Open main menu

Wikimedia Commons β

Commons:Featured picture candidates

Skip to current candidates Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates


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

Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016 and current month.

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

Formal thingsEdit


Guidelines for nominatorsEdit

Please read the complete guidelines before nominating.

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

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


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}} -- ~~~~.


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:Santorin (GR), Exomytis, Vlychada Beach -- 2017 -- 2999 (bw).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2017 at 22:42:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.


Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2017 at 19:47:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Palace of St. Michael and St. George, Corfu - September 2017.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2017 at 14:20:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Maman de Louise Bourgeois - Bilbao.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2017 at 10:25:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Yes, that's one of the points. Besides the composition, the interesting lighting and the for Bilbao very representive wet ground, I like the absence of people which isn't easy to get these days. --Basotxerri (talk) 17:09, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support There may be some imperfections, but with a creature right out of War of the Worlds and lighting from Blade Runner the wow is huge! I would also have nominated it if I had found it first. --cart-Talk 17:25, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Big wow! --MZaplotnik(talk) 21:31, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Neutral It's a nice capture, but image quality is suffering in the background (not a huge problem though) and the processing is not particularly impressive - dark and low in contrast (reducing the "wow"). Do you have a RAW file for this image? I'd love to have a play with it if you do -- Thennicke (talk) 00:44, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:09, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Iglesia de Ntra. Sra. de la Junquera, Luesma, Zaragoza, España, 2017-01-04, DD 60.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2017 at 09:00:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Bergtocht van Sapün (1600 meter) via Medergen (2000 meter) naar brug over Sapüner bach (1400 meter) 001.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2017 at 04:45:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena
  •   Info Mountain trip from Sapün (1600 meters) via Medergen (2000 meters) to bridge over Sapüner bach (1400 meters). Panorama from Seebjibodem 2072 (meter). Special atmosphere at 2072 meters altitude.

All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:45, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

  •   Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:45, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Basotxerri (talk) 07:37, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 17:30, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Pudelek (talk) 18:00, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 21:30, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- King of ♠ 23:21, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Neutral A bit dark, and the composition seems very much weighted towards the right hand side, which bothers me. Nice colours and scenery though -- Thennicke (talk) 00:48, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:10, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

File:2017.01.21.-09-Paradiski-La Plagne--Vanoise Express-Blick Richtung Les Arcs.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2017 at 19:00:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  •   Info All by me. -- Hockei (talk) 19:00, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Hockei (talk) 19:00, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - Beautiful, and I love the mood this puts me in. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:51, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Just a QI HalfGig talk 01:06, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Might be a little busy, but captures that feeling of anticipating a great day on the slopes. Daniel Case (talk) 02:45, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too busy for me -- Thennicke (talk) 03:22, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Gobierno Estatal de Baviera, Múnich, Alemania, 2017-07-07, DD 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2017 at 17:11:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  •   Info Bayerische Staatskanzlei (Bavarian State Chancellery), Munich, Germany. The building, erected from 1989 to 1993 after a work of architect Ludwig Mellinger, houses the personal offices of the chancellery staff. The equestrian statue in front of the building honors Duke Otto I Wittelsbach. All by me, Poco2 17:11, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Poco2 17:11, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ermell (talk) 21:31, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support--Peulle (talk) 21:40, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - Excellent, restful, and the streaming clouds really help draw the viewer's attention to and from the building. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:53, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Thennicke (talk) 01:25, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support great, I really do envy you for your 11mm lense --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:12, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 15:54, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 17:31, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose just boring --Bahnmoeller (talk) 20:58, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak   Support. A bit less sharp than I'd prefer especially on the sides, but beautiful lighting and clouds. -- King of ♠ 23:20, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support per King. Daniel Case (talk) 02:43, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:10, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Image:Flamenco andino 03.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2017 at 14:49:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Oppose for now -- Thennicke (talk) 00:02, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Dunnottar Castle dt 2017 36.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2017 at 11:18:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Waldburg Kirche Innenraum 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2017 at 09:18:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.


Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2017 at 22:36:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info created by Manuel García Ferré - uploaded/nominated by me --Ezarateesteban 22:38, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Ezarateesteban 22:36, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - To be outstanding and worthy of a feature, it would have to be digitally restored. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:45, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I agree that in this case the image quality is not high enough for FP. I whole-heartedly support the idea of comic covers as FPs, though, so long as the copyright issues are handled.--Peulle (talk) 10:25, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment IMHO, wrong lincence. This isn't a photo, but a painting. --C messier (talk) 13:37, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  Question What do you mean?--Peulle (talk) 15:44, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
@Peulle: It has a public domain licence, {{PD-AR-Photo}}, which mentions with bold, Use this template exclusively for photos and NOT for drawings or other pieces of art.. And this is a drawing, not a photo. --C messier (talk) 07:11, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
@C messier:Yes, I see now, thanks for clearing that up. I suppose the correct one to use should have been {{PD-old}}?--Peulle (talk) 10:56, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
Unfortunately no, Peulle, the author en:Manuel García Ferré died in 2013. --C messier (talk) 11:22, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I suspected that, hence my comment above next to my vote - I was just wondering what template should have been used if the copyright had expired.--Peulle (talk) 23:51, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Unsharp like the other one. Daniel Case (talk) 06:29, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

File:NASA's Shuttle Carrier Aircraft 905 (front) and 911 (rear).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2017 at 11:36:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Dead Horse Gap Panorama facing north-east, NSW.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2017 at 11:29:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  •   Info Dead Horse Gap, Kosciuszko National Park
  •   Info all by me -- Thennicke (talk) 11:29, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Thennicke (talk) 11:29, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Basotxerri (talk) 15:40, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:24, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:25, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - Interesting terrain, flora and colors, nice clouds. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:58, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ermell (talk) 10:22, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support per Ikan. With that time of year approaching in the Northern Hemisphere, I can practically feel the chill in the air looking at this image. I also love the name ... Dead Horse Gap. Sounds like a place you'd find here in the U.S. in the southern Appalachians (and the town in the Alaskan Arctic). Daniel Case (talk) 15:36, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:52, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --fedaro (talk) 19:45, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 15:49, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Drum of a washing machine (Bosch Maxx WFO 2440).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2017 at 07:50:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info Drum of a front-loaded washing machine (Bosch Maxx WFO 2440; 5 kg; 1200 RPM). All by me. -- Mile (talk) 07:50, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support I dont know why they didnt accept it on "Women's world" !? Its still fine shot. -- Mile (talk) 07:50, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Do only women wash where you live? --cart-Talk 09:03, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support great idea - --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 07:57, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Cool. --A.Savin 10:06, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment CA removal needed.--Peulle (talk) 11:33, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment Show me Peulle, where is it. cart you forget to vote. --Mile (talk) 11:59, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Comments can be made without voting. You have nothing to gain by telling people to do so, it's just rude. I don't have the time to examine photos closely right now. --cart-Talk 12:05, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose For such a static subject I think the composition needs to be better. The rib at the bottom isn't centered, and the bottom corners have intrusive elements. Perfect lighting and processing though -- Thennicke (talk) 12:15, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Info Thennicke if you crop corners you will lose lot of picture. If think this is better than croped. Static - more or less all is static. --Mile (talk) 12:26, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  • That's true, but I still don't like the rib at the bottom. Do you still have access to this washing machine? If you could do it again with everything symmetrical I'd be supporting -- Thennicke (talk) 12:45, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Doing on that Thennicke, centralizing...but some corners will stay, cant go out, unless drum would be so big, to put camera more in. --Mile (talk) 13:18, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Interesting idea.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:53, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Info Now is more in center Thennicke. And some CA was there Peulle, i removed. --Mile (talk) 14:25, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Thennicke (talk) 09:35, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  Support--Peulle (talk) 16:40, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support What do you do if the weather is horrible but you like to shoot something? You go for the washing machine! --Basotxerri (talk) 15:32, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Exactly, cart, that's the image I was thinking of. And how desperate someone must be who puts some torch lights in a washing machine for shooting it!   --Basotxerri (talk) 18:57, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  • You forgot: "Having to stand in the bathtub and placing the tripod in the washbasin, hoping I wouldn't slip and drop the camera in the toilet..."   I had a very small bathroom back then. (And I was very bored.) --cart-Talk 19:08, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Centro histórico de Skagway, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-18, DD 41.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2017 at 07:10:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  •   Info created & uploaded by Diego Delso - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:10, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - Something different. I think it's interesting enough to feature. I'll be interested to see what you think. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:10, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --A.Savin 10:10, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support--Peulle (talk) 11:35, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Neutral I thought of this as an FPC when I saw it on QIC, however the crop isn't symmetrical what I would prefer for this kind of image. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:39, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
    Ok, fair enough, Basotxerri,   fixed Poco2 16:17, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support and once more my gratitude to Ikan Poco2 16:17, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  • De nada. You did all the work. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:47, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support OK, you deserve my vote  . Thank you! --Basotxerri (talk) 16:25, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment Nice but WB is too yellow. -- King of ♠ 00:23, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support HalfGig talk 01:09, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Abstain because I am currently a judge for WLM-US and this may yet come up as a candidate. Daniel Case (talk) 03:04, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:23, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --cart-Talk 08:59, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Yes. -- Thennicke (talk) 09:40, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ermell (talk) 10:26, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  • The sky seems a little too dark, but the house is nice.-- 晴空·和岩 讨论页·反互煮 15:08, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:54, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --fedaro (talk) 19:46, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support a bit distorted though. --Laitche (talk) 23:27, 21 October 2017 (UTC)


Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2017 at 22:20:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info created by Editorial Atl{antida - uploaded/nominated by me Ezarateesteban 22:20, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Ezarateesteban 22:20, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Congrats to your fourtieth birthday, Ezarate. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:17, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose imo the resolution is not really sufficient for a nom of that kind. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:37, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - I agree, this is not good enough even as a historical picture for FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:11, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  • I like the idea of posters and historical images, but   Oppose per the others.--Peulle (talk) 11:35, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Way too unsharp per others. Daniel Case (talk) 03:02, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Παναγία Πορταρέα 3816.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2017 at 21:07:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  •   Info All by C messier -- C messier (talk) 21:07, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  • The small square where the church of Panagia Portarea is located. Apart from the church, it also features the funerary monument of Pantazis Anast. Zoulia. The church dates from the 16th century and is built by stone, including the roof top, a characteristic of the traditional architecture of Pelion, Greece.   Support -- C messier (talk) 21:07, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Special mood, captured very well. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:14, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice color pass, from white to yellow. Compo also well. --Mile (talk) 06:50, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support I thought this was a painting when I saw it at thumbnail size. -- Thennicke (talk) 12:17, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Basotxerri (talk) 15:42, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support A little busy but I like the evening mood. Daniel Case (talk) 16:03, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 18:08, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:55, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --fedaro (talk) 19:46, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 15:49, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support ---Pudelek (talk) 18:01, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Riisa raba varahommikul.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2017 at 20:47:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Estonia
  •   Info all by Kruusamägi (talk) 20:47, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 20:47, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Very special. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:19, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - Beautiful, but I would recommend cropping out the one branch on the right side. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:37, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Wider panorama would be even better. --Mile (talk) 06:51, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment Yes, please remove the cut-off branch. As Johann says: very special! --Basotxerri (talk) 15:44, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:57, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Harlock81 (talk) 17:11, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:56, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 01:00, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 15:50, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The processing is too dark and dingey for my tastes, and the large area of ground in the front ruins the composition - no wow for me -- Thennicke (talk) 00:39, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Neymar Jr official presentation for Paris Saint-GermainEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2017 at 14:53:06 (UTC)

  •   Info The most expensive footballer Neymar Jr official presentation for Paris Saint-Germain, 4 August 2017.
  •   Info created by by Antoine Dellenbach (Flickr) - nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 14:53, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 14:53, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too much noise (why is the ISO so high?) and the left image is of too low resolution for me to support the set.--Peulle (talk) 18:53, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose because I really don't see any of them as exceptional. Two of them are tilted and the other is a pretty standard grip-and-grin image. Daniel Case (talk) 00:04, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I'm afraid I have to agree with the other opposers --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:34, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Would support just 3rd. --Mile (talk) 06:51, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Me too. It's a good shot. -- Thennicke (talk) 09:41, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Nanxiong Sanying Ta 2014.01.12 08-26-52.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2017 at 13:17:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  •   Info Sanying Pagoda, a pagoda in Guangdong, China, built in 1009, more than 1000 years ago. All by Zhangzhugang -- Zhangzhugang (talk) 13:17, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Zhangzhugang (talk) 13:17, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose This is not a bad idea and the image could work but as it is, it seems too pale and would require better lighting and sharpness to convince me. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:56, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basotxerri, especially the comment on sharpness. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:04, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basotxerri. Daniel Case (talk) 00:01, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Basotxerri. --Mile (talk) 06:52, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Common black-hawk (Buteogallus anthracinus gundlachii).JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2017 at 09:28:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • I think heat haze followed by poor post-processing to sort it did for the lions! Charles (talk) 15:37, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Cirsium vulgare. Uitgebloeide Speerdistel Cirsium vulgare in verval.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2017 at 07:18:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Aspen groves in Öhed.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2017 at 18:44:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Benasque - Aigualluts - Árbol muerto 01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2017 at 18:18:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Spain
  •   Info All by me. -- Basotxerri (talk) 18:18, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Basotxerri (talk) 18:18, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak   Support. Reminds you of Ansel Adams. Note that BW does hide unsharpness, and the foreground grass would look like a blob of fuzzy green carpet if it were a color image. -- King of ♠ 01:00, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Outstanding. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:35, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Reminds me to much of Yosemite to say no. -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 06:06, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Mile (talk) 07:25, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

*  Oppose   weak support per KoH basically. Any chance to redevelop your raw? --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:28, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

  • Yes, I can, but sorry, I don't understand exactly what you want me to do. The front part is unsharp because I shot this using a 120 mm eq. telephoto lens. If you tell me what to improve I could try to do so. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:29, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Maybe I was being unfair. The foreground looks blotchy to me, so I assumed that the image was simply overprocessed. Your technical explanation is convincing, I'll change my vote. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:29, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Don't worry Martin, I understand your arguments and you just express your opinion. Maybe the next time I'll have to be more conscious about the depth of field but of course it can't be the same image in the same place. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:48, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Village weaver (Ploceus cucullatus cucullatus) female.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2017 at 15:17:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Santorin (GR), Fira -- 2017 -- 2598.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2017 at 14:23:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • I can try it, but I don't think it's moiré. --XRay talk 18:58, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Fixed You're right. I haven't seen the problem yesterday. Moiré removed. --XRay talk 15:20, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - I have to demur on this: it's certainly a good photo, but I don't think it's special enough to warrant a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk)
  •   Support The angle, the Greek national colors ... Daniel Case (talk) 06:24, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support per Daniel -Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:25, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Neutral, tending to oppose. The lamp is disturbing, and Santorini is not the whole Greece (one can see these colors almost only in the Cyclades, on tourist advertising posters and on the greek flag...), this is not very far from a "tourist/postcard snapshot" (as often said here) but I find this very inspiring regarding the composition. I think it needs a crop at left, and the blue and dark parts suffer of (chromatic) noise. My vote is provisional, it needs reflexion...--Jebulon (talk) 08:31, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I kinda like the colour scheme, but I'm not really wowed - I also have this sneaking feeling about the quality; it just doesn't seem quite crisp enough.--Peulle (talk) 18:55, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support I do actually think this is exceptional, but I do agree with Jebulon that the lamp disturbs the minimalism. I'd be interested to see it (and its post) cropped out -- Thennicke (talk) 09:43, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  • May be. But cropping out the post the table and the chairs are nearly in the middle. IMO that's not the best composition. --XRay talk 11:44, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support nice composition --Pudelek (talk) 18:02, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Turnau Hochanger Panorama 20171014.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2017 at 13:14:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Austria
  •   Info 240° panorama from Hochanger mountain (1,682 metres (5,518 ft)) near Turnau, Styria, Austria. ATTENTION: this file is really huge! --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:14, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:14, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Awesome piece. I was wondering if it was a little overexposed but on second thought I don't think it is. The sharpness is good and the depth is amazing; you can really see everything from birds to bonfires, from ravines to logging tracks. As for the size, well, you know it's a big image when I have to open it on my gaming rig. :) --Peulle (talk) 14:03, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment Brilliant technically I'm sure, but it crashed my PC. We need a better way to assess these panoramas. And why so much grass in the foreground? Charles (talk) 15:27, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 16:17, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment I propose to cut off the lowest part with the unsharp grass --Llez (talk) 17:55, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support, though I'd like to see how it looks with some of the grass cropped out. Charles, did you use the zoom viewer? I used the non-flash one and didn't have a problem this time. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:21, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --MZaplotnik (edits) 20:35, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Impressive size. A pity that it is not 360°. The unsharp bottom ruins FP to me at the moment. --Milseburg (talk) 20:56, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Ermell (talk) 21:20, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Past a certain point, you can't get more resolution (due to diffraction) without having the foreground being unsharp. There's always focus stacking, but technologically we're not yet at the point that we should demand it for all such FPs. -- King of ♠ 00:57, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:46, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support crazy --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:22, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 09:24, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:39, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Pogled od Crn kamen Jablanica.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2017 at 08:11:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.


Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2017 at 21:43:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Support--LivioAndronico (talk) 09:25, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Nice atmosphere and colours and although it seems somewhat insignificant, I like how book on the table can be seen entirely. --Basotxerri (talk) 16:06, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Nice composition but the colours aren't doing it for me -- Thennicke (talk) 03:25, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

File:2013.05.18.-24-Kirschgartshaeuser Schlaege Mannheim-Vierfleck-Weibchen.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2017 at 15:48:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • No mistake! See my answer in the note. Look carefully, then you'll see what it is. This is a single shot. And I didn't use any optrions (what ever you mean). At most I used extension rings. A lot of time is gone by now, so I can't remember exactly. I made the picture in the year 2013. --Hockei (talk) 17:28, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  • I get it, its other part of edge. --Mile (talk) 17:51, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  --Hockei (talk) 18:14, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /MZaplotnik(talk) 21:20, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Animals/Arthropods/Odonata#Family : Libellulidae (Skimmers)

File:MB&F HMX Black Badger Blue.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2017 at 15:18:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info created by MB&F - uploaded by MB&F - nominated by Claus Obana -- Claus 15:16, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Claus 15:16, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - Very clean photo, but please add to your file description the fact that this is a watch, because it's not clear just by looking at it, and I think supplying just a link isn't optimal. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:22, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Per Ikan. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:28, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:00, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose For description. I had to see official page what am i looking at. Can anyone read what time is it !? Otherwise good commercial shot. --Mile (talk) 08:51, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others about the description. Documentation for an FP should be just as good as the photo. Regarding the photo, it is no doubt a very good photo but I simply fail to be wow-ed by yet another advertisement using black on black to make their product look cool. It looks rather flat and clinical. --cart-Talk 09:39, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  • It's a clear FP photography-wise in my book, but   Oppose per the others re documentation. It really is necessary to get these things done before nominating.--Peulle (talk) 10:22, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Wolf im Wald 13:14, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Conditional support per Ikan pending better documentation. Daniel Case (talk) 18:07, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

File:MB&F Arachnophobia Black.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2017 at 15:16:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info created by MB&F - uploaded by MB&F - nominated by Claus Obana -- Claus 15:16, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Claus 15:16, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support, but again, please add a prose description to the file. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:23, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose insufficient description Ezarateesteban 20:17, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose As above...seems like copying Jeff Deboer. --Mile (talk) 08:54, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 10:23, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Neutral per others. Daniel Case (talk) 14:39, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Auguste Mariette photography.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2017 at 21:01:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  •   Info created by Nadar - uploaded by Jebulon - nominated by kasir -- Kasir (talk) 21:01, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Kasir (talk) 21:01, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Respectfully, I mildly   Oppose, because as good as this is, I think the restoration process isn't complete and the dark shape just above and to the viewer's left of the man's head is probably just a product of the damage shown in the original scan. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:22, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Thank you Kasir for choice. I did my best with this very difficult restoration. I think perfection requested is not of this world...--Jebulon (talk) 16:32, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Question Why would it be so difficult to make the dark area about the same as the rest of the background? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:24, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Try by yourself, and you will see !  --Jebulon (talk) 08:24, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
This is the best version --Kasir (talk) 19:44, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
That's an argument for VIC. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:15, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
Already VI.--Jebulon (talk) 08:24, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Ikan. I agree it was a spirited restoration, and you started from very far back, but I don't think the result is up there with our other featured restorations. Daniel Case (talk) 02:32, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  Weak support I think this is the best it's going to get. Daniel Case (talk) 06:30, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  • Yes, thank you.   Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:12, 18 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 21:28, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment The background looks strange. Yes the source image wasn't great, but I imagine it's a wall behind him, or perhaps a sheet, and the texture seems wrong for such a backdrop - it should be smoother, no? -- Thennicke (talk) 01:56, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Statue of Saints Cyril and Methodius on Radhošť.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2017 at 11:13:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  Support--Peulle (talk) 23:58, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Spb 06-2017 img47 Church on the Blood.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2017 at 08:58:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  •   Info Bird's eye-view of Church of the Savior on Blood and Griboyedov Canal in Saint Petersburg, Russia - all by A.Savin --A.Savin 08:58, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --A.Savin 08:58, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The overall tone is too grey-- 晴空·和岩 讨论页·反互煮 09:41, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment I think this should be rotated into portrait. Perhaps anticlock. --Mile (talk) 09:46, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support for the general composition.--Peulle (talk) 09:48, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 11:06, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 12:09, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Capricorn4049 (talk) 12:48, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Great image. Birds' eye views are always awesome to look at, even if (according to a photographer I was chatting with the other day) they're often judged as a fad in more "serious" photo competitions. -- Thennicke (talk) 13:36, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:31, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Very nice, good job. --Selbymay (talk) 18:37, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Basotxerri (talk) 19:26, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 21:28, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Very nice. -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 22:28, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - Quite visually arresting. But I wonder whether it would look better with a bit of noise reduction. What do you think? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:52, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
      Comment I did my usual portion (for Phantom always more than for DSLR) in Lightroom. Some remaining noise in darker areas is inevitable, but I'm eagerly awaiting a Phantom with more megapixels, less noise, and not much more weight and price... )) --A.Savin 09:03, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Unsual view and it works. --C messier (talk) 10:12, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Because it looks like some kind of weird steampunk machinery. :) --cart-Talk 18:18, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- King of ♠ 05:20, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support per cart. It has the technical shortcomings of most drone pictures, but it's an arresting view that only the drone could have gotten. Daniel Case (talk) 19:43, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Wolf im Wald 13:14, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Colin (talk) 17:14, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:39, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --fedaro (talk) 19:49, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Weissfluhjoch Panorama winter labeled.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2017 at 00:36:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Swiss Camp (Greenland), aerial photography 4.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2017 at 00:34:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  •   Info created, uploaded and nominated by Capricorn4049
  •   Oppose Sorry but I'm not seeing the quality I expect from an FP; the detail is just not high enough.--Peulle (talk) 12:59, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - This photo is pretty noisy in the sky and last time I checked, it had apparently been declined at QIC for technical reasons. I'm not seeing anything about the photo that's so outstanding in other ways as to prompt an FP designation in spite of that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:41, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support – Interesting composition, very good colors, sharp enough, for me not too noisy -- Lothar Spurzem (talk) 20:47, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 00:16, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Very harsh environment, technically too cold to fly a drone, extraordinary location. --Capricorn4049 (talk) 03:33, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Faust tower - Maulbronn Monastery.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2017 at 20:00:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  •   Comment - As a musician, of course I know the Faust story. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:05, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment I just focus on the picture. Its story has nothing to do with me. -- 晴空·和岩 讨论页·反互煮 04:05, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 00:15, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Just a QI for me. -- Colin (talk) 17:07, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

File:Rdeča mušnica (Amanita muscaria).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2017 at 05:52:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Fungi
  •   Info created & uploaded by Mile - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:52, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - Awesome amanita picture! The depth of field is about as close to ideal as possible, and the level of detail is outstanding. There's also a tiny little insect on the mushroom's shaft - can any of you identify it? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:52, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Great photo. -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:08, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Per Johann. I especially like how the background fades to black (making the mushroom stand out), and yet the lighting is even -- Thennicke (talk) 07:04, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:25, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Thanx Ikan Kekek for nomination. And true, Thennicke, i was looking for a mushroom which i can dissolve with black background, so object become more clear. --Mile (talk) 08:05, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- -donald- (talk) 08:42, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support, I just wish this would be in portrait format --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:06, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --cart-Talk 09:31, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment Excellent @PetarM:, but portrait format for me too. Charles (talk) 11:24, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Info Interesting question Charles, Uoaei1, more topic for me. I asked myselve while ago, why people use mostly panorama and not portrait at mushrooms. Probably because of T form, otherwise i even tried portrait; i didnt even shot, what i saw on viewfinder was enough to abandon portrait. And mostly they do it in panorama. So answer here is no. I dont tell that is always necessary, but in my case was. And probably in most FPs on Commons also. For checking more see Fungi photos. Google can admit that. I saw situtation for portrait shot, as they grow like that. Someday i will try. --Mile (talk) 13:30, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Well it would be silly to not vote when anyone wanting to use the image cropped can crop it. Charles (talk) 13:36, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

*  Support -- Giancarlolozza (talk) 13:49, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

  • Giancarlolozza, thanks for dropping by this board and for your vote. What's the rule in terms of eligibility to vote? I don't see 50 prior edits, but he's been a Commoner since no later than 9 July 2008, so does he become eligible by virtue of length of membership, providing he signs in and doesn't just vote using his IP address? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:28, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
    That IP address is an open proxy. LX (talk, contribs) 15:40, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  • So I guess the vote is invalid. Why can open proxies be blocked on sight? Only some of them that have a history of trolling or vandalism, I think? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:00, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
IP not allowed to vote. -- Colin (talk) 17:05, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Perfect!--Ermell (talk) 19:03, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support I, too, would prefer it in portrait, but I accept Mile's reasoning for why he kept it this way. Daniel Case (talk) 20:48, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Great sharpness, a worthy FP. Also a VI, I think.--Peulle (talk) 20:51, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  • @Peulle so far just Italian Wiki has article for this variant of mushroom, but enough for VI i think. I will put it.--Mile (talk) 21:09, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 03:03, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:05, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 06:18, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Pofka (talk) 09:33, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Sharp! Mile, what lens did you use? --Basotxerri (talk) 19:25, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Info Its macro lens-Zuiko 60 mm. --Mile (talk) 08:36, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Another great stacking shot -- Sixflashphoto (talk) 22:31, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose For me it is not a FP. The quality of the mushroom is very good. But not more. There is no composition at all. The background is just black. I have no feeling when I look at it. --Hockei (talk) 18:12, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Colin (talk) 17:05, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --fedaro (talk) 19:51, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Timetable (day 5 after nomination)Edit

Tue 17 Oct → Sun 22 Oct
Wed 18 Oct → Mon 23 Oct
Thu 19 Oct → Tue 24 Oct
Fri 20 Oct → Wed 25 Oct
Sat 21 Oct → Thu 26 Oct
Sun 22 Oct → Fri 27 Oct

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

Fri 13 Oct → Sun 22 Oct
Sat 14 Oct → Mon 23 Oct
Sun 15 Oct → Tue 24 Oct
Mon 16 Oct → Wed 25 Oct
Tue 17 Oct → Thu 26 Oct
Wed 18 Oct → Fri 27 Oct
Thu 19 Oct → Sat 28 Oct
Fri 20 Oct → Sun 29 Oct
Sat 21 Oct → Mon 30 Oct
Sun 22 Oct → Tue 31 Oct

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 human 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]] ===
    === [[: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 human user 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/October 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/October 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.