Commons:Kandidater till utvalda bilder

Det här är kandidater till att bli utvalda bilder.

För ett arkiv av tidigare nominerade se: Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log

Det finns också en kronologisk lista av utvalda bilder.

NomineringEdit

Om du tror att du har funnit eller skapat en bild som kan anses värdefull, lägg till den här nedan i sektionen för nomineringar, högst upp i listan, med hjälp av den här länken (Hjälp). För det behöver du inte ha en inloggning, även anonyma användare får nominera.

Men innan du nominerar, kolla upp så att bilden har lämplig bildbeskrivning och licens.

OmröstningsreglerEdit

  • Röstningen pågår i 9 dagar. På den 10:e dagen blir resultatet fastställt.
  • Om en bild efter 5 dagar inte fått någon mer positiv röst än från den som nominerade, så kan kandidaten tas bort ifrån sidan.
  • Nomineringar ifrån oinloggade bidragsgivare är välkomna
  • Bidrag ifrån oinloggade bidragsgivare till diskussionen är välkomna
  • Röstning från oinloggade bidragsgivare räknas inte
  • En nominering räknas inte som en röst, men den som nominerar får rösta
  • Den som nominerar en bild kan när som helst ta bort bilden ifrån omröstningen

En kandidat kommer att bli en utvald bild om följande krav uppfylls:

  • Lämplig licens (så klart)
  • Minst 5 stödjande röster
  • Förhållande mellan stödjande/motsättande röster på minst 2/1 (minst två tredjedels majoritet)
  • Två olika versioner av samma bild kan inte båda bli utvalda; endast den med högst antal stödjande röster blir utvald.

Röstning kan göras med "{{Support}}" (stöd) eller "{{Oppose}}" (ej stöd), neutralitet kan anges med "{{Neutral}}".

KandidaterEdit

Featured picture candidatesEdit

File:Stargazer and Pegasus F43 in flight over Atlantic (KSC-20161212-PH LAL01 0009).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2017 at 15:09:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Панорама на Лазарополе.jpgEdit

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

File:The Wings, Siemens HQ Munich, April 2017.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2017 at 11:41:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Parliament House at dusk, Canberra ACT.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2017 at 06:00:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  •   Info Parliament House, Canberra, Australia.
  •   Info All by me -- Thennicke (talk) 06:00, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Thennicke (talk) 06:00, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support blue hour shot as it should be. You may want to sharpen the pic a bit... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:21, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - I agree with Martin on all counts. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:57, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support There is a bit of stepping on the high-contrast edges of the building/sky. Is that a result of the HDR blend, or of too much sharpening there? If you do sharpen, perhaps do so selectively. But overall it is good. -- Colin (talk) 08:06, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Almost an abstraction like this. I like that the lights are sort of pastel ... a refreshing break from the (potentially) lurid colors usually used for this purpose. Daniel Case (talk) 14:19, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Looks a little spooky, but good shot(s). --cart-Talk 15:18, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Chevrolet Master Special Eagle 1933 - Z16725.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2017 at 20:40:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Automobiles
  •   Info On a hike to a nature reserve where I live, I stumbled upon this great old car. It was on its way to a vintage car meeting close by. The owner/driver was happy to share some info about the car and I could take some photos before it sped away down the road (a little too fast for me as is evident in one of the pics in the cat). I love that I was able to photograph it on a dirt road in a rural setting since it is from the era of Bonnie and Clyde, John Dillinger and car chases down American country roads. It also looks the part of a battered getaway car since not much has been done to it since 1933. All by me, -- cart-Talk 20:40, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- cart-Talk 20:40, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose A competent photo of a relatively ugly car. Nothing special enough about this for FP. Daphne Lantier 22:05, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Measured support The background is fairly busy, but the car's neutral color mitigates that. Other than that I really like its texture ... it's nice to see one of these old cars in not-quite-mint condition, as if they've been actively driven all this time. Daniel Case (talk) 13:34, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support per Daniel --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:06, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Catedral de San Sarkis, Teherán, Irán, 2016-09-17, DD 66-68 HDR.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2017 at 17:31:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  •   Info created by Poco a poco - uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by kasir -- Kasir (talk) 17:31, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Kasir (talk) 17:31, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daphne Lantier 18:29, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Serene, also nice to see a church with people in it for a change. --cart-Talk 20:46, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support "...with people in it for a change". And we are talking about a christian temple in Tehran! Poco2 20:48, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I like the view a lot, and the picture looks great at full-page size, but at full size, some parts are blurry. If in your judgment, some more processing would improve the quality, please do it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:44, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Provisional support on fixing the CA on the right window muntins. Interesting near-symmetry otherwise, and one too often forgets there are churches in Iran. Daniel Case (talk) 01:56, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:19, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - This is a great VI, but I'm opposing it because of the unsharpness of the chandelier, etc. I feel impelled to compare a church interior against the work Diliff has done as well as other work you and others have done. I would love to support a feature, if you can improve the sharpness of the various elements of this interior. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:00, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Ikan, please take into account that this is a photo with people in it. Having moving, living beings in an indoors-picture with poor light, will limit the options you have of long exposures as well as the number of shots you can take. All that will affect the overall quality of the pic. If you want a "Diliff-quality" shot of a place with people, you would probably have to equip them with neck supports first. --cart-Talk 14:43, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Nokia Networks Munich Office, April 2017.jpgEdit

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

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

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

Alternative sans contrailEdit

 

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

File:Lifeguard tower - Morro Jable.jpgEdit

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

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 14:35, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Llez (talk) 14:35, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment It's nice and vibrant and I'm leaning toward support, but the image is a bit soft as if too much noise reduction has been applied. –Juliancolton | Talk 23:43, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
    •   Done New version from raw-file uploaded --Llez (talk) 04:53, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support simple but interesting --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:31, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 13:06, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Good colors. --cart-Talk 19:53, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose A competent photo of a standard lifeguard tower. Nothing beyond a quality image for me. Daphne Lantier 22:10, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Daphne. Good, but not interesting enough for FP, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:50, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - I'm a sucker for blue and orange. –Juliancolton | Talk 01:21, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Milseburg (talk) 11:54, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Coughton Court east view.jpgEdit

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

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

File:Χριστός Παντοκράτωρ (Άγιος Νικόλαος, Σκοπός) - Pantokrator (Agios Nikolaos, Skopos, Greece).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 May 2017 at 07:14:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

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

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

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

Alternative (cropped)Edit

 

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

File:Mausoleo de Shah Cheragh, Shiraz, Irán, 2016-09-24, DD 32.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2017 at 18:43:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  •   Info View of Shāh Chérāgh (Persian for "King of the Light"), a funerary monument and mosque in Shiraz, Iran. It houses the tomb of the brothers Ahmad and Muhammad, sons of Mūsā al-Kādhim and brothers of ‘Alī ar-Ridhā. The two took refuge in the city during the Abbasid persecution of Shia Muslims. The tombs became celebrated pilgrimage centres in the 14th century when Queen Tashi Khatun erected a mosque and theological school in the vicinity. Poco2 18:43, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Info Created, uploaded and nominated by Poco a poco, edited by Jacek Halicki -- Poco2 18:43, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Poco2 18:43, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 18:58, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Very cool! -- KennyOMG (talk) 19:21, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daphne Lantier 19:25, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --cart-Talk 21:31, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - I hadn't seen this photo before. Very nice, and an interesting view. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:50, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Somewhat tempered support Great composition, lighting and I love that the tourists do not detract from it, although I wish we could so something about that distortion at the right. Daniel Case (talk) 03:43, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
    Daniel: I fixed the perspective of the minaret in the back and also got rid of the crane in the background Poco2 10:35, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:47, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Gnosis (talk) 23:05, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:27, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support The perspective chosen is perfect, and with help from the tower and colors, it makes the building look very prominent and bold. Great photograph. WClarke 17:11, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Meisje met de parel.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2017 at 23:19:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

*  Support Girl with a Pearl Earring has always been the painting by Vermeer I like the least. It should be featured anyway, of course. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:38, 21 April 2017 (UTC) per discussion below --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:21, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

  •   Support Daphne Lantier 06:50, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   oppose The image we have here is not the one in the source, and nowhere near as good. The source image much more closely matches File:1665 Girl with a Pearl Earring.jpg which claims the same source. That file is 178 megapixels, though I suspect it is actually upsampled (if downsampled 50% it looks much better and is still 45 megapixels). Major differences are that the background in the source is brown with clear cracking; the colour of her headscarf is different, and the dark patch in the scarf near her left eye is not crushed blacked but still shows colour and detail. Further the cracking on the picture shows signs that the image has been oversharpened. So I think this image has had significant colour adjustments, strong contrast enhancement that has crushed the darker areas to black, and strong sharpening. I think the larger image has merit for FP, but needs some analysis to confirm whether its very large size is justified, and if not, what degree of downsizing would restore it to correct sharp proportions.
I have discovered why the source does not match. An earlier version of the Commons page linked to the source JPG (in addition to surrounding information pages) but this was removed by Crisco for some reason. Looking at the link through the Internet Archive here gives a file that is visually similar to this one, though quite a bit smaller. So I wonder if the museum has improved the copy they display on the website since Crisco first uploaded it. I'll drop Crisco a note. -- Colin (talk) 07:21, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  • To the best of my recollection, this was uploaded exactly as I found it on the website (as can be seen by the archive link). However, rather than use the automatic download resolution, which was downsampled, I had loaded the image at its full resolution in viewing mode, then downloaded from there using judicious screenshotting. It may have loaded at 125% or something similar as its "maximum resolution"; I suspect the MET's website does the same thing.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:41, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
As for why I removed the direct link to the JPG: to the best of my understanding, we are supposed to link to the host web-page rather than the image directly, to ensure any licensing information or similar is readily available. Hence the removal to the direct JPG link.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:43, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Chris. So I suspect the image on the web page has changed considerably since you screenshotted it. I think the current version on their website is better is better and the other high-res file (File:1665 Girl with a Pearl Earring.jpg) a better place from which to create an FP (if downsized). This file here is the one used by all the Wikipedias and has been featured, etc. The other file, although from the same museum source, is really quite different. It isn't an obvious case for simply overwriting this one per Commons:Overwriting existing files. -- Colin (talk) 09:08, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Torre de la Doncella, Baku, Azerbaiyán, 2016-09-26, DD 215-217 HDR.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2017 at 19:44:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers
  •   Info View of the Maiden Tower during the blue hour Old City, Baku, capital of Azerbaijan. The tower was built according to some sources in VIII-VII B.C. and belongs to the ensemble of historic monuments in the Old City of Baku inscribed in 2001 under the UNESCO World Heritage List. The 29.5 metres (97 ft)-high tower is one of Azerbaijan's most distinctive national emblems, and is thus featured on Azeri currency notes and official letterheads. Poco2 19:44, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Poco2 19:44, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment - It looks to my eyes like it's leaning back, with the top farther back than the bottom. I'm not sure why. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:49, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:51, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose trees, strange leaning --Mile (talk) 06:15, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support something's odd re: perspective, cf. buildings in the background (some verticals are straight, others are not). Still, the overall impression is very wow-y imo. I really like colors & composition. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:32, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Robiul3.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2017 at 17:05:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  •   Info created and uploaded by Razurahmanbd, nominated by Yann (talk) 17:05, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support What can I say? -- Yann (talk) 17:05, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daphne Lantier 17:45, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Really sad. No words! Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 18:24, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support per Jacopo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:24, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Any photograph that tells a story that is worth being heard deserves to be featured, and I highly suggest that everyone read the description. Also see my comment below. WClarke 21:07, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment Yann, and anyone else: It is worth noting that there are two photographs (Rabiul.jpg & Robiul2.jpg) that, in addition to this photograph, appear to make up a set. They are all of the same subject in the same place, and they all have the same description, so should we nominate them as a set, as it seems the author (Razurahmanbd) intended? If the author is around, just to be completely clear, are they intended to be viewed together? Thanks. WClarke 21:07, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
    • I checked the 3 images, I chose this one, which is of better quality and better composition. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:18, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support   Oppose See below. A documentary photo that is almost hard to watch... Wrt WClarke's comment, I don't see what three photos can say better than this one photo can. Not sure they are intended as a set as many photographers simply number photos of similar scene/subjects as a way of distinguishing them from each other. --cart-Talk 21:43, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --The Photographer 23:26, 20 April 2017 (UTC) I can't support a dangeroux for a children. Thanks Colin for notifiquer it --The Photographer 21:13, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Regretful neutral A shattering image, but even that cannot make me !vote for an image of someone posed sitting on what appears to be an actively used rail track. Daniel Case (talk) 01:53, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support although Daniel has a point --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:28, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Daniel. I very much doubt such an image would be published in the UK by any responsible picture editor -- lest it encourage a child to play on the railway tracks. I appreciate he lives at the railway station, and this is a third-world railway track rather than a busy high-speed line, but there seems no good reason to photograph him sitting on the tracks. Further, the background story, though heartbreaking and one I do not doubt, is unsourced and supplied by an unknown and inactive user. It is hard to see how this image/story could be responsibly used for an educational purpose. -- Colin (talk) 07:35, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
    •   Comment Sure is it encouraging? are we going through something not so much about the image? --2001:B07:644F:23A4:28C4:10AC:2FE9:24D5 19:57, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
    • Colin: Please stick to review the quality and value of the picture. Making a wrong political statement about children living standards doesn't help. I worked for children living in Bombay Central railway station, helping them to find solutions to their problems, but it seems you really have no idea about the lives of such children. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:23, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
      • Yann, I have made no "political statement about children living standards". I'm talking about responsible photography, and responsible sourcing of a story. -- Colin (talk) 10:47, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
        • Among all probabilities, this track is probably just beside his home, as there are a lot of slums by railway tracks, just because there is unoccuppied land there. Not only it is dangerous, but it is also dirty and noisy. And yet it is his living habitat. It is the place where he spends most of his time, trying to make a living picking up whatever he could find there. So you doesn't know what you are talking about. Still your comment is a kind of political statement. It is arrogant and scornful. You want to decide for the child where he should stay and live. Regards, D (talk) 13:59, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
          • Yann, could you cool it a bit please. The comments you are making bear absolutely no resemblance to what I've written. I'm not making any political statement. I have not said anything about where he should stay and live. Have you read the links I posted below. It's about photographers and precisely where they choose to pose and compose their subjects, and the effect that has on other photographers posing subjects on railway lines and getting themselves killed. Those parallel lines trailing into the distance are a deadly magnet for photographers. This is nothing to do with the boy. -- Colin (talk) 14:43, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
            • You don't need to ping me. I always watch my nominations. Yes, your comment has everything to do with the boy. You assume that for him seating in the tracks is a game, or/and that this is a set up by the photographer to make the image more powerful. I think you are wrong on both points. Even if the boy's story is not the truth, he most probably just happens to be here when the photograph passed by. The tracks are his living environment. Why can't he be photographed where he lives? Regards, Yann (talk) 18:03, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
              • I have not given any indication, an indication in the slightest, that I think the boy thinks sitting on the tracks is a game. I cannot read the photographers's mind and have no interest in it. I haven't doubted the story, just question the ability for a responsible publisher to use it: it is just a random story on the internet. Real publishers would only accept such a story from a trusted source. I live next to a busy main road, but I don't photograph my children standing in the middle of it. It is perfectly possible to photograph this boy where he lives, without him sitting on the tracks. Yann, I don't think you've taken on board the links I posted below. This image/story cannot be responsibly published, and I'm far from the only person here that thinks so. I'm unwatching this page now. -- Colin (talk) 20:18, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sadly, I have to agree with Colin and Daniel. --Kabelleger (talk) 18:56, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per above, sorry --A.Savin 19:32, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support   Neutral. (13:06, 22 April 2017 (UTC)) the photograph is visually stunning and is accompanied by background info that really makes it speak volumes more. I don't see the above oppose reasons as strong enough frankly. For concerns about children playing on the tracks, the image is already accompanied by a red box warning, and if you ask me, a child's first thought really could well be: "Look what happened to the kid who ran on the tracks!". That being said, I wouldn't be able to forgive the feeling within me to deny coverage of other stories told worldwide that are heard far less on places like the internet. Although Humans of New York is helping the cause recently, at least this image is freely licensed! Seb26 (talk) 23:26, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
    • Seb26, photos on railway tracks can look "visually stunning". That's why they are popular and why every year people are killed taking photos on railway tracks, and kids are killed playing on them. See this PetaPixel search for multiple articles describing deaths, the backlash that irresponsible publishers face if they post such images, and a good video highlighting how easy it is to get killed. Despite my comment about about third-world tracks, in fact more people died taking selfies in India than anywhere in world, study says. Way more. and that includes selifies taken in front of an oncoming train. Any publisher using such an image would face considerable negative press calling for the head of the photo editor. That means, despite any photographic qualities, the educational value of this image is extremely low, and on a project dedicated to educational media, that means it is not among our finest, and not FP. I really wish the photographer had taken their photos in a safe location. Please reconsider supporting this; it isn't the sort of image we want to encouage. -- Colin (talk) 08:14, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  • While Seb26 has a point about how a child might view this photo, I've changed my vote based on Daniel's comment. Since I live in an area with lots of inactive rails, I tend to forget the perils in other places. Colin, while the article you link to says that there were 11 train related selfie deaths world-wide that year (which is bad enough) it is about selfie deaths, not train-related, and it also says that "Most of the Indian deaths were water-related". I think this would be a more relevant source. --cart-Talk 11:31, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
[1] The backlash against a photo on National Geographic's Instagram profile as recently as in the last two weeks definitely concerned me. Thank you for the links. I still feel that this boy's story is related to his home at the station. I don't fault the photographer at all in this respect and do not think that he deliberately decided to have the boy sit on the tracks. But it is right what you say, being an FP means it'll reach the main page and potentially expose Commons to backlash or outrage. I am going to be   Neutral because I can still see that out of all possible photographs and all possible poses made on one, this photograph is going to be the least likely to encourage people or children to do it. Seb26 (talk) 13:06, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment I'm doubtful about the story mentioned in the file page. The beggar mafia is very strong in Asia. They even amputate the children to attract the sympathy. The children will say the story what their mafia leader teach them. They are mostly associated with tracks; so I see anything wrong in this photography though. They will quickly adapted to that environment and quickly achieve the skills to board and alight from a moving train. Jee 16:16, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Even if his "natural habitat" is among the rails the picture is a very bad double take on it. It says something in the description and shows something that can easily be interpreted in a different way. It also lacks any sensitivity (or rather humility from the photographer's part) that great photographers show in their work, you need not to go any further than GMB Akash, the undisputed king of Bangladeshi street photography to see what I mean. Also as Jkadavoor said above me, it is a thing in South-Asia and everyone should approach any story about a child amputee with caution. Is the story about this picture plausible? Yes, sadly tying up children and/or putting them in sacks and dumping in water part is all too familiar. Is it likely, with the amputation and all? Probably not, but in any case impossible to verify. Finally I'd just like to point out this is about Bangladesh, not India, which is a completely different beast even if they look similar to the rest of the world. -- KennyOMG (talk) 22:59, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment - Please talk more about the humility of the photographer. I feel like I could really learn something if you would expound on that a bit. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:02, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Turquoise-spotted swallowtail (Graphium policenes) underside.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2017 at 06:54:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera
  •   Info This swallowtail was so intent on getting salts from the wet forest road in Ghana, that it tolerated me and my macro lens. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 06:54, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Charles (talk) 06:54, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Compo not good, also background, leaf isnt helping neither. --Mile (talk) 08:08, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment The light is a bit flat, washing out some of the color on the butterfly and a bit of better contrast on the background would be nice. Want me to have a go at it? --cart-Talk 08:44, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • In this case I would need the raw file. Please email me a link to some dropbox I'm sure you have and I'll see what I can do later tonight when I'm home. (I'm at work now) --cart-Talk 09:08, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • So,   Done. The raw file straight from the can was actually very nice and it didn't need that much help, don't know why you tried to get it so very bright (or perhaps I got it all wrong..). I made two versions, the first is just normal fixing plus a few very bright, distracting glints on the sand cloned out, in the second I removed a distracting little dry grass as well. If you like any of them, please use them. The crop is a bit wider too. I also noticed that you snuck in another file, presumably for me to fix. Ok, I'll do that one too for you and e-mail you a link to the result. In the future though, please only send me files that I volunteer to help you with. Best, --cart-Talk 18:22, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Many thanks. New version much better. I've reworked image to emulate your second version (I'd already done NR). Charles (talk) 21:06, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Neutral I agree that the light is harsh, but I will reserve judgement until I see what cart can do. Daniel Case (talk) 19:17, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Looks better now. --cart-Talk 21:30, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I like the butterfly, but I don't like the near left corner, so I'd suggest cropping the butterfly much closer on the left side. Then if you like, you could adjust the crops on other sides, though that doesn't seem essential to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:35, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Louis-DelphinOdobeyCadet.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2017 at 18:53:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical
  •   Info created by Henri Gaudichon, uploaded and nominated by FrancoisFC
  •   Support -- FrancoisFC (talk) 18:53, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - Very good, well-preserved and interesting photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:15, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support From back when sitting for the group picture really meant sitting. Daniel Case (talk) 04:40, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:07, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 07:36, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Mile (talk) 08:09, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support This is where time stands still. ;) I particularly like that each of the master craftsmen are holding their tools to indicate what they do, just like in a Renaissance portrait. --cart-Talk 08:49, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:19, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Schnobby (talk) 13:47, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Mountain gorilla (Gorilla beringei beringei) 10 month baby.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2017 at 16:46:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  •   Info Female mountain gorilla (Gorilla beringei beringei) with her 10-month-old baby. In the Titus Group in Rwanda. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 16:46, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Charles (talk) 16:46, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose; it's sort of hard to tell what's what in the image on first glance since we don't see the baby gorilla's face straight-on or any of the mother's face. Daniel Case (talk) 17:34, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Cluttered composition, sorry. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:12, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - Keeping in mind that impact can trump other factors, this baby's face moves me, so I think that if enough other people agreed, that would be a sufficient reason for a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:39, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Per Slaunger. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 08:38, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Water for use in aerial firefighting being carried in a bucket attached to a MChS Mil Mi-26 heavylift helicopter.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2017 at 18:01:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Air transport
  •   Info created by Yuri Smityuk - uploaded by Russavia & Dura-Ace - nominated by Base -- Base (talk) 18:01, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Information: The Mil Mi-26 is the world's biggest helicopter and is used in the firefighting role by the Ministry of Emergency Situations in Russia. A photo of Mi-26 using water buckets, in order to give viewers a sense of the wow of this photo, can be seen here. Base (talk) 18:01, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Base (talk) 18:01, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support--g. balaxaZe 18:54, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - That's very interesting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:06, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support- unusual and nice --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 19:26, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daphne Lantier 20:22, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   SupportJuliancolton | Talk 22:34, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:25, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 03:56, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   weak oppose Maybe I'm the only one, and though the image certainly is different, it feels weirdly artificial. The image is abstract in a way, but that doesn't seem to be the intent of the image. More than anything IMO, the background (I assume it's water) looks very unnatural and strange (to me I keep seeing lightning), and ruins the focus of the photograph, which is the bucket of water. Nothing in the image is particularly sharp, or shows good detail. Overall, it just feels off to me, and I don't really know how else to describe it. Sorry. WClarke 04:32, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment - Without prejudice to the rest of your points, I feel sure the background is mostly treetops. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:31, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  • @Ikan Kekek: You're right, after looking at it they do appear to be treetops. WClarke 20:37, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Weak support I agree with WClarke about the technical shortcomings (it's noisy, although that may not have been avoidable given the circumstances, but also the red on the ropes looks posterized). However, it's a striking and unusual enough image to support. Daniel Case (talk) 05:34, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Mild oppose It is indeed an ingenious, unusual and interesting sight, but I think there are too many technical shortcomings in the picture to feature it. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:21, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Per WClarke. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 08:49, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --The Photographer 10:56, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Sunset in the Himalayas 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2017 at 15:54:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  •   Info Nepal, national park Langtang. Created, uploaded and nominated by Sergey Pesterev -- Sergey Pesterev (talk) 15:54, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Sergey Pesterev (talk) 15:54, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support A bit oversaturated methinks but ok. It also seems to be leaning but without reference it's impossible to say and I'll give the benefit of the doubt that it is actually level. -- KennyOMG (talk) 17:05, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Yes, it's pretty and it's from the Himalayas, but there seems to be a lot of sunsets here lately despite what the guidelines suggest. Or maybe I should just go with the flow and nominate some myself since folks seems to enjoy them. --cart-Talk 17:13, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment - A remarkable scene, but the size was dearly bought by too much noise. I you could fix that, I'd be glad to support this picture --PtrQs (talk) 17:30, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Noisy, and without an exposure time in the metadata, I can't say whether this was avoidable or not. Daniel Case (talk) 22:01, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support I suggested a crop, to remove a little more of the black silhouette bottom triangle, which I don't think adds much. I would have liked to see more layering of mountains on the left: it is not very prominent. The composition, balancing left and right, is very good. The noise is a result of processing I'm sure, but not an issue here -- there's no pixel level detail in the scene anyway and a little noise helps avoid posterisation banding. -- Colin (talk) 12:24, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - I haven't really been able to make up my mind on this one. Technical quality is acceptable for me... the D800 is just naturally a noisier camera than some others due to the huge number of pixels. At any reasonable viewing size, the noise isn't detrimental. Ultimately, while it's not the most innovative or compelling image I've ever seen, its simple beauty and serenity sway me to support. –Juliancolton | Talk 22:33, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

File:BlackMarble20161km.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2017 at 08:10:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Satellite images
  •   Info created by NASA - uploaded by mareklug - nominated by mareklug -- Mareklug talk 08:10, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • For its informational/map/technical merit. Also, very absorbing to navigate over.   Support -- Mareklug talk 08:10, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - I deplore NASA's use of the highly misleading Mercator projection, but the greatness of this photo as a reference is undeniable. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:31, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support @Ikan:every projection is necessarily misleading - a globe is a globe is a globe. Gall-Peters is just as "wrong". We shouldn't succumb to zeitgeisty yet aimless activism, imo. ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:58, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I assure you, I'm well aware that any flat view of the Earth is a distortion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:02, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Oops, Ikan, I didn't want to come over as rude. Sorry! I should have chosen a different phrasing. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 03:50, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  • I didn't take offense, don't worry. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:34, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Pretty and informative. --cart-Talk 17:10, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Very interesting image. If you zoom in on North Korea, Pyongyang appears to be the only city with lights, if that says anything about the county. WClarke 18:05, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:58, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:27, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support 933.12 Megapixel? Ok. Challenge accepted. :-) -- Colin (talk) 17:29, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Slaunger (talk) 20:23, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Mausoleo de Shah Cheragh, Shiraz, Irán, 2016-09-24, DD 30.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2017 at 05:21:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • My pleasure! I hope other people like this photo as much as I do. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:18, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment It's not tilted? --Pudelek (talk) 09:24, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
    Pudelek: verticals look vertical to me on both sides. Please, consider that the picture was no taken from the front of the gate but further to the right Poco2 14:20, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:44, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Building top need perspective fix --The Photographer 16:01, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
    The Photographer: what kind of perspective fix are you expecting? Please, don´t expect the top part to be horizontal, as that can only be expected if I was in front of it. If I apply perspective correction to "fix" that I will definitely deform the building Poco2 19:14, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  Support I underestand your point that this shoot not was done exactly from the center of the building. Thanks for your explain. I like this shoot. --The Photographer 19:25, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Interesting object, but not really FP. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 09:04, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment - If you can, please explain why you don't think so. I'm pretty surprised by the light interest in this photo so far, so perhaps you might be able to shed some light on that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:20, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • I move this comment from the talk page Poco2 18:18, 19 April 2017 (UTC):
Hi Ikan Kekek, you asked me to explain my comment. I said "Interesting object, but not really FP". I think it is interesting because of the design, it has been photographed amply before. But I also feel it is not FP-quality because of the distracting objects in the photograph, like the undone poster on the left, the corrugated roof-plate, camera and loudspeaker on top and the poster on the right. Besides, the perspective seems rather artificial. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 13:54, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:20, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Old scratched glass inkwell.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2017 at 20:25:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Since no-one else has voted yet, I will elaborate on what I like so much about this photo. The inkwell does wonderful things to light and image, producing a very complex series of forms that could easily have inspired Cubists and Abstract Expressionists, yet they are strictly photographed from life. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:32, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment The scratches definitely add an absract element to photograph, but what surface is the inkwell on top of? Thanks. WClarke 23:54, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
  • @WClarke: If you open the file's page there is a description of how the photo was made along with a photo of the setup for the photo and the surface and background. --cart-Talk 08:12, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • OK, well, almost strictly from life, but certainly from life in the sense used in painting, where paintings from life don't have to literally copy every detail the artist sees to the minutest detail. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:19, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Decollazione del Battista (Matthias Stom).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2017 at 19:56:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Harbour of Sète at dawn cf01.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2017 at 06:27:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

lol :) in the south of France, we like to sleep in, it's too early to be congested by cars... Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:36, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I do not like the composition, almost half of the image just shows a boring road. --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:01, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Uoaei1, also too much sky for me (when one part is entirely featureless, I wouldn't do rule of thirds, but rather 3:4 or an even larger ratio). -- King of ♠ 02:14, 19 April 2017 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /cart-Talk 13:57, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes


Ta bort utvald-status ifrån bilderEdit

Efterhand kan standarden för utvalda bilder ändras. Bilder som tidigare var tillräckligt bra, kanske inte längre anses vara det. Här listas bilder som du tycker inte längre förtjänar att vara utvalda bilder. Då behövs 2/3 majoritet (och minst 5 röster) som håller med om att ta bort utvald-statusen ifrån bilden. Om inte 2/3 av de röstande håller med om att ta bort den, så är bilden fortsatt utvald. Här röstar man med {{Keep}} (bilden förtjänar att kvarstå som utvald) or {{Delist}} (bilden förtjänar inte att kvarstå som utvald). När du nominerar en bild här, ta med länken till den ursprungliga utvald-bild-nomineringen (den finns under Länkar på bildens beskrivningssida. Använd den här länken för att lägga till en borttags-kandidat.

Featured picture candidatesEdit

File:Stargazer and Pegasus F43 in flight over Atlantic (KSC-20161212-PH LAL01 0009).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2017 at 15:09:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Панорама на Лазарополе.jpgEdit

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

File:The Wings, Siemens HQ Munich, April 2017.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2017 at 11:41:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Parliament House at dusk, Canberra ACT.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2017 at 06:00:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  •   Info Parliament House, Canberra, Australia.
  •   Info All by me -- Thennicke (talk) 06:00, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Thennicke (talk) 06:00, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support blue hour shot as it should be. You may want to sharpen the pic a bit... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:21, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - I agree with Martin on all counts. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:57, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support There is a bit of stepping on the high-contrast edges of the building/sky. Is that a result of the HDR blend, or of too much sharpening there? If you do sharpen, perhaps do so selectively. But overall it is good. -- Colin (talk) 08:06, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Almost an abstraction like this. I like that the lights are sort of pastel ... a refreshing break from the (potentially) lurid colors usually used for this purpose. Daniel Case (talk) 14:19, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Looks a little spooky, but good shot(s). --cart-Talk 15:18, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Chevrolet Master Special Eagle 1933 - Z16725.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2017 at 20:40:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Automobiles
  •   Info On a hike to a nature reserve where I live, I stumbled upon this great old car. It was on its way to a vintage car meeting close by. The owner/driver was happy to share some info about the car and I could take some photos before it sped away down the road (a little too fast for me as is evident in one of the pics in the cat). I love that I was able to photograph it on a dirt road in a rural setting since it is from the era of Bonnie and Clyde, John Dillinger and car chases down American country roads. It also looks the part of a battered getaway car since not much has been done to it since 1933. All by me, -- cart-Talk 20:40, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- cart-Talk 20:40, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose A competent photo of a relatively ugly car. Nothing special enough about this for FP. Daphne Lantier 22:05, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Measured support The background is fairly busy, but the car's neutral color mitigates that. Other than that I really like its texture ... it's nice to see one of these old cars in not-quite-mint condition, as if they've been actively driven all this time. Daniel Case (talk) 13:34, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support per Daniel --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:06, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Catedral de San Sarkis, Teherán, Irán, 2016-09-17, DD 66-68 HDR.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2017 at 17:31:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  •   Info created by Poco a poco - uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by kasir -- Kasir (talk) 17:31, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Kasir (talk) 17:31, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daphne Lantier 18:29, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Serene, also nice to see a church with people in it for a change. --cart-Talk 20:46, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support "...with people in it for a change". And we are talking about a christian temple in Tehran! Poco2 20:48, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I like the view a lot, and the picture looks great at full-page size, but at full size, some parts are blurry. If in your judgment, some more processing would improve the quality, please do it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:44, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Provisional support on fixing the CA on the right window muntins. Interesting near-symmetry otherwise, and one too often forgets there are churches in Iran. Daniel Case (talk) 01:56, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:19, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - This is a great VI, but I'm opposing it because of the unsharpness of the chandelier, etc. I feel impelled to compare a church interior against the work Diliff has done as well as other work you and others have done. I would love to support a feature, if you can improve the sharpness of the various elements of this interior. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:00, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Ikan, please take into account that this is a photo with people in it. Having moving, living beings in an indoors-picture with poor light, will limit the options you have of long exposures as well as the number of shots you can take. All that will affect the overall quality of the pic. If you want a "Diliff-quality" shot of a place with people, you would probably have to equip them with neck supports first. --cart-Talk 14:43, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Nokia Networks Munich Office, April 2017.jpgEdit

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

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

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

Alternative sans contrailEdit

 

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

File:Lifeguard tower - Morro Jable.jpgEdit

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

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  •   Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 14:35, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Llez (talk) 14:35, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment It's nice and vibrant and I'm leaning toward support, but the image is a bit soft as if too much noise reduction has been applied. –Juliancolton | Talk 23:43, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
    •   Done New version from raw-file uploaded --Llez (talk) 04:53, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support simple but interesting --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:31, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 13:06, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Good colors. --cart-Talk 19:53, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose A competent photo of a standard lifeguard tower. Nothing beyond a quality image for me. Daphne Lantier 22:10, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Daphne. Good, but not interesting enough for FP, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:50, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - I'm a sucker for blue and orange. –Juliancolton | Talk 01:21, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Milseburg (talk) 11:54, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Coughton Court east view.jpgEdit

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

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

File:Χριστός Παντοκράτωρ (Άγιος Νικόλαος, Σκοπός) - Pantokrator (Agios Nikolaos, Skopos, Greece).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 May 2017 at 07:14:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

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

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

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

Alternative (cropped)Edit

 

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

File:Mausoleo de Shah Cheragh, Shiraz, Irán, 2016-09-24, DD 32.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2017 at 18:43:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  •   Info View of Shāh Chérāgh (Persian for "King of the Light"), a funerary monument and mosque in Shiraz, Iran. It houses the tomb of the brothers Ahmad and Muhammad, sons of Mūsā al-Kādhim and brothers of ‘Alī ar-Ridhā. The two took refuge in the city during the Abbasid persecution of Shia Muslims. The tombs became celebrated pilgrimage centres in the 14th century when Queen Tashi Khatun erected a mosque and theological school in the vicinity. Poco2 18:43, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Info Created, uploaded and nominated by Poco a poco, edited by Jacek Halicki -- Poco2 18:43, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Poco2 18:43, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support--Jacek Halicki (talk) 18:58, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Very cool! -- KennyOMG (talk) 19:21, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daphne Lantier 19:25, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --cart-Talk 21:31, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - I hadn't seen this photo before. Very nice, and an interesting view. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:50, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Somewhat tempered support Great composition, lighting and I love that the tourists do not detract from it, although I wish we could so something about that distortion at the right. Daniel Case (talk) 03:43, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
    Daniel: I fixed the perspective of the minaret in the back and also got rid of the crane in the background Poco2 10:35, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:47, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Gnosis (talk) 23:05, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:27, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support The perspective chosen is perfect, and with help from the tower and colors, it makes the building look very prominent and bold. Great photograph. WClarke 17:11, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Meisje met de parel.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2017 at 23:19:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

*  Support Girl with a Pearl Earring has always been the painting by Vermeer I like the least. It should be featured anyway, of course. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:38, 21 April 2017 (UTC) per discussion below --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:21, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

  •   Support Daphne Lantier 06:50, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   oppose The image we have here is not the one in the source, and nowhere near as good. The source image much more closely matches File:1665 Girl with a Pearl Earring.jpg which claims the same source. That file is 178 megapixels, though I suspect it is actually upsampled (if downsampled 50% it looks much better and is still 45 megapixels). Major differences are that the background in the source is brown with clear cracking; the colour of her headscarf is different, and the dark patch in the scarf near her left eye is not crushed blacked but still shows colour and detail. Further the cracking on the picture shows signs that the image has been oversharpened. So I think this image has had significant colour adjustments, strong contrast enhancement that has crushed the darker areas to black, and strong sharpening. I think the larger image has merit for FP, but needs some analysis to confirm whether its very large size is justified, and if not, what degree of downsizing would restore it to correct sharp proportions.
I have discovered why the source does not match. An earlier version of the Commons page linked to the source JPG (in addition to surrounding information pages) but this was removed by Crisco for some reason. Looking at the link through the Internet Archive here gives a file that is visually similar to this one, though quite a bit smaller. So I wonder if the museum has improved the copy they display on the website since Crisco first uploaded it. I'll drop Crisco a note. -- Colin (talk) 07:21, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  • To the best of my recollection, this was uploaded exactly as I found it on the website (as can be seen by the archive link). However, rather than use the automatic download resolution, which was downsampled, I had loaded the image at its full resolution in viewing mode, then downloaded from there using judicious screenshotting. It may have loaded at 125% or something similar as its "maximum resolution"; I suspect the MET's website does the same thing.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:41, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
As for why I removed the direct link to the JPG: to the best of my understanding, we are supposed to link to the host web-page rather than the image directly, to ensure any licensing information or similar is readily available. Hence the removal to the direct JPG link.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:43, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Chris. So I suspect the image on the web page has changed considerably since you screenshotted it. I think the current version on their website is better is better and the other high-res file (File:1665 Girl with a Pearl Earring.jpg) a better place from which to create an FP (if downsized). This file here is the one used by all the Wikipedias and has been featured, etc. The other file, although from the same museum source, is really quite different. It isn't an obvious case for simply overwriting this one per Commons:Overwriting existing files. -- Colin (talk) 09:08, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Torre de la Doncella, Baku, Azerbaiyán, 2016-09-26, DD 215-217 HDR.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2017 at 19:44:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers
  •   Info View of the Maiden Tower during the blue hour Old City, Baku, capital of Azerbaijan. The tower was built according to some sources in VIII-VII B.C. and belongs to the ensemble of historic monuments in the Old City of Baku inscribed in 2001 under the UNESCO World Heritage List. The 29.5 metres (97 ft)-high tower is one of Azerbaijan's most distinctive national emblems, and is thus featured on Azeri currency notes and official letterheads. Poco2 19:44, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Poco2 19:44, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment - It looks to my eyes like it's leaning back, with the top farther back than the bottom. I'm not sure why. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:49, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:51, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose trees, strange leaning --Mile (talk) 06:15, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support something's odd re: perspective, cf. buildings in the background (some verticals are straight, others are not). Still, the overall impression is very wow-y imo. I really like colors & composition. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:32, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Robiul3.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2017 at 17:05:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  •   Info created and uploaded by Razurahmanbd, nominated by Yann (talk) 17:05, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support What can I say? -- Yann (talk) 17:05, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daphne Lantier 17:45, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Really sad. No words! Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 18:24, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support per Jacopo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:24, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Any photograph that tells a story that is worth being heard deserves to be featured, and I highly suggest that everyone read the description. Also see my comment below. WClarke 21:07, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment Yann, and anyone else: It is worth noting that there are two photographs (Rabiul.jpg & Robiul2.jpg) that, in addition to this photograph, appear to make up a set. They are all of the same subject in the same place, and they all have the same description, so should we nominate them as a set, as it seems the author (Razurahmanbd) intended? If the author is around, just to be completely clear, are they intended to be viewed together? Thanks. WClarke 21:07, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
    • I checked the 3 images, I chose this one, which is of better quality and better composition. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:18, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support   Oppose See below. A documentary photo that is almost hard to watch... Wrt WClarke's comment, I don't see what three photos can say better than this one photo can. Not sure they are intended as a set as many photographers simply number photos of similar scene/subjects as a way of distinguishing them from each other. --cart-Talk 21:43, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --The Photographer 23:26, 20 April 2017 (UTC) I can't support a dangeroux for a children. Thanks Colin for notifiquer it --The Photographer 21:13, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Regretful neutral A shattering image, but even that cannot make me !vote for an image of someone posed sitting on what appears to be an actively used rail track. Daniel Case (talk) 01:53, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support although Daniel has a point --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:28, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Daniel. I very much doubt such an image would be published in the UK by any responsible picture editor -- lest it encourage a child to play on the railway tracks. I appreciate he lives at the railway station, and this is a third-world railway track rather than a busy high-speed line, but there seems no good reason to photograph him sitting on the tracks. Further, the background story, though heartbreaking and one I do not doubt, is unsourced and supplied by an unknown and inactive user. It is hard to see how this image/story could be responsibly used for an educational purpose. -- Colin (talk) 07:35, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
    •   Comment Sure is it encouraging? are we going through something not so much about the image? --2001:B07:644F:23A4:28C4:10AC:2FE9:24D5 19:57, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
    • Colin: Please stick to review the quality and value of the picture. Making a wrong political statement about children living standards doesn't help. I worked for children living in Bombay Central railway station, helping them to find solutions to their problems, but it seems you really have no idea about the lives of such children. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:23, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
      • Yann, I have made no "political statement about children living standards". I'm talking about responsible photography, and responsible sourcing of a story. -- Colin (talk) 10:47, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
        • Among all probabilities, this track is probably just beside his home, as there are a lot of slums by railway tracks, just because there is unoccuppied land there. Not only it is dangerous, but it is also dirty and noisy. And yet it is his living habitat. It is the place where he spends most of his time, trying to make a living picking up whatever he could find there. So you doesn't know what you are talking about. Still your comment is a kind of political statement. It is arrogant and scornful. You want to decide for the child where he should stay and live. Regards, D (talk) 13:59, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
          • Yann, could you cool it a bit please. The comments you are making bear absolutely no resemblance to what I've written. I'm not making any political statement. I have not said anything about where he should stay and live. Have you read the links I posted below. It's about photographers and precisely where they choose to pose and compose their subjects, and the effect that has on other photographers posing subjects on railway lines and getting themselves killed. Those parallel lines trailing into the distance are a deadly magnet for photographers. This is nothing to do with the boy. -- Colin (talk) 14:43, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
            • You don't need to ping me. I always watch my nominations. Yes, your comment has everything to do with the boy. You assume that for him seating in the tracks is a game, or/and that this is a set up by the photographer to make the image more powerful. I think you are wrong on both points. Even if the boy's story is not the truth, he most probably just happens to be here when the photograph passed by. The tracks are his living environment. Why can't he be photographed where he lives? Regards, Yann (talk) 18:03, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
              • I have not given any indication, an indication in the slightest, that I think the boy thinks sitting on the tracks is a game. I cannot read the photographers's mind and have no interest in it. I haven't doubted the story, just question the ability for a responsible publisher to use it: it is just a random story on the internet. Real publishers would only accept such a story from a trusted source. I live next to a busy main road, but I don't photograph my children standing in the middle of it. It is perfectly possible to photograph this boy where he lives, without him sitting on the tracks. Yann, I don't think you've taken on board the links I posted below. This image/story cannot be responsibly published, and I'm far from the only person here that thinks so. I'm unwatching this page now. -- Colin (talk) 20:18, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sadly, I have to agree with Colin and Daniel. --Kabelleger (talk) 18:56, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per above, sorry --A.Savin 19:32, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support   Neutral. (13:06, 22 April 2017 (UTC)) the photograph is visually stunning and is accompanied by background info that really makes it speak volumes more. I don't see the above oppose reasons as strong enough frankly. For concerns about children playing on the tracks, the image is already accompanied by a red box warning, and if you ask me, a child's first thought really could well be: "Look what happened to the kid who ran on the tracks!". That being said, I wouldn't be able to forgive the feeling within me to deny coverage of other stories told worldwide that are heard far less on places like the internet. Although Humans of New York is helping the cause recently, at least this image is freely licensed! Seb26 (talk) 23:26, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
    • Seb26, photos on railway tracks can look "visually stunning". That's why they are popular and why every year people are killed taking photos on railway tracks, and kids are killed playing on them. See this PetaPixel search for multiple articles describing deaths, the backlash that irresponsible publishers face if they post such images, and a good video highlighting how easy it is to get killed. Despite my comment about about third-world tracks, in fact more people died taking selfies in India than anywhere in world, study says. Way more. and that includes selifies taken in front of an oncoming train. Any publisher using such an image would face considerable negative press calling for the head of the photo editor. That means, despite any photographic qualities, the educational value of this image is extremely low, and on a project dedicated to educational media, that means it is not among our finest, and not FP. I really wish the photographer had taken their photos in a safe location. Please reconsider supporting this; it isn't the sort of image we want to encouage. -- Colin (talk) 08:14, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  • While Seb26 has a point about how a child might view this photo, I've changed my vote based on Daniel's comment. Since I live in an area with lots of inactive rails, I tend to forget the perils in other places. Colin, while the article you link to says that there were 11 train related selfie deaths world-wide that year (which is bad enough) it is about selfie deaths, not train-related, and it also says that "Most of the Indian deaths were water-related". I think this would be a more relevant source. --cart-Talk 11:31, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
[2] The backlash against a photo on National Geographic's Instagram profile as recently as in the last two weeks definitely concerned me. Thank you for the links. I still feel that this boy's story is related to his home at the station. I don't fault the photographer at all in this respect and do not think that he deliberately decided to have the boy sit on the tracks. But it is right what you say, being an FP means it'll reach the main page and potentially expose Commons to backlash or outrage. I am going to be   Neutral because I can still see that out of all possible photographs and all possible poses made on one, this photograph is going to be the least likely to encourage people or children to do it. Seb26 (talk) 13:06, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment I'm doubtful about the story mentioned in the file page. The beggar mafia is very strong in Asia. They even amputate the children to attract the sympathy. The children will say the story what their mafia leader teach them. They are mostly associated with tracks; so I see anything wrong in this photography though. They will quickly adapted to that environment and quickly achieve the skills to board and alight from a moving train. Jee 16:16, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Even if his "natural habitat" is among the rails the picture is a very bad double take on it. It says something in the description and shows something that can easily be interpreted in a different way. It also lacks any sensitivity (or rather humility from the photographer's part) that great photographers show in their work, you need not to go any further than GMB Akash, the undisputed king of Bangladeshi street photography to see what I mean. Also as Jkadavoor said above me, it is a thing in South-Asia and everyone should approach any story about a child amputee with caution. Is the story about this picture plausible? Yes, sadly tying up children and/or putting them in sacks and dumping in water part is all too familiar. Is it likely, with the amputation and all? Probably not, but in any case impossible to verify. Finally I'd just like to point out this is about Bangladesh, not India, which is a completely different beast even if they look similar to the rest of the world. -- KennyOMG (talk) 22:59, 23 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment - Please talk more about the humility of the photographer. I feel like I could really learn something if you would expound on that a bit. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:02, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Turquoise-spotted swallowtail (Graphium policenes) underside.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 29 Apr 2017 at 06:54:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera
  •   Info This swallowtail was so intent on getting salts from the wet forest road in Ghana, that it tolerated me and my macro lens. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 06:54, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Charles (talk) 06:54, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Compo not good, also background, leaf isnt helping neither. --Mile (talk) 08:08, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment The light is a bit flat, washing out some of the color on the butterfly and a bit of better contrast on the background would be nice. Want me to have a go at it? --cart-Talk 08:44, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • In this case I would need the raw file. Please email me a link to some dropbox I'm sure you have and I'll see what I can do later tonight when I'm home. (I'm at work now) --cart-Talk 09:08, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • So,   Done. The raw file straight from the can was actually very nice and it didn't need that much help, don't know why you tried to get it so very bright (or perhaps I got it all wrong..). I made two versions, the first is just normal fixing plus a few very bright, distracting glints on the sand cloned out, in the second I removed a distracting little dry grass as well. If you like any of them, please use them. The crop is a bit wider too. I also noticed that you snuck in another file, presumably for me to fix. Ok, I'll do that one too for you and e-mail you a link to the result. In the future though, please only send me files that I volunteer to help you with. Best, --cart-Talk 18:22, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Many thanks. New version much better. I've reworked image to emulate your second version (I'd already done NR). Charles (talk) 21:06, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Neutral I agree that the light is harsh, but I will reserve judgement until I see what cart can do. Daniel Case (talk) 19:17, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Looks better now. --cart-Talk 21:30, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I like the butterfly, but I don't like the near left corner, so I'd suggest cropping the butterfly much closer on the left side. Then if you like, you could adjust the crops on other sides, though that doesn't seem essential to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:35, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Louis-DelphinOdobeyCadet.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2017 at 18:53:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical
  •   Info created by Henri Gaudichon, uploaded and nominated by FrancoisFC
  •   Support -- FrancoisFC (talk) 18:53, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - Very good, well-preserved and interesting photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:15, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support From back when sitting for the group picture really meant sitting. Daniel Case (talk) 04:40, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:07, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 07:36, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Mile (talk) 08:09, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support This is where time stands still. ;) I particularly like that each of the master craftsmen are holding their tools to indicate what they do, just like in a Renaissance portrait. --cart-Talk 08:49, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:19, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Schnobby (talk) 13:47, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Mountain gorilla (Gorilla beringei beringei) 10 month baby.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 27 Apr 2017 at 16:46:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  •   Info Female mountain gorilla (Gorilla beringei beringei) with her 10-month-old baby. In the Titus Group in Rwanda. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 16:46, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Charles (talk) 16:46, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose; it's sort of hard to tell what's what in the image on first glance since we don't see the baby gorilla's face straight-on or any of the mother's face. Daniel Case (talk) 17:34, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Cluttered composition, sorry. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:12, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - Keeping in mind that impact can trump other factors, this baby's face moves me, so I think that if enough other people agreed, that would be a sufficient reason for a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:39, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Per Slaunger. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 08:38, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Water for use in aerial firefighting being carried in a bucket attached to a MChS Mil Mi-26 heavylift helicopter.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2017 at 18:01:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Air transport
  •   Info created by Yuri Smityuk - uploaded by Russavia & Dura-Ace - nominated by Base -- Base (talk) 18:01, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Information: The Mil Mi-26 is the world's biggest helicopter and is used in the firefighting role by the Ministry of Emergency Situations in Russia. A photo of Mi-26 using water buckets, in order to give viewers a sense of the wow of this photo, can be seen here. Base (talk) 18:01, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Base (talk) 18:01, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support--g. balaxaZe 18:54, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - That's very interesting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:06, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support- unusual and nice --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 19:26, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daphne Lantier 20:22, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   SupportJuliancolton | Talk 22:34, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:25, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 03:56, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   weak oppose Maybe I'm the only one, and though the image certainly is different, it feels weirdly artificial. The image is abstract in a way, but that doesn't seem to be the intent of the image. More than anything IMO, the background (I assume it's water) looks very unnatural and strange (to me I keep seeing lightning), and ruins the focus of the photograph, which is the bucket of water. Nothing in the image is particularly sharp, or shows good detail. Overall, it just feels off to me, and I don't really know how else to describe it. Sorry. WClarke 04:32, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment - Without prejudice to the rest of your points, I feel sure the background is mostly treetops. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:31, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  • @Ikan Kekek: You're right, after looking at it they do appear to be treetops. WClarke 20:37, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Weak support I agree with WClarke about the technical shortcomings (it's noisy, although that may not have been avoidable given the circumstances, but also the red on the ropes looks posterized). However, it's a striking and unusual enough image to support. Daniel Case (talk) 05:34, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Mild oppose It is indeed an ingenious, unusual and interesting sight, but I think there are too many technical shortcomings in the picture to feature it. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:21, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Per WClarke. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 08:49, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support --The Photographer 10:56, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Sunset in the Himalayas 2.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2017 at 15:54:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  •   Info Nepal, national park Langtang. Created, uploaded and nominated by Sergey Pesterev -- Sergey Pesterev (talk) 15:54, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Sergey Pesterev (talk) 15:54, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support A bit oversaturated methinks but ok. It also seems to be leaning but without reference it's impossible to say and I'll give the benefit of the doubt that it is actually level. -- KennyOMG (talk) 17:05, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Yes, it's pretty and it's from the Himalayas, but there seems to be a lot of sunsets here lately despite what the guidelines suggest. Or maybe I should just go with the flow and nominate some myself since folks seems to enjoy them. --cart-Talk 17:13, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment - A remarkable scene, but the size was dearly bought by too much noise. I you could fix that, I'd be glad to support this picture --PtrQs (talk) 17:30, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Noisy, and without an exposure time in the metadata, I can't say whether this was avoidable or not. Daniel Case (talk) 22:01, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support I suggested a crop, to remove a little more of the black silhouette bottom triangle, which I don't think adds much. I would have liked to see more layering of mountains on the left: it is not very prominent. The composition, balancing left and right, is very good. The noise is a result of processing I'm sure, but not an issue here -- there's no pixel level detail in the scene anyway and a little noise helps avoid posterisation banding. -- Colin (talk) 12:24, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - I haven't really been able to make up my mind on this one. Technical quality is acceptable for me... the D800 is just naturally a noisier camera than some others due to the huge number of pixels. At any reasonable viewing size, the noise isn't detrimental. Ultimately, while it's not the most innovative or compelling image I've ever seen, its simple beauty and serenity sway me to support. –Juliancolton | Talk 22:33, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

File:BlackMarble20161km.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2017 at 08:10:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Satellite images
  •   Info created by NASA - uploaded by mareklug - nominated by mareklug -- Mareklug talk 08:10, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • For its informational/map/technical merit. Also, very absorbing to navigate over.   Support -- Mareklug talk 08:10, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support - I deplore NASA's use of the highly misleading Mercator projection, but the greatness of this photo as a reference is undeniable. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:31, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support @Ikan:every projection is necessarily misleading - a globe is a globe is a globe. Gall-Peters is just as "wrong". We shouldn't succumb to zeitgeisty yet aimless activism, imo. ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:58, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment - I assure you, I'm well aware that any flat view of the Earth is a distortion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:02, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Oops, Ikan, I didn't want to come over as rude. Sorry! I should have chosen a different phrasing. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 03:50, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  • I didn't take offense, don't worry. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:34, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Pretty and informative. --cart-Talk 17:10, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Very interesting image. If you zoom in on North Korea, Pyongyang appears to be the only city with lights, if that says anything about the county. WClarke 18:05, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:58, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:27, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support 933.12 Megapixel? Ok. Challenge accepted. :-) -- Colin (talk) 17:29, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Slaunger (talk) 20:23, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Mausoleo de Shah Cheragh, Shiraz, Irán, 2016-09-24, DD 30.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 26 Apr 2017 at 05:21:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • My pleasure! I hope other people like this photo as much as I do. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:18, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment It's not tilted? --Pudelek (talk) 09:24, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
    Pudelek: verticals look vertical to me on both sides. Please, consider that the picture was no taken from the front of the gate but further to the right Poco2 14:20, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:44, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Building top need perspective fix --The Photographer 16:01, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
    The Photographer: what kind of perspective fix are you expecting? Please, don´t expect the top part to be horizontal, as that can only be expected if I was in front of it. If I apply perspective correction to "fix" that I will definitely deform the building Poco2 19:14, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  Support I underestand your point that this shoot not was done exactly from the center of the building. Thanks for your explain. I like this shoot. --The Photographer 19:25, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Interesting object, but not really FP. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 09:04, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment - If you can, please explain why you don't think so. I'm pretty surprised by the light interest in this photo so far, so perhaps you might be able to shed some light on that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:20, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
  • I move this comment from the talk page Poco2 18:18, 19 April 2017 (UTC):
Hi Ikan Kekek, you asked me to explain my comment. I said "Interesting object, but not really FP". I think it is interesting because of the design, it has been photographed amply before. But I also feel it is not FP-quality because of the distracting objects in the photograph, like the undone poster on the left, the corrugated roof-plate, camera and loudspeaker on top and the poster on the right. Besides, the perspective seems rather artificial. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 13:54, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:20, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Old scratched glass inkwell.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2017 at 20:25:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Since no-one else has voted yet, I will elaborate on what I like so much about this photo. The inkwell does wonderful things to light and image, producing a very complex series of forms that could easily have inspired Cubists and Abstract Expressionists, yet they are strictly photographed from life. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:32, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Comment The scratches definitely add an absract element to photograph, but what surface is the inkwell on top of? Thanks. WClarke 23:54, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
  • @WClarke: If you open the file's page there is a description of how the photo was made along with a photo of the setup for the photo and the surface and background. --cart-Talk 08:12, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • OK, well, almost strictly from life, but certainly from life in the sense used in painting, where paintings from life don't have to literally copy every detail the artist sees to the minutest detail. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:19, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Decollazione del Battista (Matthias Stom).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2017 at 19:56:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:Harbour of Sète at dawn cf01.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Apr 2017 at 06:27:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

lol :) in the south of France, we like to sleep in, it's too early to be congested by cars... Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:36, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I do not like the composition, almost half of the image just shows a boring road. --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:01, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Uoaei1, also too much sky for me (when one part is entirely featureless, I wouldn't do rule of thirds, but rather 3:4 or an even larger ratio). -- King of ♠ 02:14, 19 April 2017 (UTC)


Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /cart-Talk 13:57, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
This image will be added to the FP category: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes