Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/November 2022

File:Geraldine Ulmar in Gilbert and Sullivan's The Mikado.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2022 at 20:30:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People#Musicians_and_singers_performing (Note: The "People" categories are honestly a huge mess, so I've taken my best guess)
Info created by Benjamin Joseph Falk - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:30, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:30, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The poster/image is cropped at the bottom. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:13, 23 October 2022 (UTC)}[reply]
Aye. Probably to fit it in a book. I do have a version cropped to the photo. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:18, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:39, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 08:57, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support We need to judge this as a small card; the fact that we can zoom in further is a bonus, not the original size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:20, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 13:25, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:46, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:15, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:54, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:04, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People#Musicians_and_singers_performing

File:2022-09-24 Motorsport, IDM, Finale Hockenheimring 1DX 3890 by Stepro.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2022 at 19:18:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Motorsports

Info motor sports, IDM final Hockenheimring: Melvin van der Voort (NED), IDM Supersport 600; created, uploaded and nominated by Stepro

Support -- Stepro (talk) 19:18, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Abstain vote and discussion

Abstain As said before, you don't need to add {{PR}} in every pictures of helmet where the people are clearly unrecognizable. ~~This just clutters the file page and makes no sense for the readers~~ -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:50, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Here we have different opinions, too. The person is clearly identifiable and has personality rights, at least according to German personality law, which limits the use of this photo. This is exactly what this template says. Stepro (talk) 06:44, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Arai helmet is very recognizable But physically, not the driver. It would be any stuntman dressed up in the same clothes, like a movie double, no one would never detect the trick -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:20, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think the template is quite suitable in this case. Even if you think that the person is not recognizable here – The number on the motorcycle allows the driver to be assigned quite unambiguously. The person depicted still has the right to prevent himself from being misused for promotions etc. Of course, the personality rights applies here in a more broadly understandable sense. Sandro Halank (talk) 09:51, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You mean a car with a license plate has personality rights?! Seems totally absurd to me. Why not a PR template for this car, or for this plane? -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:58, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I did not write that. Please do not interpret such nonsense into my statements. My statements referred to the clearly recognizable person (who also wears a number on the racing suit btw), whose personal rights are the focus of this discussion. However, your associations unfortunately show that your knowledge of personal rights seems to be rather rudimentary. Sandro Halank (talk) 11:14, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately :-) I can't figure out the driver of a car saying "Dude, this is my van you took in picture, you don't see my face but I really was the conductor" :-) Basile Morin (talk) 11:56, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to ask you to continue this discussion at a more appropriate place if necessary. It has nothing to do with FPC. Stepro (talk) 12:13, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

At FPC, we frequently discuss the templates, like in Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Heino Elleri Muusikakool 005-rytmimuusika pano.jpg -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:46, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A car doesn't have personality rights, but its owner might. GDPR and privacy laws elsewhere are rapidly moving towards protecting any data that can be used to track individuals (the reason why Google Maps blurs license plates, in addition to faces). Maybe the PR template is not the ideal way to reflect these concerns, but it certainly doesn't hurt. This case in particular seems pretty clearcut as, in addition to the team number, the name of the pilot is also written in the motorcycle (in the fairing, just in front of the helmet) --Julesvernex2 (talk) 14:07, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have to second Julesvernex2’s second point. In Germany, where this photo has been taken, some politicians and lawyers propagate an extreme interpretation of the GDPR and of “personal data” – for example, that a photo which shows a license plate or similar identifiable features of a car or motorcycle injures the personal rights of the owner of that vehicle. As German politicians seem unwilling to demarcate the exact limits of personality rights and GDPR by law, we are still waiting for the Courts of Justice to bring more light into these questions. Until that, photographers in Germany are in an uncomfortable position, and I agree that it may be wise to use the {{PR}} rather too often than too rarely with photos taken in Germany. --Aristeas (talk) 16:15, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is this template tends to be used indiscriminately for so many uploads. The previous nomination was a snow hut with personality rights warning. Even photographs that have no connection whatsoever with any person display this message, like cameras with personality rights warnings, street signs with personality rights warning, banners, buildings, stadiums, bottles, etc. Under the same precautionary principle, {{Trademark}} is missing for the "Arai" helmet, {{De minimis}} for the "Pirelli" logo, and we would need a big red sign: "Don't do the same, this position is dangerous" :-) Basile Morin (talk) 07:04, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I agree with Basile that personality rights warnings on (unmodified) cameras, street signs and bottles seem a bit too much, even in Germany. ;–) --Aristeas (talk) 17:27, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Pure dynamics. -- Radomianin (talk) 06:25, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sandro Halank (talk) 09:52, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support cool Exif. --Mile (talk) 13:46, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:29, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not the sharpest one out of your series but very good.--Ermell (talk) 22:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 05:53, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:58, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:53, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:50, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:03, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:32, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:25, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Qualified support per Ermell. Daniel Case (talk) 01:47, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:35, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 15:15, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent action shot --Tagooty (talk) 07:48, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PierreSelim (talk) 08:47, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 22:59, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Sports#Motorsports

File:Bad Homburg - Erlöserkirche - Apsis (3124).jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2022 at 21:03:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Domes
Info created and uploaded by T meltzer - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 21:03, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 21:03, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 21:14, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:33, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very impressive perspective. -- Radomianin (talk) 06:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Love the accuracy of the camera placement (it's like cm accurate). - Benh (talk) 08:39, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 10:23, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Perfect Cmao20 (talk) 12:35, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 05:19, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Benh. --Aristeas (talk) 05:54, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful and perfectly taken. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:43, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent.--Peulle (talk) 11:03, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:59, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:55, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:01, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 15:31, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 00:27, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PierreSelim (talk) 08:40, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:30, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:25, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Domes

File:Dudley Hardy - Poster for Basil Hood and Arthur Sullivan's The Rose of Persia.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2022 at 09:29:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/Entertainment#Music_and_Opera
Info created by Dudley Hardy - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:29, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:29, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:35, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:27, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 05:55, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:15, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:00, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:41, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:47, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:57, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:01, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:34, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 00:28, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:14, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic_media/Entertainment#Music_and_Opera

File:Khao ji patte breakfast.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2022 at 14:14:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Bread
Info created by Jpatokal - uploaded by Jpatokal - nominated by Jpatokal -- Jpatokal (talk) 14:14, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jpatokal (talk) 14:14, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Please nominate to COM:VIC if this photo is best in scope, but I think that for this photo to be truly great, the depth of field would have to be greater and the sandwich would have to be sharper. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:50, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow factor, unsharp, on top of the concerns raised by Ikan Kekek. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:26, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not sharp. Not QI. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 11:18, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose regretfully per above because I'd love to see more food photography here at FPC but I don't think the image quality is there Cmao20 (talk) 15:01, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Even if there were no technical issues, the crops are still awkward and the subject food is presented in a very pedestrian way. Daniel Case (talk) 02:24, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:05, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:2022-07-03 Basketball, Männer, European Qualifiers, Deutschland - Polen 1DX 1386 by Stepro.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2022 at 05:17:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Other team sports
Info Men's Basketball, European Qualifiers, Germany - Poland: Dennis Schröder (GER, 17); created, uploaded and nominated by Stepro
Support I think this is an impressive portrait. -- Stepro (talk) 05:17, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:47, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support D’accord. --Aristeas (talk) 05:55, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Zgadzam się. -- Radomianin (talk) 07:12, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 09:25, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:02, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kritzolina (talk) 18:32, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ralf Roletschek 20:40, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:51, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:58, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Per Nominator -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:00, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:30, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.-- Dinkum (talk) 16:11, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:15, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:10, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:34, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:59, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 15:12, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:22, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:37, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Sports#Other team sports

File:St Cajetan church in Vicenza (3).jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2022 at 10:47:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Italy
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 10:47, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 10:47, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 00:37, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting to me Cmao20 (talk) 12:05, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 05:50, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:46, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:16, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:18, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 18:37, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I am sorry, but this view doesn't make the wow expected to me. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 15:56, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:35, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Italy

File:A Tibetan Pilgrim Lighting Ghee Lamps.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2022 at 19:51:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Traditions
Info created by Orly Liu - uploaded by Orly Liu - nominated by Kritzolina -- Kritzolina (talk) 19:51, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kritzolina (talk) 19:51, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 10:22, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not perfect image quality but gets everything else right Cmao20 (talk) 12:28, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The photo deserves justified love for its attractiveness and atmosphere. It has a few technical imperfections which are tolerable, imho; the pilgrim's hand is in focus, which is decisive from the qualitative aspect. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:10, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:21, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Radomianin and Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 05:51, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Bijay Chaurasia (talk) 04:05, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:25, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:35, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 12:58, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:36, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People#Traditions

File:Mosteiro da Serra do Pilar (1).jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2022 at 10:49:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Portugal
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 10:49, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 10:49, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:33, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 09:34, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice sky in the back, but there's too much going on the front to make it work. Daniel Case (talk) 00:40, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Like Daniel I find the composition a bit busy, however the orange sky behind these orange lights create a special atmosphere in my view, and I find the architecture interesting -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:18, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice atmosphere Cmao20 (talk) 12:10, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile. --Aristeas (talk) 05:50, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:48, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:19, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:32, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 10:28, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:36, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Portugal

File:Lilac leaf buds at Myrstigen 2.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2022 at 16:52:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Oleaceae (~~section does not exist yet~~)
Info created by W.carter - uploaded by W.carter - nominated by Артём 13327 -- Артём 13327 (talk) 16:52, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Артём 13327 (talk) 16:52, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dull background, poor lighting, and very dark overall. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:07, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The contre-jour lighting is the whole point, and the colours are great Cmao20 (talk) 12:24, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support As always, Cart finds beauty in small things. I like the contrast in the lighting, and the way the budding plant complements the open area in the background on the other side. Another image that would make a great album cover. Daniel Case (talk) 18:26, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20 and Daniel. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:24, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20 and Daniel. --Aristeas (talk) 05:49, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:53, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Truly excellent --Kritzolina (talk) 06:44, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:21, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:06, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is a special recording for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:34, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- Dinkum (talk) 16:15, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Overall a bit too dark. The blue sky is distracting -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:11, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 22:25, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Oleaceae

File:Budapest Bridge.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2022 at 17:19:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Hungary
Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 17:19, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose somewhat a nice image, and with a nice mood. But the crop is a bit unfortunate IMO. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:18, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Pleasant view and atmosphere, but too grainy and unsharp for FP, in my opinion, even in that light. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:40, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too dark, sorry. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:28, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The man is very disturbing and bad cropped. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 15:52, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why disturbing? --Wilfredor (talk) 22:02, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral I like the idea, but the execution could use some work. 1) The man should be further off to the side, and looking towards the center of the image. 2) The bottom left and right corners are cut off at an awkward place. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:28, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 22:20, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Schloss Sigmaringen 2022.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2022 at 02:05:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Germany
Info An amazing, very high resolution, photo of this German castle - this one is best viewed at full size to appreciate all the amazing details, but I like the composition and find it very satisfying. created by Milseburg - uploaded by Milseburg - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 02:05, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 02:05, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:54, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 03:19, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 04:45, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:57, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:00, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Probably the best and most detailled view of that castle I have ever seen. --Aristeas (talk) 11:02, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:58, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:24, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Dinkum (talk) 16:09, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:14, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Composition, resolution and quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:15, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:39, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:33, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alexander-93 (talk) 07:47, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 08:22, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:53, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 09:03, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you Cmao20 for nominating. I was pleasantly surprised to find the image here. --Milseburg (talk) 13:11, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:14, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:29, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:13, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:51, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:04, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:33, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:41, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:54, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 27 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 08:23, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Germany

File:Estación Ramos Mejía 2022 (16).jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2022 at 10:50:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Transport#Train stations
Info created by Wilmer Osario - uploaded by Wilmer Osario - nominated by Wilmer Osario -- Wguayana (talk) 10:50, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment IMHO this would fit better into the Train stations gallery section, therefore I have changed the gallery link (and fixed the size). --Aristeas (talk) 11:01, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Sorry for being the bad guy, but somebody has to say it. The technical quality of this photo is not on the level which is necessary for a Featured Picture. You can check this by comparing it with the existing Featured Pictures in the Train stations gallery. In addition the subject and composition are not extraordinary (which would be necessary to make up for the lack of technical excellence). Therefore I fear this photo has no chance here, sorry again. --Aristeas (talk) 11:05, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Tallinna vanalinn päikesetõusu ajal.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2022 at 08:33:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Estonia
Info created & uploaded by Hendrik Mändla - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 08:33, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 08:33, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love the light and the fog, but it's a bit noisy. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 15:04, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support very nice but really noisy at ISO 125 -- Wolf im Wald 23:50, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Noisy but fairy -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:29, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice fog pic. I register that as grain from fog, not noise. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:27, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:38, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alexander-93 (talk) 07:46, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support a little noisy, but overall nice. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:20, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:28, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:52, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's definitely noise, nothing to do with the fog, but at this resolution and for such a nice motif it's acceptable Cmao20 (talk) 15:08, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 17:15, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ethereal! --Tagooty (talk) 07:42, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow! --PierreSelim (talk) 08:39, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:26, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:10, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:29, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:11, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:51, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:01, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support Maybe a little overprocessed, but still very nice. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:26, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:50, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:45, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 00:34, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:35, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Estonia

File:Jelly Ear, Auricularia auricula-judae, UK 2.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2022 at 19:29:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Fungi
Info created by Stu's Images - uploaded by Stu's Images - nominated by Stu's Images (talk) 19:29, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Stu's Images (talk) 19:29, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting photo, nice details. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:26, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:37, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:31, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 08:20, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:48, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:15, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is the white balance okay? The temperature seems a bit too cold to me -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:34, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A very nice shot. But way too blue for me. Probably due to the long opening time. It can be repaired.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:09, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have adjusted the white balance to get rid of the blue tint. I hope it is OK now. Stu's Images (talk) 22:10, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Yes it looks better to me, thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:02, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral It didn't really help me (look at the blue on the top of the tree trunk) But I won't spoil the party.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:43, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 18:40, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:10, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:45, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:26, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Fungi

File:2021-08-07 Event, Oldtimer-Rallye 1. Erfurt Classic 1DX 9390 by Stepro.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2022 at 23:31:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family : Canidae (Canids)
Info dog is "guarding" Jaguar MK2 (1965); created, uploaded and nominated by Stepro
Support -- Stepro (talk) 23:31, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, it is not more than a cute snapshot. -- -donald- (talk) 05:46, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree, not a great composition, though certainly a good picture of the dog and correctly rated as a QI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:33, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above. The composition does not work.Dinkum (talk) 17:40, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Where is the wow factor? This is nothing more than a cute photo, IMO. --SHB2000 (talk) 21:43, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Obviously, I should only nominate action sports photos. --Stepro (talk) 23:53, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Berlin - Friedrichswerdersche Kirche - Innenansicht (9734).jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Nov 2022 at 08:20:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Germany
Info Interior of the Friedrichswerdersche Kirche (Friedrichswerder Church), Berlin, Germany. The Friedrichswerdersche Kirche was built in 1824–1831 by the famous architect Karl Friedrich Schinkel on the instructions of Frederick William IV of Prussia. It was the first Gothic Revival church in Berlin. Today the church is used as a museum to display a collection of nineteenth-century German sculptures. Photograph created and uploaded by T meltzer, nominated by --Aristeas (talk) 08:20, 30 October 2022 (UTC).[reply]
Support I am aware that church interior shots are sometimes considered boring ;–), but I think this shot is something special. I love the combination of natural light from outside and the illumination inside, it gives the image a very special mood, calm yet full of power. I also like the contrast between the magnificent symmetric Gothic revival church architecture and the loosely placed sculptures. Sharpness, colours and perspective are also excellent. --Aristeas (talk) 08:20, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File renaming, already done

Info I will rename the file to something more meaningful as soon as the jury works for WLM 2022 are done. Right now, renaming the file would confuse the hard-working jury ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 08:20, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done The jury work is over, I have been informed that I can already do the renaming. --Aristeas (talk) 11:00, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Nothing thoroughly thought and -almost- flawlessly executed is boring :) The only caveat I see is the highlight handling, but it is not bad enough to detract from the beauty of the architecture in my view. - Benh (talk) 08:51, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 14:12, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Was on my list to nominate Cmao20 (talk) 15:15, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great! Not boring to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:21, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:39, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I fully agree with you, Aristeas ... except on the part of this being potentially boring! --Kritzolina (talk) 21:06, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PierreSelim (talk) 08:39, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 09:34, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:05, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:28, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:09, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:51, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:57, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:46, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:33, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:27, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:54, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Germany

File:Schloss Wilhelmsthal bei Sonnenuntergang (1).jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2022 at 02:05:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Germany
Info And a very different picture of a castle to my other nomination, with some lovely reflections created by GZagatta - uploaded by GZagatta - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 02:05, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 02:05, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful, very atmospheric and excellent DoF. --Aristeas (talk) 11:03, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:46, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- Dinkum (talk) 16:07, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:13, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support But the ID of the monument in the description is empty. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 20:30, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Special sky, nice reflection -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:22, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question None of you feel like the photo, or at least the Schloss, may be too blue? In other photos like File:Schloss Wilhelmsthal - Wilhelmsthal.JPG, File:Wilhelmsthal-Parkseite.JPG, File:Calden wilhelmsthal palace park lake f e.jpg and File:Calden 2004 42.jpg, the main building has a primarily white facade. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:38, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Yes the white balance may be a little bit too cold, I see only a minimal tilt, almost nothing, that does not disturb. But I don't like the vignetting similar effect too. -- -donald- (talk) 07:29, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral the tilt is a little bit obvious. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:22, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:51, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A beautiful recording. But a bit on the blue side for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:13, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:13, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Are the dots in the sky dust spots or blurred birds? ~~Oppose~~ to block speedy promotion. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:35, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have regarded them as unsharp birds because of the arrangement. --Aristeas (talk) 08:47, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should assume they are birds unless there is any reason to assume otherwise. A number of them seem elongated/stretched as one would expect from a bird with its wings outstretched. Cmao20 (talk) 01:26, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are blurred birds, but it doesn't deserve an edit on the picture IMO. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 13:21, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawing my objection as it does not appear to be sensor dust. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:53, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:29, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:28, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 22:22, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Germany

File:Вайдагубский маяк.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2022 at 20:56:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#Russia
Info created and uploaded by Ted.ns - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 20:56, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 20:56, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For me nothing that special, DoF is shallow, sorry. --A.Savin 10:26, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I like the mood here but A. Savin is correct that the depth of field is just too shallow Cmao20 (talk) 12:34, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The tension between the two red objects is interesting. The foreground does not have to be sharp for me.--Ermell (talk) 22:16, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support like Ermell --Stepro (talk) 05:21, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ermell. And very atmospheric. --Aristeas (talk) 05:54, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 09:00, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per A.Savin. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:43, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Depth of field seems correct, otherwise the bushes would mess up the composition. Additionally it is a difficult condition and low light.--Wilfredor (talk) 17:06, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Correct use of selective focus. Great subject and moment. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:53, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:53, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:03, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- It has an atmospheric quality. Dinkum (talk) 16:18, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Very nice compo and atmospheric image indeed, I also think the DoF is ok here for that kind of compo, but the sign on left prevent me to support. Nice though. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:15, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per A.Savin. -- Karelj (talk) 20:50, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral per Christian Ferrer. -- Wolf im Wald 23:47, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per A.Savin. Daniel Case (talk) 01:48, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Savin. --Fischer.H (talk) 17:45, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Works for me as an atmospheric shot. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:31, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 12:08, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support It looks like the establishing shot of some arctic thriller. I don't mind the DoF -- it's on the objects, and the shallowness comes close to a tilt-shift effect, which I find interesting to look at. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:08, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 15:43, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:28, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 6 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 22:23, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Towers#Russia

File:Close wing Basking of Rathinda amor (Fabricius, 1775) - Monkey Puzzle (Female) (2) WLB.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2022 at 09:01:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Lycaenidae (Blues, coppers and hairstreaks)
Info created & uploaded by Anitava Roy - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:01, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:01, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Undisclosed artificially replaced background. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:31, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's a beautiful butterfly, but I feel like the details on the wings are not as sharp as other butterfly photos we feature, nowadays. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:46, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 14:11, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Parroquia de la Concepción, San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Tenerife, España, 2022-01-07, DD, DD 108-110 HDR.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2022 at 08:05:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Spain
Info Immaculate Conception Church, San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain. The site of the church was established by the conqueror Alonso Fernández de Lugo after the celebration of the feast of Corpus Christi in 1496. The Church of the Conception was founded in 1511 and was declared of a site of cultural interest, specifically in the category of National Historic Monument in 1948. Inside the temple is the miraculous oil of St. John the Evangelist, the icon miraculously sweat during a Black Death in 1648, after this miracle the disease disappeared from the island. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 08:05, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 08:05, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:01, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:07, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:49, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:46, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 11:06, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 14:12, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:49, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:34, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 01:36, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:07, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:27, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 14:11, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Spain

File:Tumba de Ramsés V y de Ramsés VI, Valle de las Reyes, Luxor, Egipto, 2022-04-03, DD 48.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2022 at 07:59:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Painted ceilings
Info Ceiling of the tomb KV9 of the pharaohs Ramesses V and Ramses VI, Valley of the Kings, Luxor, Egypt. The tomb was originally constructed by Pharaoh Ramesses V (who reigned between 1149–1145 BC). He was interred here, but his uncle, Ramesses VI (who reigned eight full years and two months in the mid-to-late 12th century BC), later reused the tomb as his own. The layout is typical of the 20th Dynasty – the Ramesside period. The workmen accidentally broke into KV12 (probably used for multiple burials of royal family members in the Eighteenth, Nineteenth and Twentieth Dynasties) as they dug one of the corridors. The KV9 tomb has some of the most diverse decoration in the Valley of the Kings. In the image you can see a scene of the Book of the Day and Night, framed by the goddess Nut, the sky goodess with Nekhbet, the vulture goddess protector of Upper Egypt, on each side. The scene represents the nighttime journey of the sun into and through her body, with her giving birth to the rejuvenated sun in the morning. Poco a poco (talk) 07:59, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 07:59, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Your material from Egypt is amazing, and this is spectacular! But please add this information to the file description. Even the fact that it's the ceiling isn't mentioned now. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:04, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I added the description (as eventually I always do) Poco a poco (talk) 17:09, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --XRay 💬 06:08, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 10:48, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 12:10, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:48, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 20:18, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:33, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 01:36, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:27, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 14:11, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Painted ceilings

File:Hayelom Shegae Maeregu (2022 Ljubljana Marathon).jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2022 at 13:38:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual_sports
Info Hayelom Shegae Maeregu (Ljubljana Marathon). My shot. -- Mile (talk) 13:38, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mile (talk) 13:38, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:26, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

* weak oppose CA on shoe, and this shoe is too bright Ezarateesteban 23:26, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose. The salience is on the shoes, not the runner. - SHB2000 (talk) 09:28, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info Ezarate, Ezarate corrected. --Mile (talk) 11:08, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral neutral now Ezarateesteban 11:27, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A QI, yes, but it just doesn't stand out enough for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 02:22, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:36, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Carpocoris purpureipennis - Kulna.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2022 at 18:02:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family_:_Pentatomidae_(Shield/stink_bugs)
Info all by Ivar (talk) 18:02, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 18:02, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Incredible sharpness and resolution on the insect! I guess it was still sleepy, and that's how you were able to take so many photos and stitch them? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:12, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:06, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 10:59, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 12:31, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:35, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:14, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:47, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice light, as usual -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:55, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:03, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 12:09, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I have looked, but have never found, the sleepy, droplet-covered, willing-to-sit-for-a-photo-stack insects in good light (the ones that you and Ermell seem to have in large quantities where you live) in New York. :) — Rhododendrites ^talk | 12:41, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support !! -- Radomianin (talk) 14:08, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:49, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:58, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Dinkum (talk) 17:43, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 21:45, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:35, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:11, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 08:37, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:35, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods#Family_:_Pentatomidae_(Shield/stink_bugs)

File:PeruRail MLW DL560D 653 La Raya - Marangani.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2022 at 17:57:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles
Info created & uploaded by David Gubler – nominated by Ivar (talk) 17:57, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 17:57, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Aber hallo! --A.Savin 18:24, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:55, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 21:51, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:13, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 06:01, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:06, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:50, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice contrast between the blue train and the yellowish/brown landscape. --Aristeas (talk) 10:58, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 12:32, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:36, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:16, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:48, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great scenery, nice light and composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:56, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 10:59, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support !! -- Radomianin (talk) 14:00, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:49, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:58, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:35, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 00:32, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:09, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:27, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 15:13, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:36, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles

File:Dülmen, Wildpark, Brücke am Herzteich -- 2022 -- 4642.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2022 at 06:19:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Germany
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 06:19, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 06:19, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful autumn atmosphere in combination with the bridge railing.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:32, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support yes Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:46, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Famberhorst. --Aristeas (talk) 19:56, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Bucolic -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:53, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice. -- -donald- (talk) 05:48, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 08:39, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 12:36, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 14:04, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:59, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Dinkum (talk) 17:42, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 21:44, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:36, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:14, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 12:40, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:27, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:41, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Bridges#Germany

File:Elliott & Fry - photograph W. S. Gilbert.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2022 at 19:36:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info created by Elliott & Fry - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:36, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info By the way, it's probably worth noting the original size of the photo: I'm impressed at how well this blows up given it's only about 4 inches wide naturally. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:45, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:36, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:48, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 19:56, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:59, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 21:44, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:35, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:40, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 09:28, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:12, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:24, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:55, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People/Portrait#Men

File:H.J. Whitlock - Photograph of Arthur Sullivan.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2022 at 15:54:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info created by Henry Joseph Whitlock - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:54, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:54, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:43, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 21:44, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:36, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:16, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:26, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 09:50, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:07, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:24, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 22:30, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:02, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People/Portrait#Men

File:Chalmers-Wesley United Church at night, Québec city.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2022 at 17:16:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Canada
Info All by --Wilfredor (talk) 17:16, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Quite pretty, with a combination of soft natural and warm yellow artificial light, plus fall colors. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:00, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice long exposure shot.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:28, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A lot of interesting and nice things but, sorry, one the things attracting more the eyes is the dark area at bottom left. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:22, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Christian Ferrer. -- Karelj (talk) 20:46, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Christian. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:29, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support good quality and beautiful light but I miss an outstanding composition Cmao20 (talk) 15:07, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 18:07, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Not a compelling composition in my view. There's an eye-catching yellow spot light too close to the lower border, a bit of a tree at the left with blurry leaves, and the church tower is just a silhouette. Indistinct content at the lower left corner -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:23, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A centered composition generally doesn't work unless you're trying to achieve symmetry, which is not the case here due to the large building at the bottom right. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:32, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per King and Basile. I also find the light at the bottom distracts greatly from the dusk mood. Daniel Case (talk) 02:53, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 22:32, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:FrankfurtOder asv2022-07 img04 Lennépark.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2022 at 13:35:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Germany
Info A pond in the Lennépark Frankfurt (Oder) / Brandenburg -- all by --A.Savin 13:35, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 13:35, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kritzolina (talk) 18:33, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:59, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:48, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:39, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I dissent from the others because these boxy buildings are jarring and spoil the scene to my mind. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:41, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:29, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree with Ikan that the buildings are not very pleasant but I think this picture succeeds in making them look very serene, the architects would have been happy with it Cmao20 (talk) 15:06, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. --Fischer.H (talk) 17:42, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 18:06, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ikan --Tagooty (talk) 07:45, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 18:39, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. -- Karelj (talk) 17:54, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 02:29, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I have a soft spot for pretty scenes with good lighting and clouds, regardless of whether they are nature or architecture or some combination of the two. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:30, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Motif is not outstanding enough. --Milseburg (talk) 15:23, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 22:31, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rima rima (Ranunculus weberbaueri) near Punta Unión, Cordillera Blanca 04.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2022 at 21:03:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family: Ranunculales (Ranunculaceae family)
Info created by James Sykes - uploaded by JimSPeru - nominated by Cbrescia -- Cbrescia (talk) 21:03, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cbrescia (talk) 21:03, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 00:27, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good, but I don't think enough of the flower is sharp to measure up to other recently promoted FPs of flowers. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:43, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice, but the light/composition don't quite work for me here. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 12:41, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:38, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A bit too dark for me and the composition places the flower too high in the frame. But there is still a lot to like here, the flower itself is beautiful and the detail on the centre is quite sharp Cmao20 (talk) 14:29, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment thank you very much for the feedback --Cbrescia (talk) 16:36, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Cbrescia (talk) 16:27, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, X neutral → not featured. /--Cbrescia (talk) 16:32, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ansambel SkaMeika´.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2022 at 08:32:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Musicians and singers performing
Info created & uploaded by Enel Lepik - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 08:32, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 08:32, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is a really different approach, I like it! --Kritzolina (talk) 19:40, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Expressive silhouettes -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:26, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support As a musician, I find this odd to look at, but it has a good compositional idea and it's quite well handled. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:29, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:38, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:32, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 08:21, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:52, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support very interesting photo Cmao20 (talk) 15:08, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 17:15, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 09:27, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:29, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't get it Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:02, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very creative. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:27, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 09:20, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support I dig. :) Excellent shot. My favorite of the current nominations. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:10, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Extraordinarily different. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:47, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:44, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 00:32, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:31, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:53, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People#Musicians and singers performing

File:Pulpit of St. Jakobi in Stralsund, detail 09.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2022 at 06:39:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures
Info all by Kritzolina -- Kritzolina (talk) 06:39, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kritzolina (talk) 06:39, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Excellent quality, but very disturbing background, unfortunately --George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:57, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There's some pink/purple CA near the top that needs to be removed. The composition really works for me at full page, though the more I blow the photo up, starting at 30% of full size, the more the blurry corner becomes distracting. I don't know how to think about that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:33, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per George. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:21, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The lighting makes the sculpture appear very expressive. It would be good to remove the CAs, but they are quite minor. --Aristeas (talk) 17:16, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A decent quality image, but not more, in my view. Distracting background, harsh light, tight crop at the top. The subject is a banal sculpture -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:32, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New upload slightly modified. Still a QI for me. Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:49, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per Basile Morin --Tagooty (talk) 07:43, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile and George. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 15:50, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Hello Kritzolina, I could gladly try my hand at this image to remove the fringing. Additionally, I would soften the background to the right of the figure a bit and tag it with a retouching template on the file page. Would that be okay for you? Best, -- Radomianin (talk) 17:53, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for offering your help - I trust your work in retouching and would be grateful, if you would be able to upload a version with the changes you are describing. Kritzolina (talk) 18:12, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New version uploaded Dear users @Kritzolina, George Chernilevsky, Ikan Kekek, SHB2000, Aristeas, Basile Morin, Tagooty, and Sebring12Hrs: Thank you very much for your reviews. I have reduced the color fringes as well as softened the right, disturbing image area. I think it is a little better now. Best, -- Radomianin (talk) 19:40, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Radomianin. I Support now. The pulpit really pops out at me now. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:39, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed a valuable improvement – thank you very much, Radomianin! --Aristeas (talk) 11:00, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It took me a while, but after editing the photo I feel some love for this motif. A different gaze that deserves a fair support. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:10, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Daniel Case (talk) 00:28, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:53, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Treseburg Halde 1, 2 und 3 im Herbst.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2022 at 11:18:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info View of the buildings Halde no. 1, 2 and 3 in Treseburg (Germany) in autumn with reflection in the water of the river Bode. Created and uploaded by GZagatta – nominated by --Aristeas (talk) 11:18, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I am curious what you think of this photo. I fell in love with it as soon as I saw it in the WLM entries. ;–) Technically, it’s not absolutely perfect (it’s perhaps a tiny little bit dark, and it could be even sharper). But it is very good, and the overall impression is so picturesque and painterly in the best sense of the word, the autumn colours are realistic (not exaggerated, as so often), the reflection is beautiful and the whole picture has a wonderful serene mood. --Aristeas (talk) 11:18, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support painterly — Rhododendrites ^talk | 12:35, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Extraordinary mood that captivates me. I would like to have it as an art print hanging in the apartment :) -- Radomianin (talk) 14:47, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:50, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 15:36, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good reflexion on water, colors and lights. It lacks sharpness a bit, but it doesn't matter. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 15:47, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per all the other comments. --Granada (talk) 15:51, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 17:09, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Very impressive. Dinkum (talk) 17:37, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support It sure has a lot going for it. The setting, the very nice reflection, the autumn colours, the "just the right amount of" menacing sky. Could totally be a painting from 19th century. A bit sad about the overall softness. - Benh (talk) 18:04, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I see 3 dust spots near the top margin. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:25, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ a bit dark and has dust spots as Ikan mentions. --SHB2000 (talk) 21:42, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:36, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 00:30, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The featured sky and autumn colors really produce a rich mirror image -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:03, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -donald- (talk) 07:57, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:18, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 12:40, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 12:48, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:40, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:36, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support impressive mood --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:46, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:26, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Almost like an oil painting, just wish it were sharper. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:57, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 23:08, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for dust spots, so that this does not get promoted prematurely. I think that, without prejudice to anything else, the dust spots make it not one of the greatest photos on the site. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:22, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ikan, sorry that I did not respond immediately to your remark about the dust spots but I wanted to wait first if anybody else points out similar problems. Now I have uploaded an edited version in which the dust spots are fixed. I have also removed some smaller spots (probably very unsharp birds) from the sky and from the reflection. --Aristeas (talk) 09:12, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Rhododendrites, Radomianin, Poco a poco, Yann, and Sebring12Hrs: @Granada, XRay, Dinkum, Benh, and SHB2000: @IamMM, Stepro, Basile Morin, -donald-, and Agnes Monkelbaan: @Iifar, A.Savin, Famberhorst, Charlesjsharp, and Martin Falbisoner: @Wieggy, King of Hearts, and Ermell: Because the changes are so minor, it seems unnecessary and irksome to nominate the edited version as an alternative version. Therefore I have just exchanged the nominated version, i.e. replaced the original version with the edited version in this nomination. I hope this is OK for you. I have not changed the brightness and not sharpened the photo because IHMO these would be much more controversial changes. --Aristeas (talk) 09:12, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
LGTM. I Support this. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:12, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aristeas, minor correction such as dustspots do not require to produce a separate file. Please merge. Regards --A.Savin 09:44, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And don't require either having to inform everybody, I believe. Poco a poco (talk) 12:06, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO this depends. I would regard it as very impolite if anybody would edit one of my photos and upload the edited version over my original version, even when only some dustspots have been removed. Anybody is free to do with my photos what they want, as long as the requirements of the license are fulfilled, but please upload the edited version under another filename. I know that quite some other photographers here hold the same opinion. In addition the photo in question was elected as one of the winners of WLM 2022 Germany, but that assessment applies only to the original version. Therefore IMHO it is always saver to upload an edited version under a new filename.
But now the situation has changed – the original uploader, GZagatta, has edited the file himself and uploaded the edited version. Now we could indeed merge both files because the edited version is by the auther himself.
So, if anybody knows an easy way to merge the two files under the original filename, please do so. I am not an admin, I cannot merge two files easily. However it is not necessary to merge them, it’s still everything OK as it is.
Being told that it was an error to ping everybody about the change, I will not ping anybody again. I just wanted to be correct, but when people consider pinging them as impolite, well, I will not do that anymore. And I'm just wondering if I should nominate pictures here at all – I want to help people, and the common good, and all what I get from you are lectures, warnings and criticism by people who think they know everything better. Best regards, --Aristeas (talk) 14:40, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aristeas. You should not wonder too much! Just do what your heart tells you. Then it is always good and many people appreciate your good intentions.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:50, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agree as per Famberhorst. Respectfully to all contributors, though, I understand and concur with Aristeas' points. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:20, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done Merged. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:38, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very very much, King of ♥! --Aristeas (talk) 06:35, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Opposing vote crossed out. Thanks! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:42, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Idyllic Cmao20 (talk) 14:26, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:46, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:30, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 27 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:55, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany

File:Salzspeicher Magazzini del Sale Lubecca Land Schleswig-Holstein.jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2022 at 21:28:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info created and uploaded by Maurizio Moro5153 - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 21:28, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 21:28, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Impressive but the noise is too strong IMO.--Ermell (talk) 22:57, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dear IamMM, I am very sorry to spoil one of your nominations, but this photo has got a big problem. When we discussed this photo for WLM Germany, we noticed that this is very probably a montage – the lower (mirrored) image is not a real reflection, but it is fake. You can see this (a) when you compare the mirrored image pixel by pixel with the upper one – they are too similar, namely identical pixel by pixel; (b) when you inspect the small stripe of grass in the centre – in the right part there are some areas where there are cutting lines and reflections on the grass (!), please see my note on the nomination page. From (a) and (b) we did conclude that this photo is fake, sorry. --Aristeas (talk) 06:29, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's right, according to the Exif it's a version of this image with the reflection attached. It is strange that denoising was not applied despite the digital manipulation. -- IamMM (talk) 08:49, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, very good, so you have also found the original source. Sorry again, --Aristeas (talk) 09:16, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regretfully oppose I was going to support this for image quality until I read Aristeas' comment. No way are we ever featuring a meticulously-doctored reflection. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:37, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination -- IamMM (talk) 08:49, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It is stated in the caption that the reflection is fake, so this was a valid nom. Just we need to vote for what it is (an image manipulation) - Benh (talk) 11:13, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Right, but that hint has been added only recently by Yann (thank you very much!) [1]; the original uploader did not mention that the reflection is fake. --Aristeas (talk) 14:11, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
you are right, sorry (I thought I checked the history of the page). Anyhow, still thinking this should have been given same chance as other noms. I don't see any deception attempt here. - Benh (talk) 20:43, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Now I see what you mean, Benh, and agree. Well, should we re-nominate this photo to vote on it again, this time mentioning immediately that it is a montage? --Aristeas (talk) 07:04, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's @IamMM's nom, so maybe he should decide. But yes, next time such a nom comes in, I think it could be best to specify it's a montage :) - Benh (talk) 10:38, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have lost interest in this nom, if you wish you can try your luck. I believe that FPC in terms of reflections should rely on the naturalness of the scene, a manipulated reflection is less tolerable than a manipulated background. I also like the composition of the original image and I think it could have a chance, but noise is still a problem. -- IamMM (talk) 13:58, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment My thoughts on this nomination are that there is nothing wrong with a photo with a faked reflection being uploaded to the project, because it's artistic and there should be room for such things, but i wouldn't really want to see a photo like this become FP when we have so many beautiful reflections that are 100% real. In any case I would oppose because I think this is a bit too noisy to be one of our best Cmao20 (talk) 14:34, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Quogue Village Wetlands Preserve boardwalk (92722p).jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2022 at 13:22:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Other#United_States
Info A boardwalk through a wetlands preserve on Long Island, New York. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:22, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:22, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 17:07, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 21:40, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:37, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 06:24, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:22, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 12:40, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:39, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:34, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:26, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 12:15, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 23:02, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 07:09, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Although I like the colours, I am not sure what else is special about this centred photo of a path under harsh lighting, but will not oppose and ruin your chances of quick promotion if no one else agrees Cmao20 (talk) 14:27, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:29, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:12, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Other#United_States

File:Aerial view of Somapura Mahavihara.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2022 at 19:25:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Bangladesh
Info created and uploaded by Md. Ahsanul Haque Nayem - nominated by Kritzolina -- Kritzolina (talk) 19:25, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kritzolina (talk) 19:25, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 21:39, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:33, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really great quality for a drone pic and a beautiful motif. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:42, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I've never commented on any of these, I just scroll through from time to time but this stuck me as a great photo, and zooming in and seeing the people gives a great sense of scale as well. - Aoidh (talk) 06:11, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive, works even as an abstract image, looks like some religious symbol. Great find, Kritzolina! --Aristeas (talk) 06:27, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I share the honor of finding it with Ikan and Rocky - also, I warmly recommend checking the WLM and WLE uploads/winners from Bangladesh, they have some excellent photographers in that country. Kritzolina (talk) 07:08, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Just fascinating graphically. -- Radomianin (talk) 06:29, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great work.--Rocky Masum (talk) 07:46, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:51, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support wow! --El Grafo (talk) 09:48, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:24, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 12:41, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 12:41, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 12:43, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:38, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:34, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:46, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:25, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tagooty (talk) 13:57, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:56, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 23:00, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 07:10, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 13:09, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:28, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:28, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 07:11, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 26 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:12, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Bangladesh

File:20220819 European Championships Munich 2022 Graudina Sude 850 1167.jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2022 at 07:47:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Other team sports
Info created & uploaded by Granada – nominated by Ivar (talk) 07:47, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 07:47, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Point of view is too high for me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:23, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Surely a valuable image, so good to nominate at COM:VIC, regardless of results here. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:08, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This was shot in the rain, the lighting is quite flat and though the view is relatively parallel to the net the referee's stand and other stuff are disturbing the view. @ Ivar, I really appreciate your nominations of photos I've made and I encourage you to continue doing so, but I'm afraid, this is not one of the finest. --Granada (talk) 07:14, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination imo this photo has outstanding action (fighting on the net), but I guessed wrong... -- Ivar (talk) 08:30, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lege bolster van een Tamme kastanje (Castanea sativa) 18-10-2022 (d.j.b.) 01.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2022 at 16:02:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Fagaceae
Info Wide open empty husk of a Castanea sativa . Focus stack of 61 photos.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:02, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:02, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:07, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is really impressive, but one of the thorns(? not sure what to call them. Spikes?) is cut off at the top. I'll probably support, anyway, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:38, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: "the thorn" was much longer than the other thorns. I cut it off because I think that would improve the proportions of the photo. I can also work the thorn slightly to give some space above it.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:27, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Small correction. Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:04, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yes, the cropped 'thorn' should be sorted, but more important there are many blurred areas around the subject from the focus stacking . Easy to sort if you invest the time.Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:56, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. correction. Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:04, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment You extended to the top of the thorn, but the background looks strange there, so please work on that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:35, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. correction. Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 09:29, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thank you. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:45, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:34, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 08:25, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:15, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:24, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:36, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:30, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 11:43, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:25, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Fagaceae

File:Poplar hawk-moth (Laothoe populi populi) male.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2022 at 20:45:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Sphingidae (Hawk Moths)
Info Focus stacked from 15 images. No FPs. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:45, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:45, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting moth. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:26, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I like the moth, but I find the background to the right disturbing unfortunately --Kritzolina (talk) 07:09, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Can't do much better than this.--Peulle (talk) 07:43, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support imo a tad oversharpened. -- Ivar (talk) 11:43, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 21:48, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I've never seen a moth this close. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:37, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 07:11, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:33, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ivar. --Aristeas (talk) 09:23, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Agree regarding sharpening. IMHO it wasn't needed here but you apply overall to much AI sharpening to your pictures and should be more moderate (my opinion). Poco a poco (talk) 13:11, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 17:55, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice Cmao20 (talk) 14:31, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:27, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:01, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Sphingidae (Hawk Moths)

File:Darcha Bridge NW Lahaul Himachal India Oct22 A7C 03526.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2022 at 07:38:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#India
Info Barsi Bridge, Darcha, over Jankar Nala before its confluence with the Bhaga River. The longest bridge in Himachal Pradesh, length 360 m (1,180 ft). Elevation 3,340 m (10,960 ft). Created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 07:38, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tagooty (talk) 07:38, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 09:36, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:49, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:09, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A formidable landscape. --Aristeas (talk) 11:00, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral A formidable landscape, but the photo seems overworked.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:50, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the composition doesn't work for me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:00, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Backlit lighting doesn't work for me. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:26, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 12:10, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per KoH, sorry. Nice view but wrong timing Poco a poco (talk) 20:21, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The lighting works for me, it's quite subtle and effectively shows all the details of what's going on Cmao20 (talk) 01:35, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose According to the shadows, the sun is on the wrong side. This angle of view has potential, but here the colors are not very successful due to the poor lighting -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:46, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Info Given the location, the sun will always be shining towards the camera for this composition. At this high altitude with clear air, the sunlight is sharp and harsh. --Tagooty (talk) 02:58, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The metadata indicate 9 am, that makes sense with the sun rising on the Eastern side. What about coming there in the afternoon, when the sun is behind your camera? The mountain in front is very dark blue, currently, and has no texture. The trees of the foreground also show their shadowy side -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:16, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Camera view is to SE, facing towards sun in early afternoon also. In late afternoon, the bridge is in deep shadow due to the mountain on the SW. --Tagooty (talk) 04:12, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Then early afternoon would be better, or photographing the bridge from the other side, by climbing a little bit? -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:28, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please see detailed response in the talk page --Tagooty (talk) 08:48, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps a long walk for little award. Unfortunately not all hikes can guarantee the best weather at every step. Here I agree with KoH and Poco. Same problem as Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cimetière Saint-Charles de Québec.jpg, and Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2018 - The Kvavlo village.jpg, in my opinion. Lack of texture and blue hint. It also seems over-processed, as Famberhorst noticed. Regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:59, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Pudelek (talk) 08:39, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I have been looking through a lot of similar pictures recently while categorizing and this one stands out from them. Daniel Case (talk) 01:29, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 11:45, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:14, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Menggigit Ekor Sapi.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2022 at 09:07:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports
Info created & uploaded by Aqil F - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:07, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:07, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support There are already some good pictures of this very photogenic event, but the view from above is less frequent.--Ermell (talk) 09:23, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ermell. --Aristeas (talk) 11:01, 1 November 2022 (UTC) Abstain --Aristeas (talk) 06:43, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I will not vote for this photo but will continue to speak out against this unnecessary animal suffering.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:43, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unacceptable cruelty to animals. ~~Wikipedia~~ Wikimedia should have respect for animal welfare and not endorse this cruelty. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:45, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Why are you saying Wikipedia? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:28, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Two things: First, I think the existing two FPs we have of this event are significantly better. All of the images of this spectacle have energy/action to them. Second, on the animal abuse: if this were something that would happen anyway and someone just happened to stop by and take a photo, that's one thing. But as I understand it, pacu jawi has become a tourist attraction for the photography, and its popularity has led to more races. When we're moving from documenting abuse of animals to encouraging abuse of animals, I think there's good reason to take pause, at least. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 12:55, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your thoughts on the ethics of this. I have paused and reconsidered, but that leaves me with more questions than answers. This is a tourist attraction that's all over Instagram already - wouldn't it be presumptuous to think that having or not having a FP on Commons would really make any difference to the fad? How is this any different from, say, a rodeo? How do we decide what is cruelty and what is sports? Bullfighting is bad, but show jumping is natural horse behavior and totally fine as long as we don't see what's going on during training? Should we oppose pictures of pugs and other BAOS-prone dog breeds now because that could encourage people to get one for themselves? Should be stop promoting awesome photographs of military equipment because it might encourage people to join an army? These are all questions worth asking, but their answers are highly subjective and too often based on emotions rather than reason. I my opinion, these considerations are not a good basis for evaluating a photograph. But I find this one not to be an outstanding example of its "genre", which is a much more straight-forward reason to Oppose. El Grafo (talk) 10:58, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think on animal cruelty, we should be free to vote on our conscience. So if you endorse bullfighting, support an image. If you think bullfighting should be banned, oppose. Of course, El Grafo, many votes at FP are "highly subjective" and "based on emotions rather than reason". That's inevitable. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:36, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 15:39, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 08:25, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:27, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I can't see any WoW and the picture is not very sharp. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 13:01, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Rodhodendrites and others. Daniel Case (talk) 01:30, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per other opposers --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:37, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:14, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Viljandi Pikk tänav 2021 10 01.jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2022 at 22:24:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Estonia
Info created & uploaded by Vaido Otsar - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 22:24, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 22:24, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I see what the author was going for with the composition, and I actually think this scene would make a great painting, but the light is just too dull for FP in my view Cmao20 (talk) 14:44, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao20. --Milseburg (talk) 18:18, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose great image and composition, but I sadly have to agree with Cmao20 about the lighting. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:09, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Kruusamägi (talk) 22:39, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Demonstration in Support of Ukraine in Tartu.jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2022 at 21:35:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Others
Info created & uploaded by Mana Kaasik - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 21:35, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 21:35, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Certainly very useful for Wikipedia, but the tower is cut, and the cables are not aesthetic. Yann (talk) 08:39, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose tight framing. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:07, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Yann. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 11:42, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Kruusamägi (talk) 22:39, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Night view of Safdurjung's Tomb.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2022 at 05:35:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#India
Info created & uploaded by User:Arjunfotografer - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:35, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think this photo is magical and deserves a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:35, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support It indeed is truly magical, but I can't help but notice the tilt. I still think this deserves a feature, though – the wow factor clearly outweighs the minor tilt issue, IMO. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:16, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Indeed magical. There is a tilt, yes, but it is extremely small. Everybody has got his and her favourite errors and problems ;–) – for example, I see CAs and moirés from Bayer pattern interpolation errors in many photos where almost nobody else notices them, and therefore I normally do not oppose in these cases because the problems seems to be irrelevant for most of us. IMHO it’s the same with very small tilts etc. --Aristeas (talk) 06:38, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 08:57, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's a shame the photo wasn't taken from a little further left to get the thing in the water central. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:12, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 13:12, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The listed flaws do not outweigh the great appearance of the photo for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:48, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 20:59, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kritzolina (talk) 08:47, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very beautiful and a good example of where a photo that initially appears too dark, would in fact not work any other way Cmao20 (talk) 14:38, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 17:23, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:25, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 07:11, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:27, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:49, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think a tighter crop would have been even more striking, but still very nice at full size -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:12, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 17:13, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#India

File:Itzgrund Hochwasser Luftbild-20220109-RM-153133.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2022 at 08:53:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#Bavaria
Info created and uploaded by Ermell - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 08:53, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 08:53, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nicely taken! --SHB2000 (talk) 12:19, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 20:58, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:40, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 17:23, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 17:54, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nomination.--Ermell (talk) 20:36, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 00:58, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:23, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:52, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 07:10, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. There are some minor imperfections (the patch of snow [?] at the bottom is overexposed), but they do not harm the graphical, almost abstract beauty of this photo. --Aristeas (talk) 08:33, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 13:56, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:55, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 12:57, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:51, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 17:14, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Germany#Bavaria

File:Colosos de Memnón, Luxor, Egipto, 2022-04-03, DD 132.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2022 at 12:59:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Sculptures_outdoors
Info Colossi of Memnon, Luxor, Egypt. The two massive stone statues stand at the front of the ruined Mortuary Temple of Amenhotep III, the largest temple in the Theban Necropolis. They have stood since 1350 BC, and were well known to ancient Greeks and Romans, as well as early modern travelers and Egyptologists. The statues contain 107 Roman-era inscriptions in Greek and Latin, dated to between AD 20 and 250; many of these inscriptions on the northernmost statue make reference to the Greek mythological king Memnon, whom the statue was then – erroneously – thought to represent. The twin statues depict instead Pharaoh Amenhotep III (fl. 14th century BC) in a seated position, his hands resting on his knees and his gaze facing eastwards (actually ESE in modern bearings) towards the river. The statues are made from blocks of quartzite sandstone which was quarried at el-Gabal el-Ahmar (near modern-day Cairo) and transported 675 km (420 mi) overland to Thebes (Luxor). the colossi reach 18 m (60 ft) in height and weigh an estimated 720 tons each. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 12:59, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 12:59, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 20:58, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 00:01, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent motif and quality, however the tiny bit of a wooden post at the bottom left annoys me Cmao20 (talk) 14:43, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cmao20: Gone Poco a poco (talk) 17:41, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent Cmao20 (talk) 17:56, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --XRay 💬 17:22, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:57, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 07:10, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another classic one. --Aristeas (talk) 08:34, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 12:10, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:51, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:06, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:42, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 17:15, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Sculptures#Sculptures_outdoors

File:Typ XXI - Wilhelm Bauer - Bremerhaven 09.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2022 at 07:19:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water transport#Other
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 07:19, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 07:19, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't think the non-diffused head-on flash works here, as it creates harsh and clinical lighting. Perhaps using only the available light - at the expense of a higher iso and a narrower depth of field - would have been more faithful to the gloomy and claustrophobic mood of a submarine e.g., [2] --Julesvernex2 (talk) 08:54, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 17:14, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Catedral de Santa María, Murcia, España, 2022-07-12, DD 27-29 HDR.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2022 at 12:59:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Spain
Info Retrochoir and pipe organ of the Cathedral Church of Saint Mary, Murcia, Spain. The Christian king Jaime I the Conqueror conquered the city during the Mudéjar revolt of 1264–66. Jaime I took the Great Mosque or Aljamía to consecrate it to the Virgin Mary; a custom he put in place when he conquered any settlement. However, it was not until the 14th century that construction of the cathedral would begin. The interior is largely Gothic in style and the heart and the entrails of King Alfonso X the Wise are buried under the main altar of the cathedral. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 12:59, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 12:59, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 20:58, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful! I've now added this cathedral on my bucket list when I visit Spain soon. --SHB2000 (talk) 21:48, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another good church interior from you Cmao20 (talk) 14:41, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 17:22, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 20:34, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:23, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:59, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 07:10, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:34, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:27, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:57, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:42, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 17:15, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Spain

File:Common dolphins (Delphinus delphis) adult and juvenile Sagres.jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2022 at 22:38:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Delphinidae (Oceanic Dolphins)
Info We are used to seeing adult dolphins leaping out of the water. This behaviour does not fit with child care. The adult dolphin has to swim slower and barely comes out of the water to breathe. The adult swims right alongside the calf. Its wake helps propel the youngster through the water and means it has to use less energy. No FPs of this dolphin species. No FPs of calves. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:38, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:38, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Splash and fins but no heads -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:47, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It doesn't work for me. I can't even tell what animal it is from the photo. --Stepro (talk) 04:36, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Great moment for you but not much to see for us. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:49, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Ah well... Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:16, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Tokyo Shibuya Scramble Crossing 2018-10-09.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2022 at 12:24:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Japan
Info created by Benh - uploaded by Benzoyl - nominated by TKsdik8900 -- TKsdik8900 (talk) 12:24, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- TKsdik8900 (talk) 12:24, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nom. I'm going to support that one. It has its issues, but I think it conveys the atmosphere of this incredible place well. I wish I had chosen a different ~~exposure time~~ shutter speed though. - Benh (talk) 14:58, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

shutter speed thanks Martin Falbisoner (and for the very nice comment as well) - Benh (talk) 08:33, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --SHB2000 (talk) 21:41, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:37, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unconventional. Composition (perspective, motion blur) isn't working in my eyes. --Milseburg (talk) 15:18, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support outstanding, really. A photo I wish I had taken. Love it. Angle and shutter speed are well chosen and convey a feeling of total immersion into that amazing location. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:54, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:26, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Martin. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:18, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The perspective. The blurring is not the problem for me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:23, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Milseburg and Charlesjsharp about the perspective. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 12:38, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful, it took me straight back to the Shibuya crossing! Motion blur and uncorrected perspective can and should be used, as long as they serve a purpose. Here, the former adds motion and the latter conveys a sense of scale --Julesvernex2 (talk) 16:28, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Had to look at this several times to decide, but the atmosphere comes across strongly, probably for the reasons Julesvernex2 is mentioning and that atmosphere makes it special for me. --Kritzolina (talk) 17:48, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is something that could appear on a magazine cover. We don't have to adhere so strictly to our conventional "rules" as long as the end result works. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:55, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Julesvernex2. --Aristeas (talk) 20:32, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 23:07, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Blurr helps to provide anonymity to all the people on the photo and gives the sense of movement :) Kruusamägi (talk) 22:29, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:26, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per all other opposers --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:32, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose due to perspective issues. Daniel Case (talk) 03:52, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment out of curiosity: where's the issue? The viewer might be looking up - in awe. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:56, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I will second that. In many architectural pictures, one wants vertical lines, and this is all but an architectural subject. It's fine not to like it, but allow me to point to that old failed nom of mine which IMO shows how sticking to vertical can yield unfortunate (ridiculous?) effects sometimes. Finally, I think photography is much more fun when we don't constrain ourselves too much with conventions, even though they are good guidelines to keep in mind. - Benh (talk) 23:31, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:26, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Japan

File:Parnassius apollo - Savoie.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2022 at 12:55:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family_:_Papilionidae_(Swallowtails)
Info created by Lucastristan - uploaded by Lucastristan - nominated by Lucastristan -- Lucastristan (talk) 12:55, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Lucastristan (talk) 12:55, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose low quality, tight framing. Tomer T (talk) 14:03, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think this is a good photo and I thank you for contributing it but I don't think the pixel-level detail matches existing butterfly FPs in the category, it's too smudgy and I don't think your sensor has resolved the detail adequately. I also agree with Tomer that the crops, especially at the top, are too tight, give the butterfly some room to breathe in the frame Cmao20 (talk) 14:46, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao20: this is far better than average quality, but the extraordinary excellence of the butterfly photos we feature, nowadays, is something you may have to see to believe. There are some amazing photographers here, including people who are able to take 15 or many more photos of a butterfly while it's sleepy and not yet moving and then focus-stack them. You are competing with them when your photo is nominated here. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:20, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per other opposers. -- Ivar (talk) 17:53, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Gallery link refined. Your friendly gallery link service. --Aristeas (talk) 08:47, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose tight framing. --SHB2000 (talk) 22:40, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 14:27, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stachys palustris - inflorescence.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2022 at 07:52:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Lamiaceae
Info all by Ivar (talk) 07:52, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 07:52, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The graduated background complements nice composition and well-executed stacking. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:22, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:27, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:45, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 16:42, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
( Question), Is this a natural background?--Famberhorst (talk) 18:09, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yes, it is. I shoot outside only with natural backgrond. Darker area is the shadow of the bush. Hard and fast rule: the closer you get to the subject, the smoother will be the background. -- Ivar(talk) 19:25, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Well done. Compliment.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:48, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ermell (talk) 20:30, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 22:52, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 00:57, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:22, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 07:10, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful and excellent quality. --Aristeas (talk) 08:38, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 14:28, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:59, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:37, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting shape, good quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:18, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:27, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family_:_Lamiaceae

File:Laughing gull (02914).jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2022 at 13:17:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes#Family_:_Laridae_(Gulls,_terns_and_skimmers)
Info A first winter laughing gull (Leucophaeus atricilla). all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:17, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:17, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 17:08, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- Dinkum (talk) 17:38, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 21:40, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:37, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 00:29, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 06:15, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:37, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:20, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Distracting background and common bird -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:25, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Yes, the background is the problem. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:35, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:26, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:26, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:29, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 07:11, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I'm not bothered by the background since it works well with the bird's colors. But its edges could be handled better ... a little too much CA in some places and a slightly artificial appearance. Daniel Case (talk) 03:55, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:29, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes#Family_:_Laridae_(Gulls,_terns_and_skimmers)

File:Oberlicht in der Walhalla.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2022 at 13:39:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Glass ceilings and skylights
Info created & uploaded by GZagatta - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 13:39, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 13:39, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Striking Cmao20 (talk) 14:47, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 17:21, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 17:52, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:27, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 22:58, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:20, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 07:10, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:42, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 17:48, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:02, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:38, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:28, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:21, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another album-cover quality image ... I like the slightly surreal Magritte-esque feel. Daniel Case (talk) 17:51, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 07:58, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Glass ceilings and skylights

File:2022-03-13 Wintersport, Skisprung-Weltcup der Frauen in Oberhof 1DX 7300 by Stepro-2.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2022 at 00:26:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Women
Info Marita Kramer (Austria) kisses the trophy as the winner of the overall World Cup; created, uploaded and nominated by Stepro
Support for me a wonderfully dreamy portrait in an intimate moment -- Stepro (talk) 00:26, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support not an ideal crop in my eyes, but the visible and authentic emotions in the picture override this consideration --Kritzolina (talk) 18:28, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The composition/background/mask/crop don't work for me. It's not what I would call an intimate moment. Sports winners are always kissing trophies for the camera. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:37, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Charlesjsharp. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 08:36, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, this is not sharp at all. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 12:37, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I won't support this version, I won't oppose either, however the crystal globes deserve not to be cropped. Maybe you can get a better crop from: File:2022-03-13 Wintersport, Skisprung-Weltcup der Frauen in Oberhof 1DX 7300 by Stepro.jpg --PierreSelim (talk) 09:01, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I thought about it for a while, but that would just be a different picture. For me, the tight cut is what gives this photo its intimacy. As correctly noted above, winners often kiss the trophy for the photographers, often even after being asked to do so by them. Here it was different. At that moment, Marita was completely lost in thought and introverted. In my opinion, a larger image cut would no longer represent this, then it would really only be a kissing photo, as I have often done. Stepro (talk) 09:43, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Tight crop, and unsharp -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:00, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. I also don't think it's well-served by her eyes being closed. Daniel Case (talk) 17:35, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:38, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Map (Araschnia levana) form prorsa underside Piatra Craiului.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2022 at 18:27:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)
Info All by Charlesjsharp-- Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:27, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:27, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 21:40, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:38, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 06:25, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:34, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:51, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:23, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Sharp, but I'm not sure about the postprocessing here. It looks like it was taken in sunlight, but that the highlights were taken all the way down and it was desaturated. Sort of a muted overcast look that doesn't do the subject justice IMO. Would be curious what it looks like with highlights/color restored. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 12:44, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, photographed in sunlight. The highlights were 'taken all the way down' as you suggest; the whites would be overexposed otherwise. Always a compromise... Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:32, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Sometimes bringing the highlights down doesn't significantly affect the overall presentation. In this case, it makes it look a bit strange (and less realistic), so not worth it. I don't know that I would support it with the highlights back in, but I probably wouldn't oppose. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 11:29, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:26, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not sharp enough for today standards IMO. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 14:05, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:28, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:28, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm OK with the highlight reduction; its side effects are more noticeable at thumb than full size. Daniel Case (talk) 17:35, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:38, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)

File:Templo de Ramsés II, Abu Simbel, Egipto, 2022-04-02, DD 59-61 HDR.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2022 at 19:27:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Egypt
Info Hypostyle hall of the temple of Ramses II, Abu Simbel, Egypt. The Great Temple at Abu Simbel, which took about twenty years to build, was completed around year 24 of the reign of Ramesses the Great (which corresponds to 1265 BC). It was dedicated to the gods Amun, Ra-Horakhty, and Ptah, as well as to the deified Ramesses himself. It is generally considered the grandest and most beautiful of the temples commissioned during the reign of Ramesses II, and one of the most beautiful in Egypt. The hall is 18 m (59 ft) long and 16.7 m (55 ft) wide and is supported by eight huge Osirid pillars depicting the deified Ramesses linked to the god Osiris, the god of fertility, agriculture, the afterlife, the dead, resurrection, life and vegetation, to indicate the everlasting nature of the pharaoh. The colossal statues along the left-hand wall bear the white crown of Upper Egypt, while those on the opposite side (and depicted here) are wearing the double crown of Upper and Lower Egypt (called pschent). c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 19:27, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 19:27, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great, and I'm willing to accept the slight perspective distortion as a compromise necessary to get all of this interesting scene into the frame Cmao20 (talk) 00:51, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support exactly as Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 09:18, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support although it's a bit dark on the bottom right, it's relatively minor; the wow factor clearly outweighs this minor issue, IMO. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:16, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per SHB2000, and I'm again angry at the 19th-century European vandals. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:51, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ikan Kekek, SHB2000: I'm not sure about the issue you pointed out. You mean that the background at the bottom right is darker? That area didn't get any light from the entrance, --Poco a poco (talk) 21:49, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, I don't have a problem with darkness. The drawback I notice is some noise, but I am not asking you to change anything. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:24, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I got you. Still, I applied a slight denoising in that area along with the edit mentioned below --Poco a poco (talk) 09:43, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Radomianin (talk) 14:49, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The arm on the left in the background is a little irritating, but hardly noticeable.--Ermell (talk) 19:30, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Will address that as soon as I understand whether I need to fix something in the dark area on the right. Poco a poco (talk) 21:49, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ermell: Gone Poco a poco (talk) 09:42, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --XRay 💬 09:01, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:54, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PierreSelim (talk) 11:04, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:37, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20 -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:50, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive -- IamMM (talk) 07:27, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Benh (talk) 08:31, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:59, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 22:02, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors#Egypt

File:Tower of Wrocław train station, Silesia.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2022 at 08:37:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#Poland
Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 08:37, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pudelek (talk) 08:37, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Amazing golden light with dramatic sky, but I would have preferred this flag frozen in the wind and as sharp as the tower. Not sure 1/20 sec was the best choice in this situation. Interesting picture, though. You can remove the vignetting -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:18, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral per Basile. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:38, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 21:00, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A useful picture and a good QI but sorry, I just don't see enough going on in the frame for FP, it all feels a bit empty and static. Cmao20 (talk) 14:30, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 23:26, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice colours on the tower but the motion blur on the flag adds nothing and there's too much negative space for me. BigDom (talk) 11:17, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 21:47, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Doors of Jantar Mantar.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2022 at 20:42:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#India
Info The winning picture from Wiki Loves Monuments in India. I find it very impressive and well worth the FP badge. Created and uploaded by Sudipta Maulik - nominated by Kritzolina -- Kritzolina (talk) 20:42, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kritzolina (talk) 20:42, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:42, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:10, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:40, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:53, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:11, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful photo of a building with timeless elegance. The bird and its shadow add a poetic touch to it. --Aristeas (talk) 08:32, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks Sudipta Maulik (talk) 18:22, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:34, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support that kind of architecture is definitely daring. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:07, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support It's not daring; this is an amazing place but the constructions are functional - the image shows part of an astronomical instrument. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:27, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:40, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:49, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another great example of how uncorrected perspective can add a sense of scale to an image! --Julesvernex2 (talk) 21:14, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:37, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The bird adds something -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:32, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 04:39, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:17, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:26, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:21, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow. (Especially the bird. ;-) ) --XRay 💬 09:00, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wonderful and impressiv!--Wieggy (talk) 18:38, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another album cover or travel poster image ... Daniel Case (talk) 20:23, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 07:31, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 17:54, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 14:33, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stark lines make for an outstanding composition. --Tagooty (talk) 04:11, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Sudipta Maulik (talk) 18:22, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 26 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 21:55, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#India

File:From coffee bean to instant coffee 01.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2022 at 00:31:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Drinks
Info created & uploaded by Heiti Paves - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 00:31, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 00:31, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing, asteroid :-) Basile Morin (talk) 10:53, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great detail. Just wondering if it should have {{Retouched picture}} or some similar template seeing as as an SEM image it presumably came out in greyscale and the colour was added afterwards? BigDom (talk) 11:01, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done Good idea! I added the note. Kruusamägi (talk) 15:02, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There are at least 2 spots that require some rework, I added notes. Poco a poco (talk) 20:12, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Mmmmh ... If it was a photograph, I'd say there's only edge lighting, leaving the center way too dark. Is that a technical limitation of SEM imagery or something that could have been done better? The color also doesn't quite match the coffee beans I use - but maybe I'm just biased there. --El Grafo (talk) 09:09, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Quite detailed. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:17, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others: I think this has to get the star for all the detail. But per El Grafo, it's just a pity the viewer's side of the coffee bean isn't better lit. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:57, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:48, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 16:53, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:37, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 07:32, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Color is a little weird, but given that it's a colorized SEM image I can understand. Reminds me a little of the opening credits of Rocky Horror. Daniel Case (talk) 18:24, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 21:59, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food and drink#Drinks

File:Oilshale mine 01.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2022 at 00:31:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
Info created & uploaded by Peeter Paaver - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 00:31, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 00:31, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 10:42, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good composition Cmao20 (talk) 00:33, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good composition indeed, dramatic light, like a still from a movie. (There are some CAs at some borders, but for this subject they are IMHO unimportant, just like the noise.) --Aristeas (talk) 09:16, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good composition, IMO. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:22, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree with everyone, and especially Aristeas, except that I would at least in theory want the noise to be reduced somewhat. Whether I would prefer the result, I can't say without seeing it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:59, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:46, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:37, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 07:33, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. --BigDom (talk) 08:22, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Qualified support While I agree with Aristeas that the CA is not fatal to the image, I do wish some more of it could be dealt with. But I can't not like the image's aesthetics ... I can imagine this as an album's back cover, or the scene right before the end credits. Daniel Case (talk) 18:15, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wandelndes Lexikon (talk) 20:07, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 21:58, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People#People at work

File:Catedral de San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Tenerife, España, 2022-01-07, DD, DD 85-87 HDR.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2022 at 19:03:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Spain
Info Reredos of the Cathedral of San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain. The reredos is the biggest in the Canary Islands and was built between 1709 and 1715. It's located in the Chapel of Our Lady of Los Remedios of the cathedral and is 6 metres (20 ft) high and of Baroque and Rococo style. The reredos is a work of carpenter Antonio Francisco de Orta and painter Jerónimo Príncipe Navarrete. The reredos includes seven tables ilustrationg different scenes of the life of Jesus and the Virgin Mary and are a work of Hendrick van Balen, master of Anton van Dyck. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 19:03, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 19:03, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Truly amazing artwork captured without any compromises Cmao20 (talk) 00:50, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 09:17, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 11:16, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:53, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 14:03, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 15:43, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:32, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 09:01, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:52, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 11:06, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:37, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 05:29, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 07:28, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely! --Tagooty (talk) 16:16, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:32, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 22:01, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Spain

File:Albi Panorama Sunset.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2022 at 14:22:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#France
Info Panorama of the southern French city of Albi in beautiful sunset light, featuring many of the city's most well known landmarks including the large, fortress-like brick-built cathedral on the right. created by Benh - uploaded by Benh - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 14:22, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ -- Cmao20 (talk) 14:22, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This was on my list to possibly nominate, but I hadn't. I agree with you that it's a deserving candidate. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:15, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 17:21, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 17:51, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Excellent pano after removing some diffuse spots in the sky. Please add the pano-template. I hope no one takes offense that the straight dam is slightly curved by the projection. --Milseburg (talk) 18:15, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:23, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 20:26, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ -- Radomianin (talk) 23:00, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 00:56, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:20, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 07:10, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ Amazing light, colours and mood. --Aristeas (talk) 08:44, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:24, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thanks for the nom Cmao20. And I hope you'll forgive me for editing ur comment to add the link to the Sainte-Cécile cathedral so curious reviewers can directly go check how awesome and strikingly unexpected the interior is, given its exterior shape. I'm also sure I needed to change something as "promised" a long time ago to Ikan. But I'm not sure I have the sources anymore... - Benh (talk) 11:12, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't remember. If there had been dust spots in the sky, maybe that was it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:21, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Still there. I marked them on the nomination page now, although nobody cares. It should be no problem to remove them. Milseburg (talk) 14:31, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't think we don't care. I do. I'd rather do changes from the source files but this was taken 13 years ago and I need to dig my archives. Give me time. - Benh (talk) 15:56, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --SHB2000 (talk) 22:39, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:05, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:36, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ -- IamMM (talk) 10:38, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:55, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have the RAWs. But lost my Hugin project file. I will attempt to reprocess from scratch. - Benh (talk) 18:31, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

hmm I'm embarrassed. I think I have a much better projection for it, but this would render this nom useless... Pinging Cmao20. I should have it ready tonight. - Benh (talk) 18:40, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Strong support Great light, rich composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:27, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Albi <3 --PierreSelim (talk) 13:18, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose According to the satellite images available from Google Maps, that dam (?) is a straight line in reality. The alternative below does not quite manage to stay truth to that either but it des a much better job than this one. --El Grafo (talk) 14:31, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

alternative edit

Info A reprocessing from scratch using the RAW source. I cloned out some "stains" in the sky. The were mostly (if not only) birds so I left most of them. I also propose an alternative "Panini" projection which doesn't excessively bend the dam (or whatever it is called). I also tried to emulate the original colours but please let me know if I'm off. - Benh (talk) 23:07, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @Cmao20, Ikan Kekek, XRay, Iifar, Milseburg, Charlesjsharp, Ermell, Radomianin, Der Wolf im Wald, Johann Jaritz, Tournasol7, Aristeas, Cayambe, SHB2000, Agnes Monkelbaan, Schnobby, IamMM, and Famberhorst: I think this is worth letting you know.
Comment If this version is promoted, I'm fine with it being merged with the above. - Benh (talk) 23:09, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Great light, rich composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:27, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I Support this version, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:46, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support +1 -- Radomianin (talk) 10:52, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is the superior version, really well done Cmao20 (talk) 12:07, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:12, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 15:12, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20 --Milseburg (talk) 15:26, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent. --Aristeas (talk) 19:23, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. This is a great view of Albi, lovely light. Gyrostat (talk) 22:08, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 16:09, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A great shot, lighting, subject/composition and detail are good. Still there is a strange area around the top of the tree on the right near the house. I would expect the same color of the sky (yellowish instead of white) between the branches, maybe you can improve that Poco a poco (talk) 20:28, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed ... or at least toned down. The change was sitting on my desktop. Just forgot to push it. Thanks for the reminder and review. - Benh (talk) 22:04, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 06:21, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:26, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:40, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Clearly the more realistic version. Left and right edges seem a bit more distorted than the alternative above, but I guess that's the price to pay for almost getting the dam straight. --El Grafo (talk) 14:31, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 21:46, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#France

The chosen alternative is: File:Albi Panorama Sunset Panini General.jpg

File:Kerimäen kirkkoranta.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2022 at 05:49:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Finland
Info created & uploaded by User:Sampoki - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:49, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I feel like this has a kind of deceptively simple sublimity to it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:49, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful! Reminds me of Bergen. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:31, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 08:57, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wonderful when viewed in full size. --Aristeas (talk) 09:28, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I had striked out my support vote because I had to think about the irritating something at the right. But the longer I look at it the more to looks just like some reflection or flare to me – technically an error, indeed, but it does not deteriorate the overall impression of the photo. Therefore I have enabled my support vote again. --Aristeas (talk) 08:31, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question What is on the water at the very right, a cloning error or something? --A.Savin 09:53, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Why would the sky be lighter on the left? The tree would have been better off-centre. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:09, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It’s not a problem that the sky is ligher at the left – I have seen such gradations in many photos, so this can be 100% natural, and the reflection in the water shows the same gradation. But the thing on the right, spotted by A.Savin, is a problem; I do not know what it is, but it is indeed irritating. ---— Preceding unsigned comment added by Aristeas (talk • contribs) 16:12, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't know if we'll hear from User:Sampoki, whose last contribution to Commons was in 2020. I don't know what it is. If enough people find it irritating, I'll have to just withdraw. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:10, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Wieggy (talk) 20:59, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Was on my list to nominate. Whatever's going on at the right doesn't bother me, this is the kind of motif where the overall effect is more important than the details Cmao20 (talk) 14:39, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 17:23, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality image, but I do not see any reason for FP nomination, low quality subject of image. -- Karelj (talk) 17:34, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This is more of a reason than usual from you, but that doesn't make it easy to relate to. We've featured photos of grates (including at least one I nominated), yet you think this is such a bad subject that it should be rejected on that account. Whatever. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:42, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:25, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 07:11, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 17:51, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per Aristeas' analytical conclusion. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:31, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment About the crop suggestion: I don't think I should be cropping someone else's photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:20, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:51, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Bright color and symmetrical motif -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:15, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:52, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I thought it was another one of Cart's at first. Daniel Case (talk) 22:51, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yes, a kindred sensibility. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:39, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:20, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 21:53, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Finland

File:Fontanella Faschina Kapelle.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2022 at 12:20:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Austria
Info I found this a satisfying and atmospheric landscape with a strong composition. created by Heimfoto - uploaded by Heimfoto - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 12:20, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 12:20, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice scene, but the fog seems overexposed to me. --Milseburg (talk) 15:25, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regretfully oppose per Milseburg. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:37, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support On the one hand, yes, on the other hand I do no expect much information in the fog; and after all backlit fog must be very bright. Other parts of the photo are IHMO exposed correctly, e.g. the snow which shows the appropriate texture, and the overall impression is beautiful and natural. --Aristeas (talk) 09:20, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I suggest dimming the very bright parts. --Milseburg (talk) 10:52, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's a beautiful scene and composition that reminds me of some Japanese prints, except for the cross on top of the chapel. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:19, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas and Ikan Kekek. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:45, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 21:00, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Milseburg. -- Karelj (talk) 16:47, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:32, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Doesn't work for me. Kruusamägi (talk) 21:27, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:30, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ per Kruusamägi. -- Karelj (talk) 14:53, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Already voted, although it doesn't make any difference Cmao20 (talk) 22:47, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 21:48, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Geranium sanguineum. 04-08-2022 (actm.).jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2022 at 21:42:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Geraniaceae
Info created by and uploaded by Agnes Monkelbaan - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 21:42, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 21:42, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 22:54, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:26, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very beautiful. Maybe somebody will point out that the focus stacking is not totally perfect, but there are no rough transitions and the photo is beautiful, realistic and not oversharpened. --Aristeas (talk) 06:32, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 07:14, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Re-using this unnatural background does not make for an FP. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:17, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 20:59, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A perfect example of why less can mean more. --SHB2000 (talk) 00:03, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Aristeas Cmao20 (talk) 14:35, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality image, but I do not see any reason for FP nomination, low quality subject of image. -- Karelj (talk) 17:37, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Ugh. --Aristeas (talk) 08:49, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question @Karelj: You write "low quality subject of image" as your reason for an oppose vote, but we may have a translation problem. Could you explain in more words please what you mean to say. Do you mean 'No wow' which is commonly used as a reason to oppose (I equate 'No wow' with 'This is a boring picture'), or do you mean something else? Thanks. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:06, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, this was my mistake, I have copied wrong sentence. Please, forget this my comment. Thanks, -- Karelj (talk) 17:46, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Radomianin (talk) 22:54, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I like it but there are some blurry areas, I think focus stacking errors (see image notes). -- Wolf im Wald 01:04, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Small correction. Thanks for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:18, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:26, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The color of the artificial background is in my subjective point of view very ugly, and not harmonious with the flower -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:05, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:07, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good sharpness. The background doesn't ruin the picture IMO. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 10:15, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you for promoting my photo.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:32, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 21:51, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Geraniaceae

File:Snowy Albatross 0A2A8292.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2022 at 11:04:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Diomedeidae_(Albatross)
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison – nominated by Ivar (talk) 11:04, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 11:04, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:20, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 16:08, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice photo, but is the geo accurate? GeoHack seems to indicate that this was a fair bit out into the open ocean, and if that is the case, the file description may need to be modified. --SHB2000 (talk) 22:38, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:09, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:35, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Much sharper than this current FP, though is the current nomination over-exposed? Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:14, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 19:36, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 04:39, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:25, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:46, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:39, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 17:54, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Striking image. --Tagooty (talk) 04:09, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 21:54, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family_:_Diomedeidae_(Albatross)

File:Kitchen Hut with Cradle Mountain in the background.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2022 at 01:46:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Australia#Tasmania
Info created by Darreng169 - uploaded by Darreng169 - nominated by SHB2000 --SHB2000 (talk) 01:46, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I realise the sky is a bit dark, but to me, the dark sky perfectly blends in with the hut. It frequently rains in this park (average precipitation is 2,815.8 millimetres (110.86 in) per year) which reflects the park's harsh reality. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:46, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive. The contrast is quite high (almost black shadows, white highlights), but this works very well with this subject/motif and gives it a great mood. --Aristeas (talk) 06:57, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 08:56, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The difference in brightness between the hut and the sky looks unnatural. For me, the clouds are too exaggeratedly darkened.--Ermell (talk) 09:30, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question That’s an important point. Well, I have assumed that there was a spot of sunlight shining through the clouds which illuminated exactly the hut and the area before it – that seems unlikely, yes, but sometimes such lucky coincidences actually happen. Can anybody find pieces of evidence in the photo which allow either to confirm that there was actually a spot of sunlight or to disprove this, unveiling the contrast in brightness as artificial? --Aristeas (talk) 16:23, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Shadows would be visible in sunlight. Ermell (talk) 20:39, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, right – you see how stupid I am that I did not get this myself. Well, it’s a bit difficult to apply that criterion on this photo because there are only small rocks and bushes, but I can actually spot dark shadows at the bushes around the hut. They are small, and I understand your oppose, but they are sufficient for me to assume good intentions and to keep up my support vote :–). --Aristeas (talk) 06:58, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Putting the hut right in the middle was obviously intentional but ruins the composition for me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:14, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 20:59, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 22:30, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think it is a bit too contrast-y but the effect is still FP for me Cmao20 (talk) 14:36, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ermell. -- Karelj (talk) 16:44, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support but the category should be photoart, dark light around the hut is not natural. -- Ivar (talk) 18:00, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support -- Wolf im Wald 01:00, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Striking, but the composition isn't really working for me. I often think it's fine for the main subject to be in the center, but in this case, both the hut and the peak are centered, and that makes the composition more static than I'd like. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:11, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:53, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is clearly overprocessed. If you take a look at the other upload by the same user, the excessive treatments by this photographer is very obvious -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:10, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Way too much processing that went into this one. A pity, it's a nice photo otherwise. -- KennyOMG (talk) 23:53, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 10:11, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Love the way the craggy mountain enhances the dramatic sky, with the small building in the center representing how little shelter there truly is from unforgiving, indifferent nature (and, metaphorically, life itself). I don't think any of the processing makes this look unnatural ... I have seen both similar scenes in real life (well, haven't we all?) and far worse overprocessing in other images. Daniel Case (talk) 22:50, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 21:52, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Speyer - Altstadt - Altpörtel - Blick auf Gedächtniskirche und St. Joseph mit Sonnenuntergang.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2022 at 15:35:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Germany
Info View over Speyer, created by Roman Eisele - uploaded by Aristeas - nominated by Milseburg -- Milseburg (talk) 15:35, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Outstanding view, situation and quality. -- Milseburg (talk) 15:35, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. -- IamMM (talk) 16:47, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:11, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support You can never say no to a German skyline. --SHB2000 (talk) 22:12, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 22:31, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I would have loved to distinguish more details of the city with the shadows enhanced in this picture, but that's a photographic choice, and the featured sky is really awesome -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:45, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:36, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 11:07, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:47, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support It’s a nice surprise to find this photo here. Thank you very much, Milseburg, for the nomination and all of you for your support! --Aristeas (talk) 18:25, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow Poco a poco (talk) 20:13, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Outstanding Cmao20 (talk) 00:30, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:22, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:32, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 09:03, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 16:26, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:35, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:38, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:27, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Shouldn’t the rule of the 5th day apply here? Is the bot on vacations? ;–) --Aristeas (talk) 19:42, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 21:57, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Germany

File:Conentric temples of Kalna.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2022 at 08:38:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#India
Info created & uploaded by Sudipta Maulik - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 08:38, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 08:38, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great subject, beautiful light. But I think the name of the file contains a spelling mistake that should be fixed -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:56, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Done renmaed as File:Concentric temples of Kalna.jpg PierreSelim (talk) 11:22, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment FP-worthy but a tilt/perspective correction could help to achieve symmetry, I'd also go for a square crop. --Poco a poco (talk) 20:09, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not centred, but still excellent motif and light Cmao20 (talk) 00:40, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Like Poco a Poco, I immediately thought about a symmetrical view. But this slightly decentred view and the wider crop show nicely how the temple is embedded into its earthly environments, and I really enjoy the contrast between the symmetry of the temple and the curved streets and houses around it. --Aristeas (talk) 09:08, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 11:16, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. A very good drone pic of a striking temple complex plus a slice of life. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:55, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per supporters above. -- Radomianin (talk) 14:58, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:32, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:29, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 09:02, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:50, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PierreSelim (talk) 11:05, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:37, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 07:31, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:21, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 22:00, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#India

File:Common dolphin (Delphinus delphis) Sagres.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2022 at 14:19:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Delphinidae (Oceanic Dolphins)
Info There is very similar FP of a different species from 2006. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:19, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:19, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose High resolution but the head is hidden. -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:06, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above.--Ermell (talk) 23:33, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per above, I just want to see more of the dolphin. Would vote to delist the existing FP for similar reasons Cmao20 (talk) 00:32, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:23, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:36, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 01:45, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kardang West Lahaul Himachal Oct22 A7C 03376.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2022 at 13:54:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#India
Info Kardang is a village on the left bank of the Bhaga River at an altitude of 3,130 m (10,270 ft) in the Himalayas. The peaks in the background are about 5,700–6,000 m (18,700–19,700 ft) high. Created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 13:54, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tagooty (talk) 13:54, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment WB is a little too cool. You can dial in some vibrance too if shifting the WB causes the sky to be not blue enough. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:28, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@King of Hearts: Thanks for the suggestion. Done --Tagooty (talk) 02:54, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:04, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Good now – thanks to King of ♥ for the suggestion! --Aristeas (talk) 09:25, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Navneetsharmaiit (talk) 10:07, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The contrast is too strong due to the time the photo was taken --Wilfredor (talk) 17:58, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 21:00, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Colours could do with being a bit more saturated if anything, but I like this, the composition grows on me the more I look at it Cmao20 (talk) 14:32, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:27, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Beautiful peaks, but the right side, with the big shadow and cropped building, doesn't work for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:12, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ikan Kekek: Thanks for the comments. I've corrected the cropped building, and slightly raised the exposure of the lower right shadow. Please see the new version. --Tagooty (talk) 03:12, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I like the crop better now, but I'm not sure I like the raised shadow better, and the composition isn't working for me so far although it's a very picturesque spot. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:23, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Excellent sharpness and outstanding motif. --Milseburg (talk) 14:45, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Wilfredor. Kruusamägi (talk) 21:25, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:06, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Milseburg. BigDom (talk) 11:15, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 21:49, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Settlements#India

Berlin Neue Nationalgalerie, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2022 at 13:36:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

Neue Nationalgalerie Berlin, west and south facade, with Têtes et Queue by Alexander Calder
Neue Nationalgalerie Berlin, east and north facade, with Three Way Piece No. 2: The Archer by Henry Moore

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info Two exterior views of the Neue Nationalgalerie Berlin at evening Blue hour. All by me --A.Savin 13:36, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 13:36, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:47, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 07:10, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:42, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful! --SHB2000 (talk) 22:39, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:00, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:37, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the set. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:30, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Both pictures have great colors and lights. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 11:52, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:29, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:20, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:46, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 08:02, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany

File:Stenella frontalis DSC 0236.JPG (delist) edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2022 at 11:38:13

Info Poorer quality than recent failed nomination. (Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Stenella frontalis DSC 0236.JPG)
Delist -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:38, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment More dynamic (shows movement more) than the failed nomination, and I believe it also shows more of the animal's head (you might link the recent nomination for easy comparison), so I'm disinclined to delist. I think there should be a greater reluctance to delist than to vote down new nominations, anyway. My standard is that the delisting candidate should be obviously not fit to remain an FP. We could discuss that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:45, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Assuming we're talking about this failed candidature? The difference for me is that this one works as a piece of art that I'd consider printing and hanging on my wall. When looking at it for the first time, for a moment I was wondering what on earth I was looking at - and that's a pro in this case. --El Grafo (talk) 12:59, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to give a weak Keep vote per my remarks above and also with respect for El Grafo's remarks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:01, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delist as I said I would on the failed nomination. Cmao20 (talk) 13:06, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delist -- Karelj (talk) 15:09, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a species identification photo, it leaves a lot to be desired; as a photograph, it looks quite good, owing to the sharp cut in the otherwise completely smooth surface. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 18:43, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per El Grafo and Rhododendrites. --Aristeas (talk) 19:16, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per El Grafo.--Ermell (talk) 19:25, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Rhododendrites and El Grafo. Certainly something I'd hang on my wall. --SHB2000 (talk) 02:41, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per the votes above. -- Radomianin (talk) 16:48, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep with calm water and beautiful reflection deserves this image still FP status. -- Ivar (talk) 07:29, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep "Poorer quality..." Is it !? --Mile (talk) 14:51, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:00, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Brooklyn Public Library (93880p).jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2022 at 20:43:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#United_States
Info The Central Library in Brooklyn, a NYC landmark on the National Register of Historic Places. I love the scale and design of this grand front facade, with a 50-foot entrance, curve meant to be an "indent" of the shape of the plaza it sits in, gilded literary figures, etc. The building is overall shaped like an open book, with this entrance serving as the spine. I've attempted to get a good shot of this building several times. Every time somehow something isn't quite lined up. Finally, I looked at a satellite image. Sure enough, the plaza itself isn't aligned with the entrance! So I've indeed done the best I can, and am finally content with the result. :) all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 20:43, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 20:43, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry but this harsh light combined with that asceptized architecture leaves me unmoved. Quality image -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:03, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Basile, great quality image but I do find the architecture pretty boring and it's still disconcerting how everything is not quite lined up Cmao20 (talk) 00:10, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Going forth and back on this photo, I confess that this kind of architecture somehow fascinates me – for me it looks so very “American” with its attempt to glorify learning and education (I really appreciate that, no irony!), but also with an inclination towards emotionalism and big gestures. Regarding the light, I think that the strong light actually works in this case – is a good match for this kind of architecture. I only see two technical issues: (1) is there a stiching error in the inscription on the right (see image note)? (2) I understand that it is impossible to get everything lined up, but IMHO the verticals could be straight, at least the verticals of the main portal certainly should be vertical (they are tilted a bit). --Aristeas (talk) 09:57, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Won't have time to fix the stitching error, and this isn't really going anywhere anyway. Ah well. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 15:24, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ginkgo tree in Green-Wood Cemetery (23299p).jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2022 at 21:38:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Plants#Family_:_Ginkgoaceae
Info Ginkgo biloba tree in Green-Wood Cemetery (New York, USA). all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:39, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Trees are a tough subject for me, and I've been looking for examples (and approaches to photographing them) that are neither "lone tree in a landscape" (like most of our FPs) nor a close-up of the trunk. I don't know if others will see the "wow" in this Ginkgo tree, but I thought the gradient of green at the bottom to bright yellow at the top, flanked by other colors, was pretty spectacular. This is a panorama totaling 66 MP. There is another version, btw, from a different perspective with very slightly different lighting. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:38, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Stitched image? No template on the page -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:40, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See {{Panorama}} -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:52, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I don't find the composition very successful. The main subject seems to be this ordinary tree under a blue but featureless sky. The crop at the bottom is too tight in my opinion. Two graves are cut off, and the main one in the center is too close to the border. Imagine this photo with a frame, the content may quickly become partially hidden -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:40, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile Morin. --Fischer.H (talk) 10:41, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support That oddly-shaped Ginkgo is great as is the gradient from green to yellow in its leaves. IHMO just the light is somewhat boring – strong direct light with harsh shadows. --Aristeas (talk) 10:33, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile Poco a poco (talk) 20:17, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose for similar reasons as Aristeas' weak support. It's fine and a good QI, and I think in the right hands this scene would make a lovely painting. But the arbitrary crops of the gravestones annoy me and the light is too harsh. resolution is obviously amazing but somehow I want more from this subject Cmao20 (talk) 00:27, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination — Rhododendrites ^talk | 18:46, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 21:56, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:20190227 FIS NWSC Seefeld Men CC 15km Janosch Brugger 850 5030.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2022 at 08:42:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual_snow_sports
Info created by Granada - uploaded by Granada - nominated by Granada -- Granada (talk) 08:42, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support You're wondering if it's tilted? No, the huts are tilted. :) -- Granada (talk) 08:42, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support the wow factor is just... --SHB2000 (talk) 09:06, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Look at its hands and his arm, there are bad artifacts. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 11:54, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question It's a bit noisy for the low ISO and there is a little fringing, but overall seems OK to me. Am I missing something? Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:22, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The blurred background is a little aggressive at larger resolutions, but it's not intended to be stared at and I love how this photo seems to exemplify the Alps. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:13, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A heart rate of 180, he was really hitting that hill :) Granada, perhaps it is worthwhile to check if the chromatic aberration correction didn't go overboard, it might be what is causing the fringing on contrasting edges (e.g., in the watch band, left wrist, race number on the leg) --Julesvernex2 (talk) 21:19, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 11:03, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:48, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Bad composition. -- Karelj (talk) 17:16, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. And good colours. --Aristeas (talk) 18:33, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great action shot and really captures the feel of the surroundings. BigDom (talk) 11:03, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm sorry, but despite the small f-number the background is too intrusive resulting in a too busy composition to me. Poco a poco (talk) 20:15, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I get Poco's criticism but this is too good not to support Cmao20 (talk) 00:30, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:31, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Cmao20 -- IamMM (talk) 07:36, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Great look on the skier that gets lost in the background. Daniel Case (talk) 20:20, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mile (talk) 10:06, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:44, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Sports#Individual_snow_sports

File:Guarda-corpo da Avenida Portugal - Rio de Janeiro - 20220923024517.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2022 at 07:55:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Brazil
Info created and uploaded by Donatas Dabravolskas - nominated by Kritzolina -- Kritzolina (talk) 07:55, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Another amazing aerial shot from WLM, this time from Brazil Support -- Kritzolina (talk) 07:55, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good quality for a drone photo. I like the contrast between the simple rectangular roads/buildings/basin and the cheerful, colourful irregularity of the boats. --Aristeas (talk) 08:34, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:35, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm not sure this composition works for me. It would if it were just the rectangle of the marina and the perimeter surrounding it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:21, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per that comment. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:34, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Love that idea :) - Benh (talk) 19:39, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support interesting and unusual view --Stepro (talk) 04:38, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 10:59, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 09:52, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I like it but agree with Ikan, an alternative version could help here Poco a poco (talk) 20:16, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't think you should adjust it so that the eye is satisfied. Seems to be the reality.--Ermell (talk) 20:47, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support and I would sadly oppose the version Ikan suggests for having too little counterpoint to look at - I like how it's off-centre at the moment, and the compass point adds something Cmao20 (talk) 00:29, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:29, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment IMO some technical improvements are necessary, for example removing the CAs. --XRay 💬 09:04, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:38, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 20:25, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 14:34, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:44, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Settlements#Brazil

File:The Soviet Union 1964 CPA 3026 stamp (92nd and 94th anniversaries of the birth of Lenin. Portrait of Vladimir Lenin).jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2022 at 05:14:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Others#Stamps
Info created by USSR Post - uploaded by Matsievsky - nominated by Matsievsky -- Matsievsky (talk) 05:14, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Matsievsky (talk) 05:14, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The People/Portrait gallery is for photographic portraits only, therefore I have taken the liberty to change the gallery link to Non-photographic media/Others#Stamps. --Aristeas (talk) 09:22, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Anyone could scan any one of tens of thousands of stamps like this, so no wow. ~~Image has been captured with the bottom half of the stamp under a stamp mount altering~~ the colour and texture (see left shoulder). Poor quality printing (misaligned colours) and poor centering mean the stamp isn't even a valuable example of the issue. Possible perforation damage top right corner. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:20, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No tens of thousands of stamps - this is the best stamp of 1964. The postage stamp was placed on the scanner glass, no a stamp mount. Perforation is good. All arguments are insignificant. Matsievsky (talk) 13:15, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about suggesting it was scanned with a stamp mount; but if the stamp was placed directly on the scanner then the stamp must be stained as there is color variation where there shouldn't be. This by no definition the 'best stamp of 1964'. There are many more valuable stamps from the Soviet Union issued in 1964; never mind other years and other countries. You couldn't sell your copy for more than €1/$1. I have deleted the 'best stamp' claim from Wikipedia. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:02, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand your reasoning about "color variation". This is the best postage stamp in the artistic sense, not in the price sense. And it wasn't my idea, this 1964 public decision is spread all over the Internet. Matsievsky (talk) 18:55, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Charles, plus it's not even particularly high resolution and way below the 2 Mpx threshold. --El Grafo (talk) 13:03, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is not necessary to have 2 Mpx, here is a special case of a small 2D art miniature. This 2D art miniature has a large (in some sense maximum) resolution of 600 dpi. Matsievsky (talk) 13:20, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 03:11, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 14:45, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Our Lady of the Snow church in Iseo (7).jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2022 at 07:07:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Italy
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 07:07, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 07:07, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent Cmao20 (talk) 12:50, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:08, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Indeed. --Aristeas (talk) 08:35, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful! --SHB2000 (talk) 09:08, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:38, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:54, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A nice subject but the lack of symmetry is very obvious (look at the hanging lamp). It needs an horizontal perspective correction. Poco a poco (talk) 20:21, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:45, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:39, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:44, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Italy

File:Cuolm Sura 1585m. 21-09-2022. (d.j.b) 03.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2022 at 06:24:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/Switzerland#Grisons_(Graubünden)
Info Cuolm Sura. View (from Surcuolm) on the clouds above the mountains on the south side of the valley.Long exposure photo. (5 sec.) Beautiful lines and beautiful clouds.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 06:24, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 06:24, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 07:10, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Somewhat unusual composition which I like very much. --Aristeas (talk) 08:45, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas, definitely something new and creative Cmao20 (talk) 12:48, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Composition is not convincing in my eyes. Resolution and sharpness are not outstanding. Sky is a bit posterized. Maybe a dust spot in the upper right corner. Overall below the FP-bar. Sorry. --Milseburg (talk) 14:39, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Removed spots. Thank you for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:59, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Lots of pixels, but the quality is not what we usually get - though probably the best this camera can deliver. I don't understand what long exposure is supposed to add here. The leaves and the clouds are the only things moving and why would we want them blurred in a landscape like this? Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:00, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

*Answer: I used a gray filter in combination with the tripod to get a sharp picture of the building and some movement in the vegetation. In my experience (if the angle of the sun is right) there will be more atmosphere in the photo. In this case, fuller late summer colours. So the photo becomes more of a landscape painting. This way of photographing is probably not much appreciated here because the moving green becomes less sharp due to the long exposure time. (how bad is that?)--Famberhorst (talk) 05:57, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support I rather like the colours and the atmospheric approach and the intermingling of the different lines and shapes is very intriguing to look at. --Kritzolina (talk) 07:43, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:08, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:38, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 10:52, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Detail is not so good, but the composition definitely works for me Poco a poco (talk) 20:23, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This could be a good painting motif in the right hands, but as a photo, I find that the empty sky in the upper left makes the composition unbalanced. I give it credit for being an unusual and interesting compositional idea, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:04, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. -- Karelj (talk) 15:02, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 06:23, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:40, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 08:59, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:42, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Switzerland#Grisons_(Graubünden)

File:St Christopher church in Jozerand (2).jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2022 at 07:05:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#France
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 07:05, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 07:05, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Careful and satisfying composition, but maybe not the best light Cmao20 (talk) 12:50, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support At the first glance the flowers, toys and trees interfer with the church, but altogether they form an arrangement of surprising beauty. --Aristeas (talk) 08:37, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Distracting foreground. Not an exceptional composition in my view. Banal architecture, partially hidden -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:30, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think the architecture is nice but otherwise agree with Basile. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:05, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support To me the rectilinearity of the foreground surfacess provide a nice harmony of their own that plays off the more irregular shapes behind them without taking away from them. I also commend the photographer for having chosen a rear view and making it work ... the diffuse morning light actually does more for this angle than bright midday summer sunlight would. Daniel Case (talk) 06:29, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:39, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile Morin. -- Karelj (talk) 17:39, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 14:43, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Michael William Balfe - Atelier Nadar.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2022 at 02:26:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info created by Atelier Nadar - restored, uploaded, andnominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:26, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:26, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Would the photo have originally been this dark and relatively uncontrasted? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:48, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek: I didn't actually touch the colours on this one, so I did a tweak now. Thing about photos is you often find wildly different contrasts in different prints - Compare File:Alfred, Lord Tennyson by Julia Margaret Cameron - Original.jpg and File:Alfred, Lord Tennyson MET DP295251.jpg - so there's not really a definite "right" answer. Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:23, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Understood. I like this version better, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:34, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- IamMM (talk) 07:28, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:04, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 08:29, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Durga Puja terracotta work.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2022 at 09:18:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#India
Info created & uploaded by Sudipta Maulik - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:18, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:18, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am a huge fan of this kind of terracotta work and while the general quality of this image certainly is good, I don't think this crop shows it at its best, sorry --Kritzolina (talk) 17:28, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for your comment and will consider the suggestion in future. Sudipta Maulik (talk) 18:19, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose (regretfully). Sadly, I have to agree that the crop is a bit tight. --SHB2000 (talk) 05:27, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks Sudipta Maulik (talk) 18:20, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Agree with the remarks on the tight crop; that’s a pity. Given the fact that the sensor of the D810 delivers 7,360 × 4,912 pixels and that this photo is only 3,600 × 2,400 pixels in size, there is a good chance that this is a crop from the original photo and that the the crop could be made a bit wider. Could you have a look, Sudipta Maulik? --Aristeas (talk) 10:04, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comments, actually I wanted to show or intended to highlight the subject of the terracotta work that portrayed typical activity of rituals of 'Durga puja" festival of the time. Pixels dimension is just resolution and not related to the crop. Sudipta Maulik (talk) 18:18, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Sudipta Maulik (talk) 18:20, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Wrong crop, agree witsh SHB2000 -- Karelj (talk) 10:56, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I have no problems with this image, but if there is a better way to show this terracotta work I'm open to seeing it. Daniel Case (talk) 19:08, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:45, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Soviet Union 1964 CPA 3026 stamp (92nd and 94th anniversaries of the birth of Lenin. Portrait of Vladimir Lenin).jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2022 at 05:14:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Others#Stamps
Info created by USSR Post - uploaded by Matsievsky - nominated by Matsievsky -- Matsievsky (talk) 05:14, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Matsievsky (talk) 05:14, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The People/Portrait gallery is for photographic portraits only, therefore I have taken the liberty to change the gallery link to Non-photographic media/Others#Stamps. --Aristeas (talk) 09:22, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Anyone could scan any one of tens of thousands of stamps like this, so no wow. ~~Image has been captured with the bottom half of the stamp under a stamp mount altering~~ the colour and texture (see left shoulder). Poor quality printing (misaligned colours) and poor centering mean the stamp isn't even a valuable example of the issue. Possible perforation damage top right corner. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:20, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No tens of thousands of stamps - this is the best stamp of 1964. The postage stamp was placed on the scanner glass, no a stamp mount. Perforation is good. All arguments are insignificant. Matsievsky (talk) 13:15, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about suggesting it was scanned with a stamp mount; but if the stamp was placed directly on the scanner then the stamp must be stained as there is color variation where there shouldn't be. This by no definition the 'best stamp of 1964'. There are many more valuable stamps from the Soviet Union issued in 1964; never mind other years and other countries. You couldn't sell your copy for more than €1/$1. I have deleted the 'best stamp' claim from Wikipedia. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:02, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand your reasoning about "color variation". This is the best postage stamp in the artistic sense, not in the price sense. And it wasn't my idea, this 1964 public decision is spread all over the Internet. Matsievsky (talk) 18:55, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Charles, plus it's not even particularly high resolution and way below the 2 Mpx threshold. --El Grafo (talk) 13:03, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is not necessary to have 2 Mpx, here is a special case of a small 2D art miniature. This 2D art miniature has a large (in some sense maximum) resolution of 600 dpi. Matsievsky (talk) 13:20, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 03:11, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 14:45, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:A single blue water lily in bloom.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2022 at 06:29:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Nymphaeaceae
All by -- Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 06:29, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 06:29, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not very sharp, and the center is burned Ezarateesteban 16:36, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Beautiful flower and IMO a QI, but too dark and the crop at the bottom is too tight. Cmao20 (talk) 00:31, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose although a good QI (and ∞^∞ times better than Apple's emoji), there's no wow factor. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:24, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- I withdraw my nomination. - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 11:38, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wandelndes Lexikon (talk) 20:08, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:43, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Araschnia levana caterpillar - Keila.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2022 at 07:26:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family_:_Nymphalidae_(Brush-footed_Butterflies)
Info all by Ivar (talk) 07:26, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 07:26, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:51, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Great picture, but please eliminate the hot pixels in the lower left, a couple more in the middle of the right side and a single one on a leaf on the right side. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:24, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ikan Kekek: Done -- Ivar (talk) 07:09, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:53, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Identification seems correct -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:25, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 16:58, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 21:24, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 22:51, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:10, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:58, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wandelndes Lexikon (talk) 20:07, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:06, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:38, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:44, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family_:_Nymphalidae_(Brush-footed_Butterflies)

File:Clouded apollo (Parnassius mnemosyne) Slivnica.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2022 at 16:45:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Papilionidae (Swallowtails)
Info No FPs of this butterfly. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:45, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:45, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:21, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 08:17, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:48, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support High level of detail -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:26, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 17:02, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:10, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:10, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wandelndes Lexikon (talk) 20:06, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good details -- IamMM (talk) 16:51, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:59, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:29, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:12, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nythar^T^.^C 08:32, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Papilionidae (Swallowtails)

File:Château de Miromesnil, Tourville-sur-Arques-1000659.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2022 at 18:24:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#France
Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 18:24, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 18:24, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's a pity that only grass grows in the garden instead of flowers like in the past.--Ermell (talk) 21:44, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PierreSelim (talk) 22:28, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 05:18, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 05:26, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 09:29, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive building, although I find the crop a bit tight on both side, and {{Panorama}} seems to be missing on the file page -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:34, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:17, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Klasse! --Aristeas (talk) 10:13, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wandelndes Lexikon (talk) 20:06, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Top Poco a poco (talk) 22:20, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:44, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:01, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 11:42, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I thought it was tilted at first but it may instead be just a touch asymmetrical. Daniel Case (talk) 22:13, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 12:47, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:06, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#France

File:Richmond Federal Appeals Court and skyline VA2.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2022 at 20:11:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#United States
Info Powell Courthouse in Richmond, Virginina in the early morning, created by Acroterion - uploaded by Acroterion - nominated by Acroterion -- Acroterion (talk) 20:11, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Acroterion (talk) 20:11, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Reluctant weak oppose Great idea, great composition but it isn't quite sharp enough and there's a very noisy-looking area in the dark patch down the street at the right. Daniel Case (talk) 03:34, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:07, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eurasian hoopoe (Upupa epops) juvenile in nest box 2.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2022 at 16:58:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Order : Bucerotiformes (Hornbills, Hoopoes and Wood Hoopoes)
Info We have similar 'bird looking out of nest box' composition in FP, but no hoopoe FPs. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:58, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:58, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 21:41, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:21, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support wow, I've never seen a hoopoe out of a nest box. Nicely taken, Charlesjsharp. --SHB2000 (talk) 05:26, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great shot. BigDom (talk) 08:17, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:47, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality and nice Mohawk hairstyle :-) Basile Morin (talk) 11:29, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:10, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:39, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile. --Aristeas (talk) 10:11, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 14:39, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 16:00, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cool Poco a poco (talk) 22:20, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:51, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:31, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 11:43, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Specially for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:54, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:06, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Order : Bucerotiformes (Hornbills, Hoopoes and Wood Hoopoes)

File:Top Down View of Copacabana Mosaic and Palm Trees 3.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2022 at 12:23:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Brazil
Info IMO an interesting aerial photo. I thought it was a bit tilted at first but looking at it in full res am reasonably convinced it's an optical illusion and that one cannot get *all* the lines perfectly straight anyway. created by Donatas Dabravolskas - uploaded by Donatas Dabravolskas - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 12:23, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 12:23, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:32, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 14:14, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Is there color noise on the bottom? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:57, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but it doesn't really bother me. Feel free to oppose for that reason, of course Cmao20 (talk) 19:32, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Kruusamägi (talk) 22:51, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Intersting mix of elements --Kritzolina (talk) 07:06, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 14:44, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support excellent. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 16:01, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I believe that the chroma noise should be removed, a clear quality improvement and an easy fix Poco a poco (talk) 22:16, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Fascinating patterns. At first glance I thought it was a wall. Only "weak" support due to the chroma noise on the bottom -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:01, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:41, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:41, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Basile. --Aristeas (talk) 16:33, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:52, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:03, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:57, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:47, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk)

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:42, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Settlements#Brazil

File:Laineensaari from shore of Papinniemi in Parikkala, South Karelia, Finland, 2022 June.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2022 at 22:38:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Finland
Info created and uploaded by Ximonic - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 22:38, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 22:38, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question To me this looks tilted, even in the thumbnail and more obviously at full size Cmao20 (talk) 00:51, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The white balance looks wrong (even at sunset). The yellows are too dominant in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:56, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you for nom! Picture adjusted. --Ximonic (talk) 08:40, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Bottom cropped per suggestion. To be fair, easiest would have been to pick the stick out, but I tend not to rearrange any objects just to make the scene prettier. For the foreground sharpness I don't think I could have done much differently. Narrow aperture would have led to less light passing and blurry water due to exposure time, which would be a completely different motif from this one. I didn't quite expect it to be nominated either. But i'm thankful. --Ximonic (talk) 14:46, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support FP to me now, thanks for making those changes Cmao20 (talk) 11:28, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The stick and chroma noise bottom right aren't ideal, nor are choice of where to place the horizon. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:32, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Beautiful, but I would suggest cropping out the nearest foreground, which is somewhat blurry at full size and contains what looks something like a soap bubble in various colors right at the bottom of the picture frame. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:49, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Maybe it would work when you would crop the bottom (= nearest foreground) only sightly, exactly so that the stick ends in the bottom right corner of the photo. This would be enough to remove the “soap bubble” mentioned by Ikan and it may mitigate the negative impact of the stick mentioned by Charles. (This is something I have learned from Cart: an irritating diagonal element often appears less irritating when it ends exactly in one of the corners of the image rectangle.) --Aristeas (talk) 17:51, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 18:37, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:03, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well, of course, it is already beautiful as it is ;–). It’s dark etc., but after all this is natural … --Aristeas (talk) 20:40, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support In love the dramatic atmosphere.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:47, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas and Famberhorst. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:52, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:57, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 05:23, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, though I would have preferred a larger bottom crop per my comments above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:41, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:41, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Finland

File:Kassari mõisa tuuleveski OlariPilnik-1.jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Nov 2022 at 17:48:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry#Estonia
Info created & uploaded by OlariPilnik - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 17:48, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 17:48, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The windmill is a nice subject, but the sky and light are boring to me and the surroundings aren't that interesting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:05, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There is no light in this picture. Agree with Ikan -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:36, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 12:33, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Kruusamägi (talk) 18:32, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kassari kabeliaed OlariPilnik-1.jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Nov 2022 at 17:48:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Estonia
Info created & uploaded by OlariPilnik - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 17:48, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 17:48, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dull light and the trees are cut off at the top -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:37, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile Morin. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 12:34, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. Not great to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:49, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination In my opinion that is pretty good and even light, especially for late October. But if something more dramatic is needed, then so be it. Kruusamägi (talk) 18:32, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Padum Road Shingo La Zanskar Oct22 A7C 03574.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2022 at 04:03:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#India
Info View from Shingo La (elev. 5,054m/16,580') north towards Lungnak valley, Zanskar. Created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 04:03, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The barren mountain slopes in this high-altitude semi-desert have a fascinating range of colours. -- Tagooty (talk) 04:03, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very striking, but I doubt the circular artifact toward the upper ~~right~~ left corner of the sky is natural, and if it's not, please fix the problem. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:48, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Rather on the left corner, or is that another one? Perhaps a cloning error from removing dust spots --Julesvernex2 (talk) 21:14, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, the left (or, as we say, the "other right"). :-) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:13, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Tagooty, this seems a tad oversharpened to me. I think that shooting this scene at f/8 instead of f/16 would have produced a sharper image without any discernible loss in depth of field, and hence reduce the need to apply sharpening --Julesvernex2 (talk) 21:22, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done @Ikan Kekek and Julesvernex2: Thanks for the comments. I've fixed the sensor spot in top left, and removed the post-processing sharpening. Please see the new version. --Tagooty (talk) 03:39, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks. It's so striking, I feel impelled to vote for it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:37, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yep, there's something unique about these high altitude barren landscapes. It's not the sharpest photograph out there, but it still has plenty of resolution and detail. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 11:03, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Austere and beautiful Cmao20 (talk) 14:42, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Julesvernex2. --Aristeas (talk) 16:35, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:52, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:04, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yeriho (talk) 20:11, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 11:42, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Julesvernex2. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:03, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:11, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support striking colours --SHB2000 (talk) 01:29, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk)
Weak support The patchy snow on the summit at left still looks more like paint globs, but it doesn't ruin the image for me and I suppose there's nothing more than can be done about it. Daniel Case (talk) 14:20, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:29, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#India

File:2022-11-11 10-07-45 commemo-Meroux.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2022 at 14:09:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
Info created by ComputerHotline - uploaded by ComputerHotline - nominated by ComputerHotline -- ComputerHotline (talk) 14:09, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ComputerHotline (talk) 14:09, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question This is a new photo of someone dressed like a World War I soldier, not an old photo? Same question about the other photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:55, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Reconstruction. Comparing this image with this image, can the black pouch be authentic and why the man is wearing different helmets. Surely, one of the helmet badges must be wrong? Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:37, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Besides the fact it's a reconstruction, the image itself is very noisy, not a particularly interesting subject and what's with that weird border? BigDom (talk) 17:00, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Peulle (talk) 12:58, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 02:28, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:30, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:2022-11-11 10-14-03 commemo-Meroux.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2022 at 14:08:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
Info created by ComputerHotline - uploaded by ComputerHotline - nominated by ComputerHotline -- ComputerHotline (talk) 14:08, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ComputerHotline (talk) 14:08, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Re-enactment and all wearing different uniforms. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:14, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose An image with great historical significance could become a Featured Picture despite falling short on technical quality. As this is not an image of historical significance, I find that it cannot.--Peulle (talk) 13:00, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment IMHO re-enactments are interesting events and we could certainly feature photos taken there. This would require that the re-enactment is done well (with correct historical details) and that the photo is excellent, of course. I am not sure whether it is desirable to make photos taken at re-enactments look like old photos; that brings them into a dangerous proximity to fake photos. It may be better to show clearly that we are looking at a modern photo of a re-enactment and not at an old photo of an historic event. --Aristeas (talk) 09:39, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 18:58, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:30, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sierra Vallejo sunrise.jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2022 at 05:58:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Mexico
Info: Sunrise at Sierra Vallejo; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:58, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:58, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose All yellow, nothing interesting. Yann (talk) 10:05, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice light but nothing special that makes it one of the best images on Commons.--Peulle (talk) 11:25, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:46, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose no wow factor. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:23, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Moral support Well, I think this could actually work as a minimalist, almost abstract art photo; similar e.g. to this one. It just misses the certain something; maybe because the hill silhouettes in the background are not as nicely stacked as in the other one; maybe because the foreground could show more interesting silhouettes of trees. But IMHO you are not far away from a great minimalist landscape photo. This is also a matter of luck (to be exactly at the right time in the right place), so please look out and try to take more such photos – often they don’t work, but when they work they are wonderful. --Aristeas (talk) 11:30, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the thoughtful and constructive comment, Aristeas! --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:45, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:45, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tufted titmouse in Prospect Park (53493).jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2022 at 15:56:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Paridae_(Tits)
Info Tufted titmouse (Baeolophus bicolor) with a seed. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 15:56, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 15:56, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very cute bird and nicely photographed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:46, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:36, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The nut in the beak makes the picture special -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:09, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charming and excellent quality --Kritzolina (talk) 07:27, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:49, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan and Basile Cmao20 (talk) 14:42, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:39, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Kritzolina and Basile --Aristeas (talk) 16:36, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:52, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:06, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 11:42, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:55, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support cute! --SHB2000 (talk) 01:28, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk)
Support -- Nythar^T^.^C 06:58, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 14:16, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:24, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 16:20, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:43, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Paridae_(Tits)

File:Palm Cockatoo 0A2A7769.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2022 at 06:20:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Cacatuidae_(Cockatoos)
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison – nominated by Ivar (talk) 06:20, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 06:20, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 10:19, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 13:15, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:36, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:37, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A cool guy ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 16:42, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 16:45, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:53, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, although I think there could be crops on the right side and the bottom. I don't think significant lead room is really needed, because the bird is stationary. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:11, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:54, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:42, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nythar^T^.^C 08:26, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:56, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support (as a side note, these birds are pretty cool IRL, though I've only seen these birds in Far North Queensland and not PNG or WNG). --SHB2000 (talk) 01:27, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk)
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 16:20, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:16, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:17, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family_:_Cacatuidae_(Cockatoos)

File:Catedral de San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Tenerife, España, 2022-01-07, DD, DD 70-72 HDR.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2022 at 22:03:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Spain
Info Main nave of the Cathedral of San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain. The first documented religious building in the location dates from 1511 but the current catholic temple was built between 1904 and 1915. The cathedral contains elements of several architectural styles including Neoclassical and Neo-Gothic and it's located in the historic center of the city of La Laguna, and was declared a World Heritage Site in 1999 by UNESCO. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 22:03, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 22:03, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 22:36, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:42, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:42, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:41, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:56, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support It’s great that we can see the side altars through the arches at the left and right. --Aristeas (talk) 16:36, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:53, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:08, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 14:59, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 01:28, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk)
Support -- Nythar^T^.^C 06:57, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:02, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 16:20, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:20, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Spain

File:Siegesgöttinnen und Nischen in der Befreiungshalle.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2022 at 10:54:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Germany
Info created & uploaded by GZagatta - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 10:54, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 10:54, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose Great subject, but I'd like more sharpness and detail for FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:09, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The verticals could have been optimized here -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:53, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 18:23, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:17, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Göttingen asv2022-06 img09 Alter Botanischer Garten.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2022 at 10:13:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Order : Gunnerales
Info Leaves of Gunnera manicata (giant rhubarb) in the Old Botanical Garden of Göttingen University, all by me --A.Savin 10:13, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 10:13, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Some others might question where is the wow factor, but the eye-catching leaves have to be it. It's rare to find such eye-catching leaves like those, often because something else takes the spotlight, but it's not the case here. --SHB2000 (talk) 05:29, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like this. Daniel Case (talk) 03:13, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Bad crop and nothing extra at all. -- Karelj (talk) 10:51, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- It's very detailed and high-resolution but the plant isn't visible in its entirety so I'm not able to tell its shape. It's also quite bright at the center. The image would probably look better if the camera were a little higher. Nythar^T^.^C 07:05, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:20, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Childhood Joy.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2022 at 07:42:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Other
Info created and uploaded by Jubair Ahmed Arnob - nominated by Kritzolina -- Kritzolina (talk) 07:42, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another image from WLF. I know this image has some small technical imperfections - I hesitated nominating it for a long time. But this image brings me joy just by looking at it, so I at least wanted to give it a chance -- Kritzolina (talk) 07:42, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fine by me, very exuberant and lively photo with lots of primary colours. Technically it doesn't look so bad, a bit noisy in places but far from terrible Cmao20 (talk) 14:37, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. Wonderful colour arrangement and cheerful thanks to the children. Have taken the liberty to add the {{Personality rights}} template. --Aristeas (talk) 16:41, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 21:42, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per supporters above. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:02, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Always more willing to forgive technical shortcomings when it's a fleeting moment, y'know? It's a one-off. Adam Cuerden (talk) 07:43, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:54, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:49, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 14:15, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Adam Cuerden. Daniel Case (talk) 03:34, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 07:41, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 16:20, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:19, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People#Other

File:Templo funerario de Hatshepsut, Valle de las Reyes, Luxor, Egipto, 2022-04-03, DD 118.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2022 at 22:03:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Egypt
Info Mortuary Temple of Hatshepsut, Luxor, Egypt. The mortuary temple built during the reign of Pharaoh Hatshepsut of the Eighteenth Dynasty of Egypt. The temple is considered to be a masterpiece of ancient architecture. Its three massive terraces rise above the desert floor and into the cliffs of Deir el-Bahari. Her tomb, KV20, lies inside the same massif capped by El Qurn, a pyramid for her mortuary complex. Across the river Nile, the whole structure points towards the monumental Eighth Pylon, Hatshepsut's most recognizable addition to the Temple of Karnak and the site from which the procession of the Beautiful Festival of the Valley departed. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 22:03, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 22:03, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great in my view. Spectacular mountains in the background -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:06, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:39, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:50, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I remember it well. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:41, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 10:20, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Highlights : -Exposure ? --Mile (talk) 11:08, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mile: I've reduced the highlights a bit, good enough now for your taste? Poco a poco (talk) 19:44, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would do even more, and yes, it bothered me. Also you use some vertical comp i see. --Mile (talk) 21:38, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support I don't see the problem with the highlights. They are bright but not overexposed, no actual detail is lost. Composition is great. There does seem to be a rope that sort of vanishes into nothing on the right hand side of the frame (marked with image note) - is this a cloning error? Cmao20 (talk) 14:39, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cmao20: Indeed, a cloning issue. I had to get rid of a guy in that area. Will clean it up in a few hours. Thank you! Poco a poco (talk) 15:40, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done Poco a poco (talk) 19:44, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Cmao20 (talk) 02:33, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:38, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive, and excellent use of wide-angle perspective. --Aristeas (talk) 16:38, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Gorgeous, as many of your Egypt pictures, but it still needs perspective correction on the horizontals to me. Btw, would you mind sharing how safe the trip was? I've read a thing or two about safety in Egypt and it's a bit off putting - Benh (talk) 07:41, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Benh: I've applied a very slight perspective correction, otherwise it looks pretty good to me. Regarding safety I have to say that my personal first experience in Cairo 11 years ago was not good. It didn't feel safe to me back then. That was one of the reasons (along with lack of time and the hope to be in the places before the big groups show up and spoil the pictures) that I booked a private tour. Doing so I had no problems at all, but it wasn't really cheap. Still, I'd do it again that way. --Poco a poco (talk) 22:12, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Thank you so much for the fix and interesting testimony. It's interesting to know from someone reliable that a private tour gets you safety and tranquility. Whatever the extra price, it seems totally worth it to me. - Benh (talk) 11:45, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Nythar^T^.^C 08:28, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 01:28, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk)
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:05, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 07:34, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:19, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Egypt

File:Moros i Cristians de Muro 2022 - 119.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2022 at 20:42:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
Info created by TaronjaSatsuma - uploaded by TaronjaSatsuma - nominated by TaronjaSatsuma -- TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 20:42, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 20:42, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Gallery link added. Most similar photos are in the People#Events section and one would also search for this one in that section, so let us use that link. Your friendly gallery link service ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 09:33, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I find the cut-off half face very unflattering.--Ermell (talk) 10:33, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In my view, the mirrored image should be either in full, or absent, but not cut off like this in the middle -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:40, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose per Ermell Cmao20 (talk) 11:53, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile and Ermell. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 12:35, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice motive... but per opposers above. --Cayambe (talk) 15:38, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:24, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I didn't notice the face being cut off because in general the image is just too busy for FP. There are also technical issues: it's not as sharp on the face as one would expect of an FP, and then there's the blown earring. Daniel Case (talk) 19:19, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 00:26, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gebarsten bolster van een paardenkastanje (Aesculus) 13-10-2022 (d.j.b.) 02.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2022 at 06:33:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Sapindaceae
Info Cracked husk of a horse chestnut Aesculus hippocastanum between fallen leaves. Focus stack of 15 photos.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 06:33, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 06:33, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:37, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:53, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Did you miss an image from the stack? - the focus is out bottom left. Many blurred background areas which need retouching around the top of the husk. And a lot of reflection highlights. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:14, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. New version. Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 21:19, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:13, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the improved version. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:48, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 20:29, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk)
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:32, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:07, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support some frames were not at perfect focus. -- Ivar (talk) 16:25, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 08:56, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Sapindaceae

File:Blick über den Brooksfleet auf die Speicher am Brook-1000288.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2022 at 18:27:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 18:27, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 18:27, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:33, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Why have you cropped the bottom off, Frank? Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:59, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because the green roof at the bottom would otherwise shift the compositional weight too far to the left. Best, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:28, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:50, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I miss some vibrance here, arent "red" bricks more red ?! --Mile (talk) 09:58, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mile, thanks so much for your feedback! Much appreciated. I uploaded a new, improved version. Hope this works now. Best, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 00:57, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support At the first glance the green roof at the bottom is irritating, but when I look at this photo in full size it is very impressive – captures character and spirit of the proud Hanse city Hamburg. --Aristeas (talk) 08:31, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Bad crop and the part of roof in front of image is not looking good at all, nothing extra. -- Karelj (talk) 11:03, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like it now - 2nd version, almost "Rear window" scene. --Mile (talk) 11:07, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The wow effect appears in full-screen view. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:23, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:51, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Very weak oppose A noble effort and a definite QI, but for the reasons given by the photographer it just can't make it as an FP. Daniel Case (talk) 22:17, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I would prefer to see more at the bottom, even if that increases the amount of left-biased green roof we see. Currently, I feel like it's not quite vertically balanced, and the cut-off green awning at the bottom left is distracting. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:52, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 14:40, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 08:57, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany

File:Lobi neeme OlariPilnik-4.jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2022 at 19:45:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Estonia#Lääne-Viru County
Info created & uploaded by OlariPilnik - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 19:45, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Lobi cape in Estonia during late October, that really has the sense of a typical gray autumn. Kruusamägi (talk) 19:45, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 19:45, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment To me this looks tilted - would be happy to support if it wasn't --Kritzolina (talk) 07:59, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unsharp, low DoF, and the light is dull -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:25, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile, I love foggy photos, but this is neither cold nor hot. — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 19:53, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose And it's noisy. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 08:59, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Kruusamägi (talk) 10:27, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Self-portrait of Jeremiah Gurney.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2022 at 06:41:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info created by Jeremiah Gurney - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:41, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:41, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Considering the original size of the photo and how it looks blown up, I think the dimensions of the file are unnecessarily large, but the photo looks very good at the original size and somewhat larger. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:46, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk)
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:52, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The original is really good for a self-portrait photograph; the focussing etc. must have been quite difficult. I actually like the filesize/resolution: I love to see the structure/texture of the original. --Aristeas (talk) 10:43, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:01, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 14:13, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 07:39, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 11:54, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 07:01, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:14, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:32, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People/Portrait#Men

File:Common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes schweinfurthii) feeding.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2022 at 09:24:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Hominidae (Great Apes)
Info One FP of our nearest animal relative. All by Charlesjsharp-- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:24, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:24, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:57, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 16:19, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 18:31, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 05:38, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:49, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:07, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:48, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 11:23, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:33, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:25, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals#Family : Hominidae (Great Apes)

File:Struga Panorama, October 2019.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2022 at 11:02:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#North_Macedonia
Info created by Liridon - uploaded by Liridon - nominated by Liridon -- Liridon (talk) 11:02, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Liridon (talk) 11:02, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose To me, this is overexposed, and the sun is too big. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:58, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose We don't see the sun much in England in November, so perhaps the sun is getting closer - that would explain global warming. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:44, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Honestly I think it's kind of fun and interesting to have a big bright sun in the centre of the image. It's something different for sure, and we don't have any lens flare or any of the technical defects one would fear with such a choice. I definitely don't find it overexposed - if anything the highlights are not quite bright *enough*, I think the sun could do with being a bit brighter and a bit less grey. The detail of the town is certainly not overexposed, and the light is quite atmospheric Cmao20 (talk) 00:08, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Cmao20 - this is meant to look like this and it is well executed as well as impressive --Kritzolina (talk) 07:30, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 08:36, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ikan. Too low quality. -- Karelj (talk) 11:46, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Composition and quality aren't outstanding. Too much sky, bad crop at the bottom, too noisy, stitching error in the lower right part. --Milseburg (talk) 15:19, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Actually pretty good technically IMO, but just doesn't stand out enough for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 03:42, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:33, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:CRS-20 Dragon–Enhanced.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2022 at 06:38:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Space exploration#Spacecraft in orbit
Info created by Johnson Space Center - original image was uploaded by Ultimograph5 - nominated by Nythar. Image of SpaceX CRS-20, the final flight of the Dragon 1 spacecraft. -- Nythar^T^.^C 06:38, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nythar^T^.^C 06:38, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 11:58, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose CAs should be removed. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 12:33, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Sebring12Hrs: I believe you are referring to chromatic aberration? I've edited the image, please tell me if it has been removed. (The edited image is File:CRS-20 Dragon–Enhanced.jpg; I'm still trying to figure out how to replace the image above.) Nythar^T^.^C 00:58, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Much better ! Thanks you. FP now --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 10:15, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Nythar: I assume that you want to use your enhanced version for the nomination instead of the original one. I have replaced it for you and renamed the nomination accordingly etc. Hope it helps, --Aristeas (talk) 11:38, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Aristeas: That's really helpful, thanks! Nythar^T^.^C 11:40, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Nythar: You are welcome ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 11:43, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 01:22, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 11:01, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the enhanced version. --Aristeas (talk) 11:34, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:42, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm not sure what the cloud-like fuzziness on the left is, but I think this photo is too good not to support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:20, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the improved version. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:51, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mosbatho (talk) 16:27, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 07:03, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:21, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:31, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Space exploration#Spacecraft in orbit

File:Rostocker Pfeilstorch.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2022 at 15:25:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Order : Ciconiiformes (Storks)
Info created by the Zoological Collection of the University of Rostock - uploaded by Reinhard Kraasch - nominated by Ich -- Ich (talk) 15:25, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ich (talk) 15:25, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's a shame that this is technically a poor image by today's standards. It is well worth reading the Wikipedia article Pfeilstorch. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:41, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support passable quality, high educational value. Tomer T (talk) 17:57, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles, but should be a VI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:54, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Tomer --Muhammad (talk) 06:56, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose imo the quality and reso should be very good. -- Ivar (talk) 07:06, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Wandelndes Lexikon (talk) 20:09, 15 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Charlesjsharp and Ivar. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 12:15, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting photo but IMO just not sharp enough for an easily photographed static motif Cmao20 (talk) 14:43, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 02:31, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 23:03, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Southern gelada (Theropithecus gelada obscura) female with baby.jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2022 at 09:14:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Cercopithecidae (Old World Monkeys)
Info Child care from the 'bleeding-heart monkey'. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:14, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:14, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I like the photo, but I wonder if it would make sense to blur the bokeh more, as the effect of the partially blurred background feels aggressive and distracts me from the monkeys. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:12, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't like to blur backgrounds. Happier for it to fail. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:22, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:33, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:33, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gutshof Nassanger Luftbild-20220807-RM-155224.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Nov 2022 at 15:57:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Germany
Info A striking and well composed drone photo under beautiful light. created by Ermell - uploaded by Ermell - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 15:57, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 15:57, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This photo shows the Nassanger Manor which was built in 1693 as a perfect circle – a unique feature among agricultural manors in Germany. But from the ground you never really see the full circular structure. Here this drone photo is really ideal because it reveals at the first glance the specific plan of the building. --Aristeas (talk) 18:36, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:48, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 16:19, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 16:54, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 18:32, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 05:39, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:49, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:03, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:10, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:42, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Tree leaves seem to be blurred a bit (even at 50%; especially in the right bottom). Although trees aren't main subject of the photo, it's too much IMO. It's a pity, because the picture is overally nice. — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 20:12, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nomination and the votes.--Ermell (talk) 16:08, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Reminds me the Fujian tulou in China -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:39, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Thanks for the tip. But here was the manure pile in the middle which has probably somewhat reduced the quality of living.--Ermell (talk) 10:25, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps Apple Park got inspired? :-) Basile Morin (talk) 00:38, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --BigDom (talk) 10:59, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support One that I should be able to find fault with, but I don't. Daniel Case (talk) 00:27, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:21, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 00:28, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Germany

File:Perrinia elisa 01.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Nov 2022 at 05:49:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Shells#Family : Chilodontidae
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 05:49, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 05:49, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 10:59, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:08, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 14:09, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:37, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful shells, like little precious artworks. --Aristeas (talk) 18:46, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 07:32, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 16:19, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:01, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 17:09, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:34, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:32, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 14:38, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 16:20, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 00:25, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 03:00, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 00:28, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Shells#Family : Chilodontidae

File:Nava Kailash - DJI 0332 - Copy.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Nov 2022 at 04:53:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#India
Info created by Dibphoto - uploaded by Dibphoto - nominated by Bodhisattwa -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 04:53, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 04:53, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It’s only a few days since we have promoted that photo of the same temple to FP status. Do you want to replace it, i.e. to feature this photo instead of that one? Then a “delist and replace” nomination would be appropriate ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 07:06, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question @Dibphoto and Sudipta Maulik: And this is funny: According to the EXIF data, both photos have been taken with the same drone model at the same day only 5 minutes apart, but one is attributed to Dibyendu Biswas and the other one to Sudipta Maulik. Were there two drones (of the same model) in the sky, or did you share one and the same drone, or …? That’s all OK, it’s not forbidden or so, but it would be good to understand this. Best --Aristeas (talk) 07:13, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Aristeas: , I actually wanted to nominate this image without replacing the other one, which was a great shot too. Regarding the question about same drone model and timing of the two images, it has come to my knowledge that the photographers own two separate drones but of the same model, went together to that place to photograph the monument and flew the two drones together to take their shots at the same time. :) -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 08:36, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Bodhisattwa: Thank you very much for the information! Now we understand the photos and the nomination better. --Aristeas (talk) 08:49, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The camera is pointed at an odd angle, that's not a perfect 90 degree angle, if it's supposed to be a top down photo, let's make it 90 degrees. Sea Cow (talk) 16:58, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No need for two virtually identical FPs of the same motif, I would support a delist and replace but there is no point in this nomination Cmao20 (talk) 12:31, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao20. BigDom (talk) 16:08, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 18:32, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 00:27, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rani ki vav - Patan - Gujarat - Wall Decorations.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Nov 2022 at 04:40:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: ~~Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#India~~ Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Statues_outdoors
Info created by Snehrashmi - uploaded by Snehrashmi - nominated by Bodhisattwa -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 04:40, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 04:40, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A more appropriate gallery is Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Statues_outdoors, IMO. --Tagooty (talk) 04:49, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- @Tagooty: - I have changed the gallery. Thanks for suggesting. -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 04:56, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good framing. WLM winner. -Nizil Shah (talk) 05:36, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good shot of really beautiful Terracottawork, thank you for nominating this! --Kritzolina (talk) 07:57, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 13:38, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:06, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 14:10, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:39, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:58, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:45, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice carvings, the light is fine -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:22, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 07:34, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 11:33, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 16:19, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:02, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:31, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 16:22, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Gazal world (talk) 17:21, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:31, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 00:27, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Sculptures#Statues_outdoors

File:Jeremiah Gurney - Photograph of Euphrosyne Parepa-Rosa.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2022 at 05:58:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Women
Info created by Jeremiah Gurney - restored, uploaded and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:58, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:58, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:16, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 14:57, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:51, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:40, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk)
Support -- Nythar^T^.^C 06:49, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:30, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 07:40, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:48, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People/Portrait#Women

File:Heyne-Lesesaal der Niedersächsischen Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen-1000196.jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Dec 2022 at 17:07:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Interiors#Germany
Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 17:07, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 17:07, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am sure you took a bunch of images - I'd rather have more books than walkways. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:56, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point. How about this one? --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 19:30, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I like it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:23, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Much better. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:05, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Yes, I took a bunch of other images :-) --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:04, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lagoa do Capitão com montanha do pico.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Nov 2022 at 10:28:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Portugal
Info created and uploaded by Pablosievert - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 10:28, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:28, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support interesting composition - Benh (talk) 15:58, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 16:19, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 16:44, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 17:13, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 05:38, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nice one! Nythar^T^.^C 06:58, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:09, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:10, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 19:52, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Benh. --Aristeas (talk) 09:49, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Strange and compelling photo Cmao20 (talk) 12:34, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mile (talk) 12:43, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:09, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 16:18, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 03:05, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:23, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support One that shouldn't work but does ... maybe because the apparent knot of branches is centered almost exactly on the sun? Daniel Case (talk) 17:30, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:08, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:08, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Portugal

File:Panorama vom Rothaus-Zäpfle-Turm.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2022 at 15:31:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Germany
Info Panoramic view (360°) from the Rothaus-Zäpfle-Tower in the near of Höchenschwand, Baden-Württemberg, Germany with view to the Alps during meteorological inversion
Support -- Milseburg (talk) 15:31, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive panorama up to the highest technical standards, especially an excellent level of fine details. The sea of clouds in the background adds much to the atmosphere. --Aristeas (talk) 16:44, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:54, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not a fan of the long strip format, which IMO lessens the use cases of the full photo. And for browsing, a spherical panorama (edit: with larger vertical FOV) is much better. Interesting example of thermal inversion though. - Benh (talk) 19:40, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

just noticed after zooming back that the part of sky under the sun is darker than the rest. I believe it should be the opposite (at least it should be even). - Benh (talk) 19:43, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Too long to be useful. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:11, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive to me and serves as a reference. People don't usually read reference books cover to cover; if you think of that analogy, it is relatively much easier to look at this entire panorama. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:05, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To extend the analogy, if this were a book it would be published in more than one volume. One would be too difficult to read. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:48, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In a book it would be a image to be unfold. There are books with such panoramas. Milseburg (talk) 16:43, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Mainly per my comment on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Winterpanorama von der Milseburg.jpg. And also per Benh and Charles -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:00, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A spherical panorama would be uninteresting here, because then the majority of the image would be dominated by the observation deck and the landscape would be largely obscured by it. The conditions on the Rothaus-Zäpfle-Tower are different than on the aforementioned Milseburg, where you are completely outdoors. The way shown here is the only way to show the complete panorama of the sorounding landscape.--Milseburg (talk) 16:40, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unless I miss something, there should be a way to make it an interesting spherical panorama judging by how the observation deck is from the photos. You can circle through the deck and remain close to the border. This would involve parallax issue, but nothing that can't be concealed in the vegetation which is very stitching friendly (I've seen much more tricky stitching). And as a benefit everything down to the bottom of the tower would be offered for us to stare at. Benh (talk) 19:15, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Believe me, the blue empty sky and the tennis hall, the sports fields, the sauna and the outdoor sauna area around the tower are not as interesting enough that you have to inflate the panorama so that no one can load it anymore. Milseburg (talk) 22:05, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support 360 panoramas are not very interesting to me either, but I am persuaded by Ikan's reasoning that this is an important document of the view, and there has clearly been a lot of effort to produce it Cmao20 (talk) 11:52, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk)
Support -- Je-str (talk) 11:00, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sometimes I oppose on the grounds that the image is not enough ... it is like part of a better image. Here the image is too much ... I understand the desire to have a 360º panorama but outside of the sea-of-clouds part it is less interesting. Daniel Case (talk) 06:26, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 08:58, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per other opposers plus the clouds are almost overexposed at some places. -- Ivar (talk) 16:24, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:37, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Monti Sibillini.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2022 at 16:42:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Italy
Info created and uploaded by Alessandro Mangione - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 16:42, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:42, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question What is so special about these weird vehicles? Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:10, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp I've never seen this kind of self-propelled hay rake or mower. The large ones are/were usually attached to/pulled by a regular tractor/horse. There are small ones you can attach to a two-wheel tractor and all kinds of self-propelled mowers that require you to walk behind them. Self-propelles ones you can sit on are rare, at least in most parts of Europe. Knowing that alpine environments like this require specialized hay making equipment (to the point that on certain slopes in Switzerland they still use old-fashioned scythes because nothing else will work there), these look super interesting to me. El Grafo (talk) 10:41, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Fails on technical grounds, imo. There's posterization in the sky and the detail level is not high enough.--Peulle (talk) 12:16, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The sky could do with denoising, but otherwise this is technically fine for a 15 megapixel image in my view, and I like the composition and light Cmao20 (talk) 11:53, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. -- Radomianin (talk) 16:52, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose An FP of a landscape should be printable in poster size, this one lacks detail when zoomed in. --Tagooty (talk) 04:57, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As noted, the sky is noisy; in my experience, when its color is this shade of electric blue, especially this oversaturated, and it was not taken during wintertime, it is a good indicator that the image was misprocessed in other ways. Daniel Case (talk) 19:07, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:36, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aachener Dom - Zentralbau - Kuppel (8416).jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2022 at 14:33:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Germany
Info Very high quality photo of a beautiful and iconic ceiling - the chandelier here is famous enough to have its own Wikipedia article. No FPs of this famous place at the moment. created by T meltzer - uploaded by T meltzer - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 14:33, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 14:33, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 16:45, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:46, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:07, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 10:36, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 11:04, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:00, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nythar^T^.^C 08:24, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:58, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't be better to rotate 180° and have Jesus in bottom, since there is no one on opposite side ? --Mile (talk) 18:46, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tagooty (talk) 04:53, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'd also prefer the rotation --Llez (talk)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 16:20, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The reflections of lights look unnatural and overprocessed, and it does not seem that they had to be. Daniel Case (talk) 06:20, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Daniel Case, too much overprocessed for FP. Look at the windows. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 19:56, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Per Daniel and Sebring. Less shrarpening might help. I also plead for rotation (see Jesus and central angel). — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 20:00, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:37, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Germany

File:Bitobolo Village.jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2022 at 18:48:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Congo
Info created and uploaded by Tyron Amanpour - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 18:48, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 18:48, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now, as there is CA. I'm guessing the house in the left foreground is really slanted like that? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:30, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek: CAs were reduced to some extent but unfortunately I couldn't fix it completely, I hope Tyron Amanpour is ok with this new version. IMO the main motif of this image is different subject of rural life in Central African countries + composition. Most of these countries contribute little to Commons and FP Gallery, except in the field of wildlife. -- IamMM (talk) 16:14, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely understand. The photo looks much better to me, but there are still some trees that appear to have borders on them. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:03, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Beautiful, but maybe a bit oversaturated. Cmao20 (talk) 16:10, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Oversaturated. — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 15:20, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. The colors don't seem natural to me -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:30, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thanks for comments. -- IamMM (talk) 08:57, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Triton-en.svg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Dec 2022 at 05:29:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SVG diagram of Triton, the largest moon of Uranus

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Computer-generated#Astronomy
Info created by A loose necktie - uploaded by A loose necktie - nominated by A loose necktie (talk) 05:29, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- A loose necktie (talk) 05:29, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I changed the gallery to a more appropriate one. BigDom (talk) 08:22, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment You need to check the text on the image. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:03, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question What should be changed? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:43, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Many new versions have been uploaded. Is this OR? Description of atmosphere doesn't agree with English Wikipedia article. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:23, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely NOT OR. I have made this version in alignment with current (as of 2022) research on Triton. I have now modified the atmosphere to reflect the corresponding Wikipedia article. The bottom line is that we don't really know what Triton "actually" looks like on the inside, but this image matches current understanding of its likely content, and I very much doubt that any planetary astronomer will disagree with the interpretation presented here. References available, if that will be helpful.1 2 A loose necktie (talk) 12:33, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Definitely OR and misleading too. The size of the supposed layers does not in any way agree with the diagram in your reference 2 . Neither do the supposed contents of each layer. This diagram should be removed from English Wikipedia (where you placed it ten days ago). If this is peer-reviewed and agreed to be authoritative, then of course any approved version could be put back. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:03, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question What does OR mean? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:54, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

original research Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:11, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. I'm the son of an anthropologist who did really important original research. Original research is responsible for scientific progress. Is Commons opposed to it? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:09, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because Commons is not run by "experts", the presentation of "original research" is considered generally inappropriate because no one can be vetted as being a qualified researcher. I myself am not an astronomer, just an editor and would-be graphic designer. I understand that this FP nomination is now dead in the water, but I would like to know how (specifically) others feel my depiction does not align with the references I provided. I tried to be very careful in this regard, and given the degree of ambiguity that exists around Triton as a planetary body, felt I had done a good job of this. Misleading? How can a thing which is unknown be misleading? A loose necktie (talk) 04:54, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If Ikan Kekek's father's work was published then that is exactly what we should reference on Wikipedia. If it was not published, then that would be OR. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:12, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm talking about my mother. Sure, her work was published big-time, but it was her original work. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:44, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia (though not Commons) requires that even published works that are original and even vetted be treated as less reliable than secondary sources-- sources which discuss that work. And so while your mom's work could be cited in an article, other editors would likely treat it as less reliable than sources which discussed her work. None of this is really supposed to apply to a Featured Picture discussion, in which the criteria for a diagram is supposed to be the quality of the image. I suspect another editor (Charles Sharp) has mistaken a diagram of Neptune (that appears in one of my references) for a diagram of Triton, though the diagram I created is accurate and contemporary. But I cannot stop this now, as the Neutral vote below shows. A loose necktie (talk) 02:00, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral per discussion. Daniel Case (talk) 16:49, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Charlesjsharp Please confirm that you are not confusing my diagram with the diagram of the planet Neptune that is shown in the reference I provided. My diagram is of Triton, not Neptune, and no visual diagram of Triton appears in the refs. Thanks. A loose necktie (talk) 01:49, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sorry; the diagram was of Neptune. Many apologies. With no diagram, then your work is unfortunately OR. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:15, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So I made a diagram according to the specific text of several scientific articles, a Commons editor mistakenly accused me of OR, apologized by saying that while he had made a mistake, the fact that I had not used a diagram for my diagram meant my diagram was still OR, and so the whole thing failed. Do I have this right, Charlesjsharp? And also, you may notice that there is no policy on Commons against "original research": COM:OR has nothing to do with it which is why you were unable to link to it above. Featured Picture consideration is, as far as I understand it, meant to focus on the nature of the material itself, not on whether or not it satisfies some Wikipedia policy regarding its accuracy according to scientific precedence (though it actually does this as well). There are no criteria under Commons FP that say anything at all about original research. So, can you clarify for me please? Thank you. A loose necktie (talk) 02:23, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 11:16, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Indira-Gandhi-Straße Berlin in September 2022.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2022 at 21:49:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Germany
Info created by Kurmanbek - uploaded by Kurmanbek - nominated by Kurmanbek -- Kurmanbek (talk) 21:49, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kurmanbek (talk) 21:49, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing special. Try COM:QIC. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:45, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No 'wow', plus the sky looks very processed. BigDom (talk) 10:49, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, this photo hasn't any processing. Kurmanbek (talk) 17:45, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not by you perhaps, but by the phone definitely. BigDom (talk) 18:43, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would not mind the sky in this photo – the sky can actually look that way in reality, of course. But yes, iPhones and Co. process by default every photo heavily, to mitigate the disadvantages of their tiny image sensors and to give photos more “wow”. This can be avoided on many smartphones by recording photos in the raw image format; this allows the users to do the processing themselves. But that’s a lot of work, of course ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 08:07, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Okay thanks :) Kurmanbek (talk) 23:11, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, just looks like a random photo of a street on a nice day. Daniel Case (talk) 01:07, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 11:15, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Berlin Französischer Dom in September 2022.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2022 at 21:22:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info created by Kurmanbek - uploaded by Kurmanbek - nominated by Kurmanbek -- Kurmanbek (talk) 21:22, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kurmanbek (talk) 21:22, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The extreme distortion isn't working in my eyes. --Milseburg (talk) 21:29, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Same as Milseburg, also the sky looks totally unnatural. BigDom (talk) 10:45, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Milseburg, BigDom + bad crop. — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 11:12, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Impressive architecture but sadly the perspective distortion isn't working for me either Cmao20 (talk) 19:56, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose I realize the photographer liked this view, but if you shoot that you still have to consider some degree of perspective correction as its absence, if deliberate, looks too self-consciously arty, and even beyond that there is no excuse for cropping it like this, especially with the perspective distortion. Daniel Case (talk) 21:37, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 11:14, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:ISS020-E-09048 Sarychev.jpg (delist), delisted edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Nov 2022 at 16:26:19

Info This is identical to File:Sarychev Peak.jpg, which was promoted in 2010 and won 3rd place in that year's POTY. This second nomination of the same image (rotated) should not have been promoted. (Original nomination)
Delist — Rhododendrites ^talk | 16:26, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment They're both quite good, so I'm reluctant to support delisting either one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:08, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ikan Kekek: They should be equally good, because it's the same image but rotated. Presumably we could rotate many of our FPs and produce good images, but should we feature them? — Rhododendrites ^talk | 17:17, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's exactly the same image, just rotated? If so, it does make sense to delist one of them. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:18, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delist Duplicate. Yann (talk) 17:13, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per nom. Tomer T (talk) 19:26, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delist — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 19:33, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Kruusamägi (talk) 20:20, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and merge into the duplicated file. --A.Savin 20:22, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delist -- Ivar (talk) 16:19, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per nomination. --Aristeas (talk) 19:42, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Daniel Case (talk) 17:21, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Between both I would have delisted the other one, because I find the crop a bit tight around. However, I think this one, promoted later, is redundant -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:16, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 10 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. /Yann (talk) 21:36, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Алея до пам'ятника розстріляним у Бабиному Яру дітям.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Nov 2022 at 14:28:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Ukraine
Info created by Andrii Didkivskyi - uploaded by Didkov - nominated by Didkov -- Didkov (talk) 14:28, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Didkov (talk) 14:28, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose IMO overprocessed, the grain is too strong, so it washed out all details from the tree leaves. (I guess it's postprocessing, ISO 100 shoudn't appear so.) Geolocation and English description would be nice. Otherwise it's a good shot. — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 19:46, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your opinion. Didkov (talk) 07:58, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Draceane. Daniel Case (talk) 05:03, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:37, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Arabic Varieties Map.svg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Nov 2022 at 07:36:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Maps#Other_maps
Info created by Goran tek-en - uploaded by Goran tek-en - nominated by A455bcd9 -- A455bcd9 (talk) 07:36, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- A455bcd9 (talk) 07:36, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- High educational value. It is unfortunate for me that I did not know about the existence of Uzbeki Arabic and Tajiki Arabic until now. -- IamMM (talk) 06:41, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment looking at the use of {{No edit no revision}}: having a non-standard template in the main template namespace with a general name but an individual user's name hard-coded into it seems a bit hacky ... --El Grafo (talk) 08:02, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch. Well, I think this template would be useful for more contributors, we would just need to make the name of the user configurable via a template parameter. @Goran tek-en: Your template {{No edit no revision}} is a good idea and well done, but El Grafo is right that this template now appears like a template for general use (it’s in the name template namespace and has a general name), but your name is hardcoded into it. We could easily make this template even more useful for other users by making the name of the creator/user configurable via a template parameter. Would you be happy with that? It’s easy, I can do it for you. Or we can make a copy of that template in your user space (e.g. as {{User:Goran tek-en/No edit no revision}}), then you can keep your name hard-coded. What would you prefer? No offence, we just want to help, --Aristeas (talk) 09:03, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Aristeas None taken, it's just fine. I created/started to use it because many of the maps/illustrations I create or a bit complex and often when you need to edit something you need the full original file to be able to edit it correctly. If then something has been edited in the uploaded version it makes this hard. But on the other hand this (wikimedia) is all about all of us helping out so it's a bit contradicting, I know.

So if it's considered this template can be useful generally I'm all for making it configurable (I didn't/don't have that knowledge) and I didn't realize this with the namespace, I just looked at other templates and copy/edited.

So please edit the one existing and I would be happy to get information on what you are doing (likes to learn).

Will it be like "Contact the Author" or what do you mean, instead of my hard-coded name?

Thanks for the help! --please ping me-- Goran tek-en (talk) 13:58, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Goran tek-en: Thank you very much for your consent! Well, I have tried to adapt your template – see the talk page of the template for a short account of what I have done. If more discussion is needed, we should continue it on that talk page, too, in order to keep this discussion here focussed on the FP state of the map. Hope it helps and best regards, --Aristeas (talk) 17:24, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Arabic is one of the most important languages with a rich history and literature, and this map successfully visualizes the distribution of its many varieties. --Aristeas (talk) 09:03, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 09:58, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose We should be aware that there are many issues with this at current FP nomination at English Wikipedia Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:27, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp: what are the "many issues with this"? (besides M.Bitton's opinion mentioning "asinine errors" without pointing specifically to any or providing any reliable source to back their claim) A455bcd9 (talk) 07:29, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea which is right, but the distribution map presented here varies markedly from the relevannt English Wikipedia articles (e.g. nos. 20,23, 25, 26). Can I suggest you validate the data and correct the articles or map (which is wrong) before nominating here. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:51, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Charlesjsharp. I don't understand, I looked at the numbers you cited:
- 20: Hijazi Arabic => the map used on Wikipedia is unsourced original research ("Source Own work") however the geographical distribution of Hijazi on this map is roughly consistent with the new map
- 23: Dhofari Arabic => the map previously on Wikipedia was incorrect and contributors (including M.Bitton) accepted to change it to use the same source as this map
- 25: Ta'izzi-Adeni Arabic => there's no language distribution map in this article but the article says that this dialect "is native to the areas of South Western Yemen and the nearby country of Djibouti" => this is consistent with this map
- 26: Hadrami Arabic => similarly, no map in this article (and not many sources either...). The article says that it is spoken by the en:Hadhrami people, that article contains a map that is again consistent with this new map.
What are the inconsistencies you identified? A455bcd9 (talk) 18:18, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FYI @Charlesjsharp: M.Bitton has just uploaded the new map for 23/Dhofari Arabic, using the same source (Ethnologue). A455bcd9 (talk) 20:03, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I suggest other editors have a look at the number errors that have been highlighted on Commons and en.wp discussions. Those are just the tip of the iceberg as the map is still new and most editors too busy and less invested to counteract the unbelievable amount of work (by the nominator) that has gone into plastering it all over the place in order to claim that "it's used in other projects". M.Bitton (talk) 14:13, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your feedback @M.Bitton. The map shows the view of Ethnologue. As such, there are no errors per se. On the other hand, for sure, there may be errors in the original source (Ethnologue). But I think that's a different discussion. A455bcd9 (talk) 14:59, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@M.Bitton: I would also like to know more about these mentioned errors. The main thing I understand from reading the long discussions here, the image talk page and the English WP nom is that they have little to do with this nomination on Commons. Disputes about image usage in English wiki articles should be resolved there. What I see is just a map based on Ethnologue data. -- IamMM (talk) 15:27, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Certainly this map can be improved – such a map summarizes a lot of data, so it can easily lack reliable sources for some points and contain ambiguities and errors. However, to be honest, the discussion on the English Wikipedia gives the impression that not all participants are only concerned about improving the map, but that a war is being fought here between different Wikipedia contributors. Maybe this impression is wrong, I certainly hope it is wrong, but the style and wording of some comments there gives that impression. It is therefore very difficult to judge whether this map is really so problematic or if that discussion is particularly about rivalries between contributors … That’s a pity, as we all should be devoted to the one goal of free reliable knowlegde and not to personal rivalries. --Aristeas (talk) 16:49, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Aristeas: Hi and thanks for your comment. You can judge whether the map is problematic or not by looking at the sources used to create this map. They're all listed on File:Arabic Varieties Map.svg. Most of them come from Ethnologue, which is considered a reliable source in linguistics per en:Ethnologue#Reception,_reliability,_and_use. Of course this source itself may contain errors and if such errors are found and documented by other reliable sources, we could and should update this map accordingly, or upload a new one. Cheers, A455bcd9 (talk) 12:05, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose I respect the amount of work that went into this, but not only are there the questions above about its accuracy and reliability, it's a very busy image (of necessity) that once we're sure about the information it conveys is probably better fitted as a VI. Daniel Case (talk) 17:16, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Daniel Case: thanks for your feedback. Why would it be better as a Valued Image? (I can't grasp the difference between FP and VI tbh...) A455bcd9 (talk) 18:26, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 11:13, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Berliner Stadtschloss, September 2022-L1000099.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Nov 2022 at 04:35:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:35, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:35, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 05:39, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support At the first glance I thought the left crop was unfortunate. But after comparing some photos which show more at the left (e.g. this one), I see that showing more of the façade at the left would make the photo boring. So this is actually a clever composition. --Aristeas (talk) 08:52, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Nothing boring on the left to me in that composition, whose left I prefer to this composition; the boring part in that composition is on the right. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:15, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:05, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:30, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support To me, picking only part of the facade to focus on is totally fine Cmao20 (talk) 12:33, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The construction fences are authentic but not optimal for a FP. A better FP should be possible after the end of the construction work. I would prefer the whole building. --Milseburg (talk) 14:36, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Similar to Milseburg, I'm not as concerned about the construction fences but I think a composition with more of the building visible would be better. BigDom (talk) 10:57, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Considering how much I prefer the composition of the other photo linked above, I agree with you guys. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:29, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain per Milseburg. Daniel Case (talk) 00:39, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 11:12, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Käsmu sadam OlariPilnik-2.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2022 at 19:45:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Transport#Water transport infrastructure
Info created & uploaded by OlariPilnik - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 19:45, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 19:45, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support: lovely light and colours --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:40, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:47, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 07:11, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Tight crop on the upper edge. — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 19:53, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:31, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:38, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 11:12, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Festival Queen of Palawod Festival.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2022 at 07:50:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
Info created and uploaded by CharMel Creations - nominated by Kritzolina -- Kritzolina (talk) 07:50, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another colorful and joyful take from Wiki Loves Folklore -- Kritzolina (talk) 07:50, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Great idea and motif, but given the relatively low resolution I don't feel that the detail level is high enough for FP. --Peulle (talk) 11:23, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I even like it. Simbioze of colors. --Mile (talk) 18:47, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral per Peulle. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:22, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle.--Ermell (talk) 10:57, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Now this is a hard one. The motif is great as is the contrast between the colourful figure and the simple black asphalt (?), but indeed the quality is not great. --Aristeas (talk) 18:40, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle and Ermell. Daniel Case (talk) 18:42, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 11:11, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Garibaldi Lake seen from Panorama Ridge.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2022 at 01:52:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#British Columbia
Info: Garibaldi Lake seen from Panorama Ridge; all by --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:52, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:52, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Excellent quality for what if I'm not mistaken is a cellphone pic, but not one of the greatest photos on the site. We see regions of oversharpening and unsharpness that don't look good at larger sizes. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:49, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. Nice scene but technically not quite there. BigDom (talk) 20:31, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support a nice scene but I don't like how the clouds are cut off. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:24, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is a lens camera with its own sensor that is clamped to the mobile phone and then controlled with it. The photographer did not reveal how many shots he used to compose the picture. Unfortunately, the Exif does not give any information about the lens used. The quality is ok for this kind of equipment.--Ermell (talk) 11:18, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: used 4 frames for this version; added a single frame alternative. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:34, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose The clouds in the right seem to have strange, greenish hue, IMO. Nice composition. — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 20:06, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. --Fischer.H (talk) 15:49, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative edit

Info: a single frame version for more consistent quality. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:34, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:34, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 16:20, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support This is much better, but the crop spoils the composition. — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 20:06, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:09, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm really sorry but neither version is FP to me. They are very beautiful in terms of composition and colours but the level of detail preserved is not FP, it feels both oversharpened and undetailed at full size Cmao20 (talk) 12:14, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao 20. --Fischer.H (talk) 15:55, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 11:10, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Templo funerario de Hatshepsut, Luxor, Egipto, 2022-04-03, DD 13.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Nov 2022 at 22:28:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Egypt
Info Aerial view during sunrise of the Mortuary Temple of Hatshepsut, Luxor, Egypt. The mortuary temple built during the reign of Pharaoh Hatshepsut of the Eighteenth Dynasty of Egypt. The temple is considered to be a masterpiece of ancient architecture. Its three massive terraces rise above the desert floor and into the cliffs of Deir el-Bahari. Her tomb, KV20, lies inside the same massif capped by El Qurn, a pyramid for her mortuary complex. Across the river Nile, the whole structure points towards the monumental Eighth Pylon, Hatshepsut's most recognizable addition to the Temple of Karnak and the site from which the procession of the Beautiful Festival of the Valley departed. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 22:28, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 22:28, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:36, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely light and excellent motif. For me the noise reduction may have gone a little bit far. Cmao20 (talk) 12:36, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, will upload this weekend a new version with TopazAI Denoising to try to keep more detail while reducing the noise, FYI, too Benh Poco a poco (talk) 08:23, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cmao20, Benh: Done, detail looks better now, I believe. Sorry that I didn't manage it before it got speedy promoted. Poco a poco (talk) 17:52, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, in my view significantly better. Cmao20 (talk) 21:20, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:19, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 16:12, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 16:13, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support it was worth to get up early in the morning. -- Ivar (talk) 16:16, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:53, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 19:46, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support That's such a breathtaking view and light that I'm going to overlook the image quality and the slightly heavy handed noise reduction. I wish you had a wider view too (maybe you do...) - Benh (talk) 21:46, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 23:27, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Pleasant light. There is a strong ancient vibe in this pic. -- IamMM (talk) 04:18, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 10:50, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:56, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Striking image --Tagooty (talk) 05:27, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 08:05, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:06, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A little fuzzy but that actually makes it work better. Daniel Case (talk) 18:21, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question How? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:36, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poco a poco (talk) 11:21, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Egypt

File:File, Asuán, Egipto, 2022-04-01, DD 93.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Nov 2022 at 22:40:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Egypt
Info The Philae temple complex is an island-based temple complex in the reservoir of the Aswan Low Dam, downstream of the Aswan Dam and Lake Nasser, Egypt. It was built by Taharqa or Psamtik II in the 7th or 6th century BC and was abandoned in the 6th century AD, comprising so the Third Intermediate Period or Late Period to the Byzantine Empire. The temple complex was located originally on Philae Island, near the expansive First Cataract of the Nile in Upper Egypt. The temple complex was dismantled and moved to nearby Agilkia Island as part of the UNESCO Nubia Campaign project, protecting this and other complexes before the 1970 completion of the Aswan High Dam. Note: again an actually very crowded monument in Egypt without any tourists. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 22:40, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! but you airbrush out people... Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:20, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong guess, not here Poco a poco (talk) 19:05, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 22:40, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:36, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting and well composed, especially when viewed in full size so you can see the buildings on the right hand side. I could wish for a bluer sky but you can't have everything, this is good enough Cmao20 (talk) 12:38, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nicely emphasizes the insular character of that site. (Yes, a blue sky would be nice, but AFAICR this kind of sky is really typical for Egypt.) --Aristeas (talk) 19:48, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:21, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:31, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 10:49, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 11:13, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 08:05, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:47, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I realize this was shot at f/11, so we can't really do much about the unsharp trees at the left. But can we at least get rid of the CA on the leftmost palm tree? Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:25, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, will fix that today Poco a poco (talk) 08:13, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Case: Done, a pretty slight CA, though Poco a poco (talk) 17:44, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Poco a poco (talk) 11:24, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Egypt

File:Narva asv2022-04 img09 Castle.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Nov 2022 at 20:15:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Estonia
Info View of Hermann Castle in Narva. All by me --A.Savin 20:15, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 20:15, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 20:48, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nythar^T^.^C 22:40, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:39, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 14:30, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:19, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 15:31, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 16:18, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Crisp, sharp, good colours, beautiful sky – a really impressive view of the castle. --Aristeas (talk) 19:44, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:23, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Nice light and colours, great detail - I wonder what those two women are looking at on the wall? Composition wise, I can't help thinking it might be better with some of the water at the bottom cropped out as it's not like there's a sharp reflection or anything. The half-tree on the left is also a little distracting IMO. BigDom (talk) 10:53, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:54, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:29, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:07, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 20:35, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the little details, like the people looking out over the guardrail on the one side and the Estonian flag in the wind on the other. Daniel Case (talk) 18:19, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:35, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Estonia

File:Forte Príncipe da Beira.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Nov 2022 at 16:10:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Brazil
Info created & uploaded by Israelvalejr – nominated by Ivar (talk) 16:10, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 16:10, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 20:33, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 20:49, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question A small tilt? Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:21, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- This seems like an acceptable tradeoff to get the cross levelled. - Benh (talk) 19:00, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support OK. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:09, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:39, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support excellent framing and point of view plus accurate drone (?) placement. My bet is that this is a mosaic, making it even more incredible. - Benh (talk) 13:28, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:19, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 16:10, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 16:14, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is quite good. You all feel sure the white balance is fine? If you do, I'll support, but I'm not sure it is in the background. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:57, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm note sure why you ask a confirmation to be honest. Because there are infinite varieties of lighting conditions, I don't think there is a truth when it comes to WB. And I personally like to alter it to change the mood of a picture. There are boundaries to that but here in particular, colours don't seem so off as to be putting (greens are green, blues blue, ...) - Benh (talk) 18:55, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm humble enough to want another opinion from an expert eye sometimes. Thanks for giving one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:56, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, I was just trying to say that slight to moderate WB offset is one of those subjective issues that I don't think needs an opinion to be backed up. One likes it or not. Sharpness, noise, stitching glitches on the other hand... Anyways. - Benh (talk) 21:39, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Benh. --Aristeas (talk) 19:40, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:24, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:50, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:24, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:20, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:37, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Brazil

File:PalouseHillsFromSteptoeButteMay2017-10.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2022 at 14:45:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Palouse Hills from Steptoe Butte in Whitman County, Washington State on a Saturday evening

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United States#Washington
Info created by FriendlyToaster - uploaded by FriendlyToaster - nominated by Bruce1ee -- —Bruce1ee^talk 14:45, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- —Bruce1ee^talk 14:45, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Striking photo – another picture of which I would hang an art print in my office to enjoy the beauty of this landscape over and over again. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:51, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:43, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 18:52, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 01:21, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thought this was a drone initially - amazing that such a viewpoint exists. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:45, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk)
Support -- Nythar^T^.^C 06:14, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Striking – I first thought this was a photo from southern Tuscany. --Aristeas (talk) 07:19, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 10:52, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:03, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 07:37, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Benh (talk) 15:58, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 16:20, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:00, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hazy sky but spectacular scenery -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:46, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 19:53, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 19:58, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Brilliant, almost perfect photo Cmao20 (talk) 12:24, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Outstanding in the foreground but too dull and hazy in the distance. --Milseburg (talk) 14:39, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 08:33, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 18:34, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/United States#Washington

File:Hamerkop (Scopus umbretta umbretta) 2.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Dec 2022 at 17:27:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus : Scopus
Info One zoo FP from 2010. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:27, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:27, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:24, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very high quality --Tagooty (talk) 05:24, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:33, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:05, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:57, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 10:57, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:15, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 16:15, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:55, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 10:40, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support DoF well chosen -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:12, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 06:03, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nythar^T^.^C 01:15, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 18:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus : Scopus

File:Love in Death (for "Good Words") MET DP841109.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Dec 2022 at 22:19:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Exteriors
Info created by Brothers Dalziel and Frederick Walker, uploaded by Pharos, nominated by Levana Taylor -- Levana Taylor (talk) 22:19, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is a particularly striking example of Victorian narrative art, and also one of the masterpieces of 1860s wood engraving from the noted Dalziel Brothers workshop. Social history note: The original 1861 poem by Dora Greenwell, with which this illustration was published, was about a heroic American married woman. Aberystwyth University explains: "The scene is based on a true event that took place in Canada just before Christmas 1821. Lucy Goodell Blake and her husband Harrison had visited relatives and got lost in the snow in the Green Mountains, Vermont, on their way home. Harrison was discovered alive the next morning, but Lucy had not survived the freezing cold, although her husband had given her his overcoat to keep warm. She was only 28-years old. Lucy had the couple’s baby Rebecca with her; she was found a little distance from her mother’s body, wrapped-up in her father’s coat and miraculously alive." Frederick Walker re-used his own image in a painting titled "The Lost Path" which was exhibited at the Royal Academy in 1863. At some time between 1861 and when the organizers of the exhibition The Fallen Woman used the painting for the cover of their catalog, it became powerfully associated with the narrative of an outcast fallen woman, that quintessential Victorian trope. See The Victorian Web -- Levana Taylor (talk) 22:19, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for explaining the historical importance of this print. The quality is good enough that a digital restoration is probably not essential. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:37, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Special photo for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:57, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good reproduction of a well-done wood engraving. --Aristeas (talk) 10:03, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:56, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 23:36, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:12, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:08, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 14:38, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 18:38, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/People#Other portraits

File:Oak apples - Keila.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Nov 2022 at 18:50:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Others
Info all by Ivar (talk) 18:50, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 18:50, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:18, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:47, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 07:36, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:01, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 19:55, 21 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
SupportCmao20 (talk) 12:24, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't get what's outstanding here and the chosen DOF isn't convincing me. --Milseburg (talk) 21:37, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Very high-quality and great resolution. I like the composition, but that's a matter of taste. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:31, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:10, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 18:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Others

File:St Ignatius church from Castle of Gorizia.jpg, not featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Nov 2022 at 16:15:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Italy
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 16:15, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 16:15, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful motif under nice light Cmao20 (talk) 12:36, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Does not look spectacular at the first glance, but the soft light and the sky give it a subtle harmonious atmosphere. The surrounding buildings etc. are not all great, but they frame the church really nicely. --Aristeas (talk) 19:42, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I like the idea here but it needs a better sky to really stand out. Daniel Case (talk) 00:05, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 18:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Castle of Bard (3).jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Nov 2022 at 16:12:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Italy
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 16:12, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 16:12, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 17:16, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 18:31, 20 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good shot, but it needs more contrast Cmao20 (talk) 12:35, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:24, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:07, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 00:03, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:40, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 00:21, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Maire (talk) 09:06, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 09:14, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 18:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Italy

File:Krishna Butterball Below Mahabalipuram Sep22 A7C 02490.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Dec 2022 at 05:22:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Other_objects_in_landscapes
Info created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 05:22, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Krishna's Butterball is a 250 ton granite boulder precariously perched on a slope. It is said to have been on this spot for 1,200 years. The Category:Group of monuments at Mahabalipuram has a very large number of images, but no FPs as yet. -- Tagooty (talk) 05:22, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:44, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The illusion works -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:50, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support … especially when viewed in full size. --Aristeas (talk) 10:06, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:59, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:49, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 08:33, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 10:18, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:17, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 16:14, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:55, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:26, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 16:48, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 18:40, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Other_objects_in_landscapes

File:Baglafecht weaver (Ploceus baglafecht baglafecht) male non-breeding.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Dec 2022 at 16:36:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Ploceidae (Weavers)
Info No FP of this species. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:36, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:36, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 17:01, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support a short distance ! --Wilfredor (talk) 18:25, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 19:34, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nythar^T^.^C 08:06, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:32, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality. This race seems to have a different plumage color -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:45, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes; and there are variations in plumage even within recognized races. Ploceus taxonomy is evolving. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:22, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:04, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 16:50, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:56, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 08:33, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:14, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 16:16, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:53, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 10:40, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 06:01, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 18:39, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Ploceidae (Weavers)

File:Mary Jackson in a wind tunnel with a model at NASA Langley.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Dec 2022 at 05:06:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
Info created by NASA Langley Research Center; restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:06, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:06, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice restoration and good historical significance. BigDom (talk) 08:36, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:42, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent restauration of a good environmental portrait. --Aristeas (talk) 10:08, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nythar^T^.^C 22:03, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 08:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 10:04, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:19, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:56, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:27, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 00:20, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 18:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People#People at work