Diliff -- Colin (talk) 11:07, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Fünf Höfe - Sphere, Munich, April 2017 -02.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2017 at 13:51:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • It's in color - I didn't even reduce saturation. Found that astonishing myself. The day was overcast and the light rather dull... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:47, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --cart-Talk 09:01, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Looks great in full size! Jee 13:49, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Cherry blossom buds 1.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2017 at 12:37:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:(Pano Spherique) Eglise Sainte-Marie de Quarante France.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2017 at 09:08:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Please add a link to the 360 panorama viewer in the nom since all users don't know how to access it. --cart-Talk 10:08, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
The link is here. Anyway, FYI it can also be found on the file description page. Poké95 12:04, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Thanks! :) (Well I know that but it is polite to put it on the nom page too make it easier for voters who may not be so familiar with the tech-things on the site.) --cart-Talk 12:22, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Excellent --The Photographer 10:51, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support The lack of overall bright light adds something new to this and makes it mysteious. Nice work! --cart-Talk 12:26, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:41, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Weak support Very good but I think less than 20MPix is somewhat small for a full spherical panorama. It would be great if the author could upload a larger version and give some information about the equipment and settings used. --Code (talk) 14:17, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice to see how this works in a starkly lit interior. Daniel Case (talk) 15:55, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daphne Lantier 19:49, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too dark, too small panorama file.--Claus 08:59, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Saint-Jean-de-Buèges cf02.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2017 at 07:19:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  •   Info created - uploaded - nominated by me -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:19, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:19, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I can see what attracted you to this (the similar forms of the houses), but there's too much going on compositionally for that aspect to distinguish itself so readily, and the fact that it's mostly in the shade doesn't help. Daniel Case (talk) 15:54, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Mezquita de Nasirolmolk, Shiraz, Irán, 2016-09-24, DD 66-68 HDR.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 7 May 2017 at 18:41:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Van-willem-vincent-gogh-die-kartoffelesser-03850.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 7 May 2017 at 17:26:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Münster, LVM-Versicherung -- 2017 -- 6848.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 7 May 2017 at 04:13:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Germany
  •   Info all by XRay -- XRay talk 04:13, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- XRay talk 04:13, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - Great and almost surreal-looking. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:00, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Another great photo of this building showing a new aspect of it, it looks almost totally transparent and I'm not just talking about the glas. --cart-Talk 08:08, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:41, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Another great picture for the cover of the annual report ... Daniel Case (talk) 14:16, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Interesting! Jee 13:32, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Empress Maria Theresia monument in Vienna 02.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 May 2017 at 21:59:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Sculptures
  •   Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 21:59, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Pudelek (talk) 21:59, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support A potentially static image redeemed by the cool colors and subdued light. Daniel Case (talk) 02:57, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Per Daniel. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:34, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment I'd expect such a picture to be sharper. And at least it needs a geocode and a description in a second language. --Code (talk) 04:21, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
    I added a location --Pudelek (talk) 05:08, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
    I added a German description --Uoaei1 (talk) 10:32, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --cart-Talk 08:11, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support per Daniel --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:40, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay talk 08:30, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Jee 13:30, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

File:20120913 Bayezid II Kulliye Edirne Turkey.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 May 2017 at 13:40:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  •   Info created by Ggia - uploaded by Ggia - nominated by Ggia -- Ggia (talk) 13:40, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Ggia (talk) 13:40, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support I like both lighting and mood --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:05, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daphne Lantier 18:42, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Weak oppose I agree about the lighting and the mood; however it just feels unbalanced enough to me to keep it from FP. Deservedly a QI, though. Daniel Case (talk) 19:00, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry,per above --LivioAndronico (talk) 20:59, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose perspective --Pudelek (talk) 21:54, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak   Support - A little soft in places, but a pretty composition that reminds me of good 19th-century prints, with nice, soft lighting. However, I would like to hear from the opposers about what's unbalanced about the composition and what problem there is with the perspective. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:36, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Statsbiblioteket læsesalen-2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 May 2017 at 12:14:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Good job, you could try too neat image like a noise reduction tool --The Photographer 11:43, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - I really like this composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:26, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:04, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daphne Lantier 18:43, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Colors, lighting and symmetry are good enough that I will forgive the posterization evident in the background. Daniel Case (talk) 18:58, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Pudelek (talk) 22:00, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Thennicke (talk) 03:07, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:34, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Code (talk) 04:22, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support I can't resist a good library. --cart-Talk 08:12, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support per ^^ Jee 08:49, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Good perespective. ~ Moheen (keep talking) 17:09, 28 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Minor leaning out at the left. Good composition. --XRay talk 08:31, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

File:2017 London Marathon - Men's Wheelchair.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 May 2017 at 11:15:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports
  •   Info Hiroki Nishida leading the men's wheelchair race after approximately 25 and a quarter miles at the 2017 London Marathon. All by KTC -- KTC (talk) 11:15, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- KTC (talk) 11:15, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose A lot going on there ... the background competes closely with the subject for the viewer's attention—amd frankly the lead racer's expression just isn't dramatic and emotional enough to overcome that. There's also too much unsharpness around the image for a crop to work. Daniel Case (talk) 17:51, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose This is good enough for QI but not for FP IMO. As Daniel said, there is too much unsharpness, the light is on the dull side and the shadows too deep with little detail, sorry. --cart-Talk 08:15, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Salzburg Altstadt Panorama 20170409 02.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 May 2017 at 09:49:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Salar de Uyuni, Bolivia, 2016-02-04, DD 16-18 HDR.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2017 at 21:00:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Kyrgyz women and child offering bread and salt.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2017 at 20:21:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:MalaDevi Temple Gyaraspur N-MP-283 (51).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2017 at 08:19:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

*  Oppose Incomplete description, the picture shows a specific part of a temple. Ezarateesteban 13:06, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

@Ezarate: That can be dealt with by renaming the file. It's not a reason to oppose the image. Daniel Case (talk) 16:33, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 OK when the image were renamed and description improved I´ll support it Ezarateesteban 17:23, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
@Ezarate:   Done renamed - Prakrut language verses in pillar at MalaDevi Temple.jpg thanks -- Suyash Dwivedi (talk) 07:49, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Loxura atymnus-Kadavoor-2017-04-23-001.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2017 at 05:47:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Juan Griego Sunset.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2017 at 00:17:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Dechantlacke - Lobau Wien-2475.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2017 at 22:34:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

That's what I liked about it. Thanks! Daniel Case (talk) 14:44, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Wat Mae Chon ruins 2 -Sukhothai.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2017 at 20:55:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:FN2A3653.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2017 at 20:30:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora
  •   Info created by Nixette - uploaded by Nixette - nominated by JukoFF -- JukoFF (talk) 20:30, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- JukoFF (talk) 20:30, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment Funny how these "morning-stretching-poses" always seems to give us humans a good look at the animal's privat parts. (former cat servant speaking here) Nevertheless, I like the nonchalance in the photo but it could use a little bit better contrast and there is color noise all over the fur that should be fixed. --cart-Talk 21:38, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Neutral per cart and, indeed, the colors in the image   Daniel Case (talk) 04:50, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I love seeing a picture from Novaya Zemlya, an Arctic island I used to look at in my atlases when I was young and have always been kind of fascinated with. I like the fox, but the very blurry parts of the foreground are distracting. It's certainly a useful photo, though, and I will insert a thumbnail of it into the Wikivoyage article that covers Novaya Zemlya right away. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:14, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Great pose and the noise doesn't bother me given that it's not too severe -- Thennicke (talk) 12:29, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment I don't like the cryptic file name. PumpkinSky talk 11:20, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Длиннохвостая неясыть.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2017 at 20:21:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
  •   Info created by Levashkin - uploaded by Levashkin - nominated by JukoFF -- JukoFF (talk) 20:21, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- JukoFF (talk) 20:21, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Very harsh flash, the owl has a somewhat awkward posture, and fully half of the image is just blackness. Sorry. –Juliancolton | Talk 02:25, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Julian. Daniel Case (talk) 03:59, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Animals do not pose, and for taking a picture of a night bird, there is no option but flashing. --Yann (talk) 07:38, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support I agree with Yann. Sure, we could get some well lit photos of this species during daytime in a zoo, but there is definitely a plus to get a good photo of one in its natural habitat and a flash is the only way. The blackness is not a problem either, it's what you usually get at night in a nature reserve and if someone put a camera flash on me while I was busy hunting down my dinner, I would look startled and awkward too. --cart-Talk 09:18, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Jee 11:07, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Peer Juliancolton and if this period is prolonged, logically, the bird is blinded for an extended moment and is vulnerable to danger as it cannot see well enough to respond to its environment. Many strigids and other nocturnal birds are highly dependent on sight, so a temporary lost of sight might be costly, or even life-threatening (due to depredation). Likewise, a night-bird blinded by the flashes, whether by birder’s torches or photographers flashes, are essentially “wasting” time for foraging and other natural behavior. This might have some ecological implication that we don’t know exist, that directly affects the birds negatively, perhaps in lowered prey capture success, leading to nest failure?, or got killed by arboreal predators.. etc. Having said that, there is still a small chance that the bird may react unexpectedly and hurt itself. IMHO “The subject is more important than the photo” more info --The Photographer 19:46, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support There is no evidence that one or two (close) flashes cause any damage to nocturnal animals' eyesight. This is a nice photo. I would crop at right and ideally leave more room at the top. Charles (talk)
    • Oh God! In this photo having the status is depicted the killer of people! [1]. :) And she scored 10 positive votes. JukoFF (talk) 21:57, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Минарет Ајдар кади џамија Битољ (Minaret of Hajdar Kadi Mosque, Bitola).jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2017 at 10:34:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.


Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 13:26, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:Iron Gate (Serbia-Romania) in 2016 - 02.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2017 at 09:24:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  •   Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 09:24, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Pudelek (talk) 09:24, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support The orange cones are disturbing. Can you remove them? Nice. -- -donald- (talk) 09:51, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
    done --Pudelek (talk) 10:46, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support as I did the other nominee from this set because it further demonstrates the Iron Gate's uncanny similarity to the Hudson Highlands near where I live. Daniel Case (talk) 20:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment - The thing that disturbs me is the unsharp reeds in the near right corner. I'd suggest you crop them out, which is easy since there are so few of them. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:26, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
    Cropped :) --Pudelek (talk) 07:19, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Much better, thank you. I like this picture and will reflect on whether I consider it an FP, as I haven't decided yet. I think the fact that you have the road with the stone cubes and the hewn rock in shadow as part of the foreground helps the composition considerably, as it isn't all in hazy light. That might make the difference. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:32, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support per above remarks. Looking down and across at the widening water and hillsides does it for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:42, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Statue of Louis XIV in place d'armes of Versailles.jpg, not featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2017 at 09:16:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Oppose A QI but no wow. -- Colin (talk) 19:40, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Colin ... looks like it was taken with a DP/S, actually, even if it wasn't, and compositionally there is nothing exceptional about it. Daniel Case (talk) 20:05, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. Certainly useful but not exceptional, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:27, 26 April 2017 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 13:25, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Earth and the Moon 2016-07-05 0428Z.png, not featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2017 at 06:13:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Satellite images
  •   Info Eath and the Moon, image captured by NASA’s DSCOVR satellite - uploaded by Meow - nominated by Price Zero -- Price Zero (talk) 06:13, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Price Zero (talk) 06:13, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Question - What's the yellowish ring around the moon? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:21, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
    • This is because of how DSCOVR EPIC is making photos. It's taking many images on different wavelength and they are stitched together later for one multi-color image. Apparently it's good enough for Earth, but Moon is "too fast" so layers are misaligned. You can see here that on the opposite side there is blue-ish ring. Yarl 💭  20:50, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
      • Thanks for the explanation. This inaccurate depiction bugs me, though, so I don't think I can support a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:29, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Neutral pending resolution of Ikan's question. Daniel Case (talk) 15:37, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose While it is stunning to see a photo of both these stellar bodies, I'm a bit disappointed when it comes to such a quality error. When a Commons photographer can get a really nice image by layering photos of the moving moon, using a normal camera and a PC, you'd think that NASA with all its technology and knowledge would know how to adjust layers. --cart-Talk 09:57, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - I agree. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:43, 27 April 2017 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Jee 13:24, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Tere schoonheid van de Camellia × williamsii 'Jury's Yellow' bloem 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2017 at 05:08:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants #Family Theaceae .
  •   Info Delicate beauty of the Camellia × williamsii 'Jury's Yellow' flower. All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:08, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:08, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:43, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 09:18, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Harsh light is distracting, and the composition isn't helping it out, either. Daniel Case (talk) 15:36, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
    • Question: Does this photo have less hard light and a better cutout?   --Famberhorst (talk) 15:54, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Harsh contrast and posible flash light (because white light). Background distracting, underexposed, composition... --The Photographer 19:37, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
    • Note: I never use the flash.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:49, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Ausblick von Burg Liebenstein.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2017 at 17:00:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • And I like the bit of structure, though cropping it out wouldn't be likely to change my vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:29, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:46, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 09:19, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:25, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Structure at right should be cropped out. Daphne Lantier 19:28, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Not a fan of the lighting, where most of the houses' visible sides are in shadow. -- King of ♠ 01:20, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per King. Not much wow to me. -- Thennicke (talk) 01:29, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Панорама на Лазарополе.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2017 at 13:04:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Nokia Networks Munich Office, April 2017.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2017 at 08:40:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Support Interestellar movie station --The Photographer 12:48, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Good view. --Mile (talk) 14:40, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - Very good, though I think I'd prefer it without the plane and contrail. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:43, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support I agree with Ikan about the plane and contrail. This would be just about perfect without that. Daphne Lantier 18:32, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment a matter of taste maybe. Imo the plane adds another interesting element... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:15, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose On 2nd thought, I can't support with the disharmonious contrail. Daphne Lantier 21:59, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Another FP in the category of "images that would make me think the band that would use this on their album cover made music I might find interesting and thus buy the album without knowing what it sounds like, especially if the back cover showed a couple of guys with European names standing behind their synthesizers" or "images that would make me pick the book up and thumb through it."

    Yes, I like the idea of it without the contrail, and we could certainly make a cloned-out version, but that's not enough to offset all the other things about this one. Daniel Case (talk) 01:53, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

  •   Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:08, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Very mild   Oppose, only because I favor the contrailless version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:26, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support The contrail is a plus. --Yann (talk) 06:14, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 09:19, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Alternative sans contrailEdit

 

  •   Info Ok guys, pinging cart, The Photographer, Mile, Ikan Kekek, Daphne Lantier, Daniel Case, an alternative without plane and contrail, taken half a minute later. Cloning by nature if you will.
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:02, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - I do prefer this one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:07, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support I prefer this one. The contrail is a bit distracting in the other one, even though it is sharply captured with the plane -- the eye is drawn to the plane, rather than the building or the geometric forms. Also with this one the cloud pattern is better, looking almost like a globe with cloudy continents drifting on it. -- Colin (talk) 07:39, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Either one deserves to be featured, but I still like the plane. --cart-Talk 08:07, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Strong support per my !vote above. Daniel Case (talk) 13:32, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Perfect! Daphne Lantier 18:29, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:49, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 09:19, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Thennicke (talk) 12:32, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Code (talk) 05:52, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 11:27, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Jee 13:00, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:09, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Lifeguard tower - Morro Jable.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 May 2017 at 14:35:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 14:35, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Llez (talk) 14:35, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment It's nice and vibrant and I'm leaning toward support, but the image is a bit soft as if too much noise reduction has been applied. –Juliancolton | Talk 23:43, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
    •   Done New version from raw-file uploaded --Llez (talk) 04:53, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support simple but interesting --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:31, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 13:06, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Good colors. --cart-Talk 19:53, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose A competent photo of a standard lifeguard tower. Nothing beyond a quality image for me. Daphne Lantier 22:10, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Daphne. Good, but not interesting enough for FP, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:50, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - I'm a sucker for blue and orange. –Juliancolton | Talk 01:21, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Milseburg (talk) 11:54, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Normal composition --The Photographer 15:58, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Very good light and great colours. --Code (talk) 04:11, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support I agree with Code. -- Thennicke (talk) 06:21, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 09:19, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support We need a few FPs like this to remind this is Commons; not Wikipedia. Jee 13:08, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Mile (talk) 11:32, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Coughton Court east view.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 May 2017 at 07:53:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Done, I've sharpened the north and south wings a bit Ikan Kekek. DeFacto (talk). 19:33, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Qualified support Still wish it could be sharper, but it's still a nice near-symmetry. Daniel Case (talk) 03:33, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support per Daniel --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:32, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose for now because I'm having trouble considering this a really outstanding photo of this beautiful motif, as I'm not satisfied with the sharpness. Maybe I'm being shallow in some way, but I'm not feeling that wowed. If there were more light on the courtyard, etc., that might make me feel differently (of course I realize that rain and overcast skies are much more typical of English weather). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:58, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 09:19, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

File:London Bees v Millwall Lionesses, 15 April 2017 (062).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2017 at 20:03:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports
  •   Info London Bees's Jo Wilson during warm-ups before FA WSL 2 match against Millwall Lionesses match on 15 April 2017. All by KTC -- KTC (talk) 20:03, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- KTC (talk) 20:03, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment I really like this and the action of the photo, it brings to mind Zlatan's bicycle kick but I think it would be better to crop the pic to concentrate on Wilson since the players on the left side are a bit distracting and it is also impossible to make a cut there without cutting a person. (See crop suggestion) Let's hear what the rest of the folks here has to say. --cart-Talk 20:40, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support this version, but would be interested to see what a cropped version would look like. Seb26 (talk) 23:13, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Alternative (cropped)Edit

 

  •   Info Cropped version as suggested by W.carter. @W.carter, Seb26: -- KTC (talk) 23:30, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:52, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support. Prefer this cropped version; nice action shot. —Bruce1eetalk 07:04, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Interesting. And rare. --Mile (talk) 07:19, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Better, thanks! --cart-Talk 11:05, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Obviously   Support this version as well. -- KTC (talk) 14:57, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Jakubhal 05:52, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daphne Lantier 06:37, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:29, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice catch! --PierreSelim (talk) 19:36, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Bad background --Claus 09:01, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Timetable (day 5 after nomination)Edit

Tue 25 Apr → Sun 30 Apr
Wed 26 Apr → Mon 01 May
Thu 27 Apr → Tue 02 May
Fri 28 Apr → Wed 03 May
Sat 29 Apr → Thu 04 May
Sun 30 Apr → Fri 05 May

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

Fri 21 Apr → Sun 30 Apr
Sat 22 Apr → Mon 01 May
Sun 23 Apr → Tue 02 May
Mon 24 Apr → Wed 03 May
Tue 25 Apr → Thu 04 May
Wed 26 Apr → Fri 05 May
Thu 27 Apr → Sat 06 May
Fri 28 Apr → Sun 07 May
Sat 29 Apr → Mon 08 May
Sun 30 Apr → Tue 09 May

Closing a featured picture promotion requestEdit

The botEdit

Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below (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 {{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/April 2017), 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/April 2017.
  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.