Commons:Propositions d'images remarquables

Les règles des Propositions d'images remarquables ont changé.
Conformément aux règles générales, une image est promue avec 7 (sept) votes "support" ou plus (et un ratio de 2/1 de # supports/opposes) et le nombre de nominations actives par utilisateur est limité à 2 (deux)
Désormais, seuls peuvent voter les membres inscrits depuis plus de 10 jours ayant procédé à au moins 50 interventions dans "Commons"


Skip to current candidates Aller directement aux propositions en cours

Cette page recense les images qui sont proposées pour être affichées dans les Images remarquables. Notez qu'il ne s'agit pas de la même chose que l'image du jour ou que les images de qualité.

Les archives des votes précédents se trouvent sur cette page.

Il existe également une liste chronologique des images remarquables.

Voir aussi les Images de qualité, les propositions d'images de qualité et les critiques photographiques.

ProcédureEdit

Conseils avant de proposer une imageEdit

partie en cours de traduction depuis la version anglaise, votre avis est le bienvenu.
Lisez entièrement le guide avant de commencer
Quelques règles informelles à retenir avant de proposer une image (les termes en italiques sont la traduction anglaise des termes).

  • Définition (display resolution) : les images de Commons peuvent être utilisées sur d'autres supports qu'un écran d'ordinateur, par exemple pour être imprimées ou vues à très haute résolution. Il est important que les images proposées aient la plus haute résolution possible. Au moins 2 millions de pixels (par ex. 2000 x 1000) semble raisonnable à présent. Les images de définition inférieure sont systématiquement rejetées sauf s'il y a une bonne raison.
  • Mise au point (focus) : tous les objets importants de l'image devraient être nets. Dans l'idéal les objets non primordiaux sont nets.
  • Avant-plan et arrière-plan (background and foreground): ils peuvent être dérangeants. Le sujet principal ne devrait pas être caché par le premier plan, ni se confondre avec l'arrière-plan.
  • Qualité générale (general quality) : Les images proposées devraient avoir une très haute qualité technique.
  • Une retouche (digital manipulations) ne doit pas tromper l'observateur. La correction de quelques défauts dans l'image est acceptée pour autant que ce soit limité, bien fait, et non pour tromper. Les retouches courantes sont le recadrage, la correction de la perspective, de netteté, des couleurs ou de l'exposition. Des manipulations plus importantes, tels quel l'élimination d'éléments dans l'arrière plan, doivent être décrites dans la description de l'image, par le biais du modèle {{RetouchedPicture}}. Les retouches non décrites ou mal décrites qui transformeraient le sujet sont inacceptables.
  • Utilité (value) : notre but principal est de présenter des images utiles et précieuses. Les images devraient ainsi être spéciales d'une façon ou d'une autre, donc, entre autres :
    • La plupart des coucher de soleil sont beaux, et la plupart ne sont pas différents des autres existant déjà.
    • Les photos de nuit sont souvent belles mais davantage de détails sont visibles de jour.
    • "Beau" ne veut pas dire "utile".

Au niveau technique, nous avons l'exposition, la composition, le mouvement et la profondeur du champ.

  • L'exposition (exposure) est l'obturation du diaphragme qui modifie la luminosité (brightness) pour rendre avec qualité les ombres et les lumières au sein de l'image. Le manque d'ombres dans le détail n'est pas nécessairement négatif, cela peut être un effet désiré.
  • La composition (composition) est l'arrangement des éléments dans l'image. La "Règle de trois" est un bon guide pour la composition, c'est un héritage des écoles de peintures. L'idée est de diviser l'image par deux lignes horizontales et deux lignes verticales, nous avons donc trois parties dans chaque sens. L'objet ne doit pas forcément être centré. Les sujets intéressants doivent êtres placés aux 4 croisements des lignes. L'horizon ne doit jamais être mis au milieu, car il couperait l'image en deux. L'idée principale ici est de rendre l'image dynamique.
  • Netteté (sharpness) renvoie à la manière dont les mouvements sont représentés dans l'image. Ils peuvent être nets ou flous. Ils ne sont pas mieux l'un que l'autre, cela dépend de l'intention du photographe. L'impression de mouvement dépend des différents objets de l'image. Par exemple, photographier une voiture de course qui apparaît nette par rapport à l'arrière plan ne donne pas une idée de la vitesse. Il faudrait en fait que la voiture soit représentée nette, mais avec un arrière plan flou, créant ainsi le mouvement. D'un autre coté, représenter le saut d'un joueur de basket net avec le reste de l'image flou, en raison de la nature peu habituelle de la photo, lui conférerait de l'intérêt.
  • La profondeur de champ (depth of field or DOF) renvoie à la zone de mise au point devant et au delà du sujet principal. La profondeur de champ est choisie en fonction des besoins spécifiques à chaque image. Une profondeur grande ou petite peu améliorer ou dégrader la qualité de l'image. Une faible profondeur de champ peu attirer l'attention sur le sujet principal, en le séparant de son environnement. Le lentilles à petite distance focale (grand angle) ont une grande profondeur de champ, et vice versa, les lentilles à grande distance focale (petite ouverture) ont une petite profondeur de champ.

PropositionEdit

Si vous pensez avoir trouvé ou créé une image qui puisse être considérée comme parmi les meilleures de Commons, avec une description et une licence appropriée, copiez le nom de l'image dans la boîte ci-dessous (en incluant le préfixe File:), après le texte déjà présent :


Après cela, vous devrez insérer un lien vers la page que vous venez de créer en haut de Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list.

VoteEdit

A l'exclusion de tous autres, vous pouvez utiliser les modèles suivants:

  • {{Pour}} (Symbol support vote.svg Support),
  • {{Contre}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose),

Ainsi que :

  • {{Neutre}} (Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral),
  • {{Comment}} (Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment),
  • {{Info}} (Pictogram voting info.svg Info),
  • {{Question}} (Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question).


IMPORTANT: veuillez notamment NE PAS UTILISER les modèles {{weak support}} (GA candidate.svg Weak support) ni {{weak oppose}} (BA candidate.svg Weak oppose), ils ne sont pas reconnus par le robot, et votre vote serait considéré comme non valide.

Merci d'inclure quelques mots expliquant pourquoi vous soutenez ou non la promotion de l'image, surtout si vous votez contre. N'oubliez pas de signer avec ~~~~.

RèglesEdit

Règles généralesEdit

  1. Le résultat est donné 9 jours après la proposition (voir le planning en bas de page). Les votes ajoutés le 10e jour ou après ne sont pas décomptés.
  2. Les utilisateurs non-enregistrés peuvent proposer des images, faire des commentaires, mais pas voter.
  3. La proposition elle-même ne compte pas comme un vote : il faut l'ajouter explicitement.
  4. Le proposant peut retirer une image à tout moment, en écrivant : {{withdraw}} ~~~~
  5. Souvenez-vous que le but de Wikimedia Commons est une bibliothèque pour tous les projets Wikimedia, y compris des projets futurs ; les images n'ont pas à être utiles uniquement pour Wikipédia.
  6. Les images peuvent être retirées de la liste dès le 5e jour si elles n'ont reçu aucun vote "pour".
  7. Soyez attentifs et très sélectifs dans les choix que vous faites, car il ne peut y avoir que deux propositions actives par proposant. Toute proposition supplémentaire sera rejetée sans examen.
  8. Seulement 2 nominations actives par même utilisateur (qui est, en nomination sous "review" et non encore close) sont autorisées. Le principal but de cette mesure est de contribuer à une meilleure qualité moyenne des nominations, par un choix plus judicieux des photos présentes en nominations.

Règles de promotionEdit

L'image candidate devient une image remarquable si elle remplit les conditions suivantes :

  1. Une licence appropriée (bien sûr !)
  2. Au moins sept votes "pour".
  3. un ratio de 2/1 de votes "pour"/"contre".
  4. Deux versions différentes de la même image ne peuvent pas être promues en même temps, mais seulement celle avec le plus grand score.

ContestationsEdit

Avec le temps, les critères d'évaluation évoluent, et il peut être décidé qu'une image qui était auparavant assez bonne pour être dans la liste ne peut plus l'être.

Pour qu'une image soit déchue, il faut qu'une majorité de 2/3 avec au moins 5 votes accepte de retirer l'image, autrement elle reste "remarquable". Pour voter, utiliser les modèles {{Keep}} (Symbol keep vote.svg Keep : mérite de rester "remarquable") ou {{Delist}} (Symbol oppose vote.svg Delist  : ne mérite plus le label).

Pour contester une image, copiez son nom avec le préfixe dans la boîte ci-dessous à la suite du texte déjà présent :


Vous devriez inclure les informations suivantes :

  • Informations sur l'origine de l'image (créateur, importateur).
  • Un lien vers le vote d'origine.
  • La raison pour laquelle vous contestez le label, avec votre signature.

Insérez ensuite un lien en haut de Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal.

SommaireEdit

Pour ajouter votre proposition à la listeEdit

Pour ajouter votre proposition à la liste, cliquez ici et ajoutez votre proposition en haut de la liste : {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:FILENAME}}

Propositions en coursEdit

Featured picture candidatesEdit

File:Rococo staircase (Gruber Mansion, Slovenia).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 9 May 2016 at 09:19:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Rococo staircase in Gruber Mansion, Ljubljana. About photo: behind window is white wall, not burned. Fresco above cant be seen like this in real, HDR make it looking better than in real. Shot with fisheye.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mile (talk) 09:19, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 09:22, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:AT 50473 Justizpalast Wien, Iustitia - Emanuel Pendl 4388-HDR.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 9 May 2016 at 07:26:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Austria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info View from the second floor to the westside of the assembly hall with part of the stairway and arcades. Palace of Justice, Vienna. Architect: Alexander Wielemans von Monteforte (erected 1879). Iustitia, this sitting marble figure is almost 2.5 m high and made by Emanuel Pendl in 1881. All by -- Hubertl 07:26, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Hubertl 07:26, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support well done --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:57, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice. I like the symmetry. --XRay talk 10:51, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Ponte dos Ingleses, também conhecida como Ponte Metálica.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2016 at 21:12:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Mina de Chuquicamata, Calama, Chile, 2016-02-01, DD 110-112 PAN.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2016 at 19:42:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Chuquicamata is a state-owned copper mine located at 9,350 feet (2,850m) above sea level just outside Calama, north of Chile.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Industry
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Panoramic view of Chuquicamata, a state-owned copper mine located at 2,850 metres (9,350 ft) above sea level just outside Calama, north of Chile. It is by excavated volume the largest open pit copper mine in the world. The huge hole was started in 1882 as a mine to extract gold and copper. It is 3.5 kilometres (2.2 mi) long, 4.5 kilometres (2.8 mi) wide and with a depth of 850 metres (2,790 ft) it is the second deepest open-pit mine in the world (after Bingham Canyon Mine in Utah, USA). Note: to get a feeling of the scale spot out a haul truck, which is 9.5 metres (31 ft) long and 4.5 metres (15 ft) high. All by me, Poco2 19:42, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 19:42, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:48, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:30, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 08:31, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:55, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 10:54, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Impressive. --Pugilist (talk) 13:09, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:St. Pölten Dom Hochaltar 01.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2016 at 15:29:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

High altar of St. Pölten Cathedral, Lower Austria

File:Laon Porte d'Ardon 01.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2016 at 15:26:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Porte d'Ardon in Laon, Picardie, France

File:Winchester Cathedral Nave 1, Hampshire, UK - Diliff.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2016 at 10:46:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Winchester Cathedral

File:Rhapsody (ship, 1996), Sète cf01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2016 at 05:14:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rhapsody (ship, 1996)
I was surprised by the size of the boat, I came with the prime 35mm lens, I applied a small perspective correction and this is the bigger size I can give. Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:54, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support You might try simple panorama, handheld, two shot then stitch. Just lock settings to be same. --Mile (talk) 12:42, 29 April 2016 (UTC)re
Yes indeed, I have not had the idea to do this... Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:38, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support crystal clear picture of a piece of ugliness! This ship is a candidate for the hall of shame. But maybe just in my humble opinion. --Hubertl 12:22, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:12, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I must say that the bright effect here comes from the use of a UV filter, this one, this is also why I had chosen the 35mm lens despite the size of the ship, as my 14-24mm accepts no filter. Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:35, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:47, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It’s impressively sharp and rich in detail, yet the tight side crop does not appeal to me. So, it’s just a ship, no idea beyond the plain rendering (if only I could see the wide sea it’s going for! Oh, and I agree with Hubertl about its lack of beauty). Some pixelisation on the right side (look at the letters of the name), maybe due to your perspective correction. I rather tend to oppose in spite of the technical qualities and high resolution.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:44, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Outstanding capture of an ordinary subject. The dominance of the white and blue throughout the image makes for a strong motif. --King of ♠ 23:17, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 08:35, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good image. (Crop could be better left and right.) --XRay talk 10:55, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Imperial Academy of Arts Panorama.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2016 at 00:15:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saint Petersburg, Russia: building of the Imperial Academy of Arts
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Russia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Florstein - nominated by A.Savin --A.Savin 00:15, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 00:15, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 00:53, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another standard Florstein, but the colors in this picture are especially nice. --King of ♠ 01:25, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Certainly a nice building, but I don't love what's on either side of it. I think that for me to consider this kind of shot a FP, it would need more sky, with nice clouds (especially, dramatic ones), or perhaps some really great light, such as the streaming yellow sunlight that you can get shortly after sunrise. Sorry, I know this may seem a bit nitpicky. It's a very good photo, but it's not quite FP to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:43, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's a nice capture with good detail though I agree with Ikan that it would benefit from more sky. But it is way over-processed. Compare File:Imperial Academy of Arts.jpg. The white in the other photo is peach yellow/orange in this. While such a change could occur with "golden hour" lighting, this photo was taken at 13:16, 17 October 2015, which is far away from golden hour as one can get. And golden light wouldn't explain why all the grey elements (street signs, cars) are blue-grey. It's too contrasty too. I'd support a neutral version where Photoshop Lightroom sliders were more conservatively set. -- Colin (talk) 07:43, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Abbaye d'Hautecombe.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 7 May 2016 at 22:30:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Abbey of Hautecombe from the Lake of Bourget

File:AtardecerPlayaDoForte1-feb2016.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 7 May 2016 at 22:09:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunset in do Forte beach, Cabo Frío, Brazil
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me --Ezarateesteban 22:10, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ezarateesteban 22:09, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like the composition a fair deal. However, to me, this photo looks a lot better at thumbnail and full-page size than it does at full size. At full size, the sky looks noisy. Perhaps you could improve the photo by denoising the sky somewhat. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:01, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks @Ikan Kekek: I tried to denoise a bit all the image, look if it is enough, furthermore I provide the original source file, so if you or another user wants to improve the image I'll be very greatful, I authorize, off course, to upload the improves over this image. Best Regards and thanks for your revision --Ezarateesteban 23:24, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
That's a substantial improvement, to my eyes, though others may be able to do more. Moderate support from me now. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:32, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the composition --The Photographer (talk) 12:57, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry. Composition is good. Some details missing and a lot of disturbing elements (waste). Sharpness may be better too. --XRay talk 10:56, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Elite Residential Area Ottawa Lamanai 10.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 7 May 2016 at 14:30:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mayan ruin - Administrative and Elite Residential Area, Ottawa
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Cephas - uploaded by Cephas - nominated by Cephas -- Cephas (talk) 14:30, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cephas (talk) 14:30, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I love the composition and subject matter. The only thing I find to be a real drawback is the hazy light, but that's not close to a reason for me not to support featuring this photo, overall. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:53, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Almost a painting… 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:31, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support more pictures from Lamanai! ;-) funny we both went there only a few days apart --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:03, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Cape Skink Flowers.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 7 May 2016 at 07:07:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cape Skink (Trachylepis capensis) on purple Aster flowers.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Prosthetic_Head - uploaded by Prosthetic_Head - nominated by Prosthetic Head -- Prosthetic Head (talk) 07:07, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Prosthetic Head (talk) 07:07, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Interesting and high-quality photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:22, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Flash colors, shallow DOF, composition could be much better, now i dont know is it animal or flower about. --Mile (talk) 10:22, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your comment, I'm not sure what you mean by "Flash colors", I didn't use a flash - just sun light. DoF is quite somewhat shallow, but I don't personally find it a problem. I disagree about the compostition but respect your oppinion, it can be rather subjective. Prosthetic Head (talk) 10:54, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
    • I see its made with compact, hence some low IQ, i still dont like reflection on skin, and compo could be better. --Mile (talk) 06:31, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • {{neutral}}, I like it, but without Meta-data the experts here (not me) have no good clues what might be wrong.Be..anyone 💩 10:39, 28 April 2016 (UTC) Symbol support vote.svg Support, updated. –Be..anyone 💩 11:20, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your comment, the meta-data must have got stripped from the file when I did the crop. I'll try to add it back. Prosthetic Head (talk) 10:54, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done New version with complete meta-data included. Thanks for pointing this out Be..anyone. Prosthetic Head (talk) 11:14, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Laguna Hedionda, Bolivia, 2016-02-03, DD 50.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 6 May 2016 at 20:19:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Colourful shop oasis near the Laguna Hedionda, Nor Lípez Province southwestern Bolivia.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Colourful shop oasis near the Laguna Hedionda, Nor Lípez Province southwestern Bolivia. All by me, Poco2 20:19, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 20:19, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support More Bolivia! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:58, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:16, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Strong support for this amazing photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:42, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Also, to further explain, the reason I wanted this photo to be nominated is that it's an amazing sight, the strip of habitation and colorful mural in the middle of the desert. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:58, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Not convinced yet, technically. Colours appear oversaturated (esp. the red house near center) with some overexposed areas to the left (not blown but washed-out), and there’s a bright seam along the horizon line suggesting that the sky is unnatural. --Kreuzschnabel 09:55, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
    Kreuzschnabel, please, have a new look, I have reduced slightly the brightness and retouched the blues Poco2 18:04, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Shows the barrenness of the landscape. --King of ♠ 02:04, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support what an amazingly colorful picture of a barren landscape --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:08, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

File:I-DPCN at work 03 (4203528315).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 May 2016 at 14:45:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bombardier 415 dropping water.

File:Cathedral of Mount Mary, Old Goa.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 May 2016 at 11:15:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cathedral of Mount Mary, Old Goa
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Black and white
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dey.sandip - uploaded by Dey.sandip - nominated by Dey.sandip -- Dey.sandip (talk) 11:15, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dey.sandip (talk) 11:15, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question What’s that terracing in the foreground, taking up 60 percent of the frame? For a picture of a church building, I’d like to see more of the building. --Kreuzschnabel 14:25, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
    • First of all, thank you for your interest. To clarify, it's not a picture of just the church building, in that case I would have put up an image (or a close-up) of only the building itself. The intention here was to show the church in the context of its surroundings by using a low-angle composition and framing. This image presents the point-of-a view of a little kid who is standing on the base of the steps and looking up to take all the steps that lead up to the church. The church is located at an elevated level. The foreground is worn out steps covered with dry grass and leaves and convey the feeling of deserted and lonely surrounding of the church and they are very much integral part of the photo to establish the mood and lead the viewer to the church which is at the end of the steps. I hope this explains my idea as I captured it. -- Dey.sandip (talk) 08:26, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
      • It works in those terms. I'm sort of Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral about whether that makes it a deserving FP, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:53, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I'm tempted to oppose, unless there's a good explanation of how unusual or important those terraces are. I give you credit for trying a non-traditional composition, which I think is a good thing to try, but I lean against this being a really good and featurable composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:53, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
    • Thanks for your interest. I have tried to explain my intention/idea above, if that helps. -- Dey.sandip (talk) 08:26, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Узкоколейный тепловоз ТУ8-0427 с туристическим поездом на станции Гуамка..JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 6 May 2016 at 11:02:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Narrow-gauge diesel locomotive TU8-0427 with the tourist train on station Guamka.

File:Mengshäuser Kuppe mit Kruspis.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 May 2016 at 06:12:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Jörg Braukmann (Milseburg) - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:12, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I don't know whether this will be judged an FP or only a good QI, but this is the only way to find out. I think it's a beautiful landscape, and it reminds me of some of the landscapes my father painted in New England in the late 60s and early 70s. It's a composition with several distinct grounds, if you like, rather than just a foreground, middleground and background, and then a sky with dramatic clouds. Among other things, I really love the very green mown grass crops in the foreground. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:12, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose from me, sorry. Certainly it is a nice scenery, but the image as such does not strike me outstanding nor even flawless (overexposed clouds). The ruined house on the lower right might have given an impressive subject :-) Foreground shows no mown grass but growing crops on a field, as does the middleground. Cropping, err, the crop out would give a better composition IMHO. Altogether nice but not exceptional. --Kreuzschnabel 09:07, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I respect your opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:06, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Paseo Ciclista.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2016 at 14:42:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Français : Cyclistes sur la piste cyclable du pont de San Juan de Aznalfarache, en Andalousie, en Espagne.English: Cyclists on the bike path San Juan de Aznalfarache, Andalusia, Spain. (Google traduction)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Abel Maestro Garcia - uploaded by Tyseria - nominated by Tyseria -- Tyseria (talk) 16:42, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tyseria (talk) 16:42, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • regretful Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose – it’s really a brilliant idea and beautiful lighting, lots of wow. But then you somehow overdid it. Severe colour fringing on all structure edges, haloes from tonemapping, many blown/oversaturated patches, sharpening artifacts. Can it be redone? It’s a pity for the fine idea. --Kreuzschnabel 18:13, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Per Kreuz, but also, pictures with watermarks are per se disqualified from FP consideration. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:42, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel, and I'm not sure about the Flickr transfer with no review. This image is tagged with a CC-0 license here but is PD-Mark on Flickr. @Yann: @Jameslwoodward: Is PD-Mark from Flickr still a no-go? I haven't dealt with PD-Mark images in depth since I've never really seen many uploaded, but this image lacks a license review. INeverCry 20:12, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above. I hope you can solve the issues mentioned --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:59, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above, especially the PD Mark issue. -- Poké95 06:25, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As noted above, the license is not valid. I have removed the {{cc-0}} tag, because it is not CC-0. A CC-0 license is irrevocable. The Public Domain Mark is simply an expression of opinion that the work is PD, but it can be changed at any time. Licenses for Commons must be irrevocable. Technically this is a {{speedy}}, but I have put a {{delete}} on it. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because license issues, watermark, none possibility to succed here Ezarateesteban 11:26, 27 April 2016 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ezarateesteban 17:29, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Khaoyai 06.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2016 at 16:13:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Khunkay - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 16:13, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 16:13, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Solid FP --The Photographer (talk) 16:22, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good compo --Mile (talk) 16:25, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tyseria (talk) 17:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:38, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lots of heehee but no wow on my side, sorry. In other words: Definitely funny but not outstanding as a photograph. Sharpness impaired by noise. --Kreuzschnabel 18:10, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Per Kreuz, and I find the blurring in the middle of the picture frame very distracting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:45, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 20:10, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 20:18, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hehe trumps technical issues --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:05, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Mainly because of the blurring in the middle. It's a funny image though. --Cayambe (talk) 08:08, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 09:56, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Would be probably better with more DoF + less ISO, but I like it nonetheless --A.Savin 15:49, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kasir (talk) 10:48, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question A crop of the road below maybe ?--Jebulon (talk) 20:10, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Guepier d'europe au parc national Ichkeul.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2016 at 15:18:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
The main subject is the bird, however, everything else is important too and pay attention to every detail is relevant because small details is what make a ecepcional image. --The Photographer (talk) 19:04, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For 500mm on K5 its OK. That shadow in eye problem a bit. I dont mind that stick, not problem. --Mile (talk) 16:27, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 16:44, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tyseria (talk) 17:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:39, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Bit loss of detail on the plumage but still very impressive. --Kreuzschnabel 18:15, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:58, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Zcebeci (talk) 12:55, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 03:45, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good. Charles (talk) 16:40, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good picture, bad work. All over posterisation and luminance noise. Maybe it comes from over-sharpening and de-noising at the same time. --Hockei (talk) 18:54, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

File:2014 Cenzura.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2016 at 14:55:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Allegory of communist censorship, analogue picture taken in 1989 in Poland
  • @Jacek Halicki: In the description, the date is given as 1989, while in the date field it says "1 October 1982, 19:00:00". INeverCry 21:31, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Pictogram voting keep.svg Fixed --Jacek Halicki (talk) 22:28, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noisy background does not fit this one. I like 4th version, but face. --Mile (talk) 05:25, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above. I guess it was impossible to avoid a certain degree of grain --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:09, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:59, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 19:30, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 07:36, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

File:2015 Swaledale from Kisdon Hill.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2016 at 09:48:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by -- Kreuzschnabel 09:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I hesitated long if I should nominate this one but finally decided to get your opinions about it. Beyond a very fine view into Swaledale, it also conveys the contrasting Yorkshire Dales scenery formed by the green pastures below and the more brownish moorlands on the hills. Took some effort to avoid overexposure in the clouds which, of course, shone brightly in the backlight. --Kreuzschnabel 09:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kreuzschnabel 09:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very well done! --Hubertl 09:56, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like this landscape a lot. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely. Looks like a painting. Very well done technically, too. --Code (talk) 10:08, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above. Great! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:26, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nice view and well executed. --Pugilist (talk) 15:02, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Maybe some crop in bottom. --Mile (talk) 16:02, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
    • I already cropped some of the foreground off. Found it best this way to maintain a U-shaped darker frame around the sunlit curved valley. --Kreuzschnabel 17:12, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 16:45, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tyseria (talk) 17:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 17:06, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It is so attractive নকীব সরকার (talk) 01:19, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:02, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 09:00, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Santa Maria dell'Orto (Rome) - Ceiling.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2016 at 08:57:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Santa Maria dell'Orto (Rome) - Ceiling.jpg
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by LivioAndronico (talk) 08:57, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LivioAndronico (talk) 08:57, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I'm not sure what others will say, but I love the decorations and the resplendent shafts of light, and I'm willing to accept the shadow at the bottom of the picture as a side effect of natural lighting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:19, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support interesting light effects, maybe a bit overprocessed (sharpness, saturation) but FP for me. --Hubertl 09:59, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Put some contrast down or minus saturation. --Mile (talk) 16:17, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 16:45, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 17:08, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:07, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:56, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:10, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 09:01, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 19:30, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Annunciation (Leonardo).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2016 at 08:53:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Annunciation (Leonardo).jpg

File:Saint Kitts - Brimstone Hill Fortress 04.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2016 at 06:45:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Brimstone Hill Fortress, detail of the Orientation Center.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Caribbean feeling (Brimstone Hill Fortress, St. Kitts: Orientation Center). All by me --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:45, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:45, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Not obviously spectacular - it looks like a private house, not a fortress - but, perhaps ironically, a very peaceful picture. The area to the right of the fortress is a bit blurred at full size, but it looks fine at full-page size, and the picture would suffer if it were much more closely cropped on the right side (a bit closer might be fine). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:30, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 09:05, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good composition and colour management. --Kreuzschnabel 09:12, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as Kreuzschnabel --Hubertl 10:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I was thinking of nominating this myself -- Thennicke (talk) 11:47, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tyseria (talk) 16:59, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 17:10, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:16, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Hubertl. --Johann Jaritz (talk) 09:02, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Magnolienbaum, Wiesbaden-Biebrich, 360x180, 160409, ako.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2016 at 06:00:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A flowering magnolia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Spherical panorama of a flowering magnolia. The picture was taken from underneath the tree. I think it's an unusual view of an interesting subject and therefore could be special enough for FP. Please do me the favour and look at it in the panellum viewer before voting. All by me -- Code (talk) 06:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Code (talk) 06:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 06:14, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Almost a hypnotic effect. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:32, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very fine rendering, and excellent lighting control. --Kreuzschnabel 09:14, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 10:01, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question How do you plan to fit in some article if viewer isnt part of Wiki ? --Mile (talk) 16:14, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Not at all - at the moment. I hope there will a suitable technology in the future. --Code (talk) 18:32, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Rosapelikan beim Putzen des Gefieders.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2016 at 20:58:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rosapelikan while cleaning the plumage.

File:Gruga-Mustergärten-Bee-Home-Garden-2016.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2016 at 20:58:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Show garden Bee Home Garden inside Grugapark
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Show garden Bee Home Garden inside Grugapark. This area of the park is a "showroom" for landscape contractors.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 20:58, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 20:58, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I'm not sure if all is enough sharp Ezarateesteban 22:31, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice scenery + well composed, sharpness is OK --A.Savin 00:04, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Per A.Savin. Interesting and unusual photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:34, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but the composition is too busy. The elements on the left pull toward the left while the elements on the right pull toward the right, leaving nothing to draw the eye to the center. The cut-off tree on the top right is also not ideal. --King of ♠ 02:51, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per KoH. INeverCry 04:08, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose technically as good as usual, but the composition is too busy, therefore not FP for me. --Hubertl 17:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I really like this composition because it seems full but well-ordered, the quality is good, beautiful colors. Ultimately it looks messy, but it is not.--LivioAndronico (talk) 18:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too many straights lines in too many directions.--Jebulon (talk) 20:08, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per all the other opposers. There are all the elements of a featured picture here. Trouble is, there's more than enough for one picture. Daniel Case (talk) 06:22, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Daniel: It's not my fault that there is more than enough :) In this case I tried to photographed the show garden in a favourable way. The characteristic of a show garden is that all elements of a "normal" garden are concentrated at small space. The same, Jebulon,the same is the case with the straight lines. Normally all these elements had been distributed over a larger area - but here gardeners show many possibilities. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:08, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Basel - Roche-Turm mit Stadtansicht bei Abenddämmerung.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2016 at 19:50:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Basel: Roche Tower during dusk
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Switzerland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 19:50, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 19:50, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I'm impressed that you avoided star trails completely, but could you please talk about the shape of the moon? I thought I was looking at some kind of eclipse, as the light and dark parts of the moon don't form a circular shape together. I like the rest of the picture but wish the upper crop of the trees on the left were less random-looking. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:05, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Image with very short exposure
Hi Ikan Kekek: I can't say much conserning shape of the moon. This is exactley how the camera the moon caputured. Look at the example image with the very short exposure. To retouch this eclipse-effect is not really difficult, but is it so distracting? Why do you think the crop is random? The image object is clearly defined: tower on the right side, the far away cityscape on the left side connected by the river rhine. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:28, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Yes, the strange shape of the moon is distracting to me, or I wouldn't have mentioned it, and for what it's worth, I don't see it in the short-exposure picture. The crop looks random on the trees on the left side of the picture, not above the building. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:31, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
The image example with the short exposure was to demonstrate the moon-shape taken by the camera. Sadly you don't argue why the crop should be random. Do you want more or less trees? The trees on the left enframe the image in my opinion, I see no need to chance this, sorry. --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:31, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
I didn't tell you to change the crop of the trees. Not all my comments require action. However, I would need for the moon to look more normal for me to consider supporting this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:52, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
You asked what I meant about the crop of the trees, so I'll try to explain. The trees have a very jagged shape. If there were a way to either include their tops or crop them in a way that seems satisfying (such that some thought about the uppermost shapes clearly was taken, however that could be done), I'd consider that superior. I'm looking again, and yeah, the moon really bothers me because it looks like a partial eclipse of the sun by the moon. But again, high praise for your stars! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:10, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
The trees look like they are looking after being cut in autumn-time the year before. Either the trees nor the shape of the moon are main objects of this image and I can't understand how they are distracting the whole image. But there is no need that we agree. If other users also mention that the moon-shape is disturbing I'll retouch it, but for the shape of the trees I'm not liable and I like this shape. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:51, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Because I look at the entire picture, not just whatever the photographer may think their subject was. I didn't say I insist you do anything with the trees. I may feel impelled to vote against what's otherwise a very nice picture because of the weird moon, and in spite of the great stars, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:09, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support the moon is a bit weird but you don't have to retouch it imo, it's not that important an element here. I like the composition and image quality very much. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:38, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poké95 06:18, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:57, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 07:37, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Looking again, I think I see a dust spot just below the upper rightmost tree branch. Please fix that (even if you won't fix the moon). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:46, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Following your description I can't find a dustspot. Please make a mark on the image. Thx. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:40, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
You have to look at the picture at full size. It's a black spot under the downward curve in a branch off the upper rightmost branch. I don't know how to mark a dustspot. How do I do it? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:49, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
This wasn't a dustspot but a bird or s.th. like that. Dustspots are regulary not so black and much more bigger. I have erased it nevertheless. But for the image impression/quality it is irrelevant IMO. For the Annotation tool look at Help:Gadget-ImageAnnotator. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:32, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. If it was a bird, no need to erase it. It just looked like a black spot to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:03, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 02:26, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another impeccable blue-hour skyline (IIRC, don't we have a day version of this shot somewhere?) Daniel Case (talk) 06:19, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Hornbill closeup profile 01.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2016 at 13:16:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Southern yellow-billed hornbill (Tockus leucomelas). Pilanesberg national park, South Africa.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Prosthetic_Head - uploaded by Prosthetic_Head - nominated by Prosthetic Head -- Prosthetic Head (talk) 13:16, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Prosthetic Head (talk) 13:16, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, the sharpness is not enough and I also would not have promoted it to QI. --A.Savin 14:06, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Savin, & I see the the lighting and the close crop on the beak as issues. INeverCry 18:09, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A.Savin, INeverCry, I think you are being too harsh on sharpness. Many of our bird FPs are low MP such as 6MP or much less. This is 16MP from a compact camera. Downsized to 6MP version would be a fairer comparison to many FP. The crop is tight and the face in some shadow but the backlit beak is extraordinary. I can't find another photo like it. I think it shouldn't be dismissed so easily. I wonder if extending the left a little (possibly with a little creative Photoshop if no wider crop possible) and lifting the shadows might help. -- Colin (talk) 20:09, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • For me, the main issues are the crop (it almost gives the visual impression that the bird's beak would straighten out a bit if he had more room) and the shadow on the face and neck. I could support the image if something like what you suggest was done about that. INeverCry 20:21, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • There are also some sharpening artefacts at 6mpix, and given a relatively small resolution like 6mpix I may demand better quality. --A.Savin 23:58, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nice picture, but I do feel the crops are tight on both the left and right. However, I completely agree with Colin on the backlit beak. Being able to see the blood vessels in the beak is amazing, and for that reason, I offer this photo mild support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:29, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Like INeverCry I don't like the cropping --Rettinghaus (talk) 09:39, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for the comments, I personally like the lighting - it's a matter of taste and which features one wants to highlight. I agree the crop is a little close to the end of the beak, unfortunatly the only way to extend it would be to add "background" by synthesis which I don't want to do. If that means it's not suitable for FP I'm ok with that. Cheers! Prosthetic Head (talk)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I had a play with synthesising a little more background, not sure about the result and even if I can get it looking perfect I don't really like the idea of inventing pixels.
    Hornbill with synthetic BG
    Prosthetic Head (talk) 21:28, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - In that version, there are some strange artifacts to the left of the beak. Otherwise, I like it better, and since you're using a bokeh that blurs the boundaries of everything beyond recognition, anyway, why is it a problem for you also to fudge things by extending those blurred colors a bit to the left? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:51, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The crop is never going to work for me. Daniel Case (talk) 05:45, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Palazzo Fontana Rezzonico Canal Grande Venezia.jpg, not featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2016 at 12:29:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Palazzo Fontana Rezzonico from the Canal Grande in Venice


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:03, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Lápida cerca de San Pedro de Atacama, Chile, 2016-02-01, DD 147.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2016 at 04:52:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:52, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I find this photograph very moving. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:52, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For me it was really shocking,… There are many places in the world where the location of an accident becomes in a kind of memorial where temporarily flowers, candles but also permanently gravestones are placed/erected. In this case they left a big deal more there and just removed the bodies. I happened to talk to Chilean colleagues a few days ago about this picture and they confirmed me that this is quite unique in their country and don’t know another example of this. Thank you Ikan for the nomination! Poco2 09:31, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Thank, you, Poco, for the photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:52, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • I think stuff might be interesting, but that have to be explained (description). --Mile (talk) 11:11, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Poco, would you like to add a bit more content to the file description? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:37, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I’d prefer to see the horizon in the background to get a better feeling of dimensions. --Kreuzschnabel 09:36, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
    Sorry, Kreuzschnabel, I can only offer this crop Poco2 20:01, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Moving and technichally good photograph. Agree with others it could be improved by a bit more description and perhapse a very similar photo that includes the horizon would give sense of place. Prosthetic Head (talk) 13:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I didn't expect to support this one until I looked at it in closeup. What makes it, I guess, is that background, perhaps the way it suggests the vastness of time juxtaposed with this one life, and death. Daniel Case (talk) 20:38, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 21:12, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Solitaire berk (Betula) in een prachtig landschap. Locatie, natuurgebied Delleboersterheide – Catspoele 03.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2016 at 17:08:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Solitary birch (Betula) in a beautiful landscape.
Zie this photo: Solitaire berk (Betula) in een prachtig landschap. Locatie, natuurgebied Delleboersterheide – Catspoele 02.jpg Other composition.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:59, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, Dominicus. I like that composition better. It gives my eyes more to travel around. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:52, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

File:2013.07.01-21-Wustrow-Neu Drosedow-Blaugruene Mosaikjungfer-Maennchen.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2016 at 17:06:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Blue hawker - Aeshna cyanea, male.
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Please consider that insects don't have real colours. The colour arises from light refraction in its skin (or what ever the name is). --Hockei (talk) 19:06, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:50, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The bokeh is a nice abstraction all by itself. Daniel Case (talk) 04:23, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Cordoba Center Hotel in Cordoba, Spain.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2016 at 16:31:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cordoba Center Hotel by night.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by ElBute - uploaded by ElBute - nominated by ElBute -- ElBute (talk) 16:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info It is a night view of the Cordoba Center Hotel in Cordoba, Spain, illuminated in blue because of the World Autism Awareness Day 2016.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ElBute (talk) 16:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, it´s a fine motif and well done, but not good enough to be featured. Especially because of the ghosts. They are avoidable. Therefore only QI IMO. --Hubertl 17:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I agree with Hubertl. Also, the composition is good but not super-compelling to me, though the context is a strong supporting point for the nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:59, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • (weak) Symbol support vote.svg Support Well, I like it, especially the colours (blue lighting in blue hour) are nice. Regarding the ghosts, I see only one issue (people to the right of the entrance) and it is somewhat not a big deal for me. However, I would like to see this photo used somewhere (WP articles or so). So far only weak support. --A.Savin 02:05, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 11:24, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support though I would have crop a big part of the empty road at bottom. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:01, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Yeah, I think your suggested crop would help a lot. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:00, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Ok guys, you're right. Could I do it right now or not because the image is being reviewed? In any case, I'll crop it as soon as the review process is finished. --ElBute (talk) 10:38, 28 April 2016 (UTC).
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Yes, you can do it now and then ping everyone who's voted. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:51, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice blue-hour image of a street and lit building. Daniel Case (talk) 21:22, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - The image has been cropped for some of you requested such action. I agree it looks better now. --ElBute (talk) 07:40, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks. I'm still not wowed by it, but it's enough better that I seriously considered supporting it for the message. In the end, I'm Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:37, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

File:2016.04.21.-01-Mannheim Vogelstang--Vierfleck-Zartspinne-Weibchen.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2016 at 13:35:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Anyphaena accentuata, female

File:Thurston the Great Magician - Strobridge Litho. Co..jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2016 at 18:57:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Mordechai Keidar.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2016 at 18:53:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mordechai Keidar - Ph.D Israeli Scholar, researcher and lecturer of Islam and Arab culture. Became famous for being one of the few Arabic-speaking Israelis interviewed for Arabic satellite channels such as Al-Jazeera. Image created as part of the People Pictures Project of Wikimedia Israel.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Portrait
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Arielinson - uploaded by Arielinson - nominated by Arielinson -- Arielinson (talk) 18:53, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arielinson (talk) 18:53, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 18:03, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark at bottom, and the book is too obviously a prop. I'd prefer a more natural/relaxed pose with more even light, and maybe more space. INeverCry 02:13, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support works for me - well done --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:05, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - This is really somewhat of a gut-level oppose vote: I react differently to a laptop screen than to books on a shelf. I find the text on the TV segment on the laptop behind and to the right of the subject to be overly distracting and a little gimmicky, though I understand the reason for it, as described in the second sentence of the file description: "Became famous for being one of the few Arabic-speaking Israelis interviewed for Arabic satellite channels such as Al-Jazeera." But I don't see that sentence as necessitating a laptop picture of him appearing on Al-Jazeera with a particular message. If the laptop were cropped out, I'd give the photo another look and might support it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:30, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the idea of this as an environmental portrait, but this is too much environment at the expense of the portrait; per Ikan, I find the computer screen unnecessary. Cropping it out would probably simplify the image wonderfully, although it would also make it much less environmental. Daniel Case (talk) 03:34, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

File:William McIlvaine - The Chickahominy - Sumners Upper Bridge.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2016 at 18:38:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Chickahominy - Sumners Upper Bridge

File:Cathedral of Petrópolis, Brazil.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 May 2016 at 18:37:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cathedral of Petrópolis, Brazil
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Catedral de Petrópolis or Catedral de São Pedro de Alcântara (St. Peter of Alcantara Cathedral) is located in Petrópolis, near Rio de Janeiro, in Brazil. All by. -- The Photographer (talk) 18:37, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- The Photographer (talk) 18:37, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:02, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm sure there's another way to re-nominate an FP than changing part of the tile to English. A /2 or something? Anyway, the original nomination is at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Catedral de Petrópolis, Brasil.jpg. -- Colin (talk) 19:14, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Doesn't address any of the issues I raised in the previous nomination. All that seems to have happened is that the image has been cropped vertically, lightened a little, some reflections on the floor cloned-out, and the white parts of the walls and dark wood gone over with a very heavy NR brush. The rest of the image is still as noisy, the stained glass no clearer or sharper, and the colourspace still AdobeRGB. The crop is an improvement, but the interior really would benefit from multi-frame HDR to capture this dynamic range noislessly. -- Colin (talk) 19:14, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
I corrected noise specifically located on the roof shadow areas and some areas that seem noise is really cement texture, the reflection of the floor was corrected using cloning, stained glass no clearer or sharper and QI criteria overexposed.svg Overexposed because its not a HDR, I'm fixing right now AdobeRGB to RGB. I don't have a equipment (external shooter) to do HDR. Thanks for your comments. --The Photographer (talk) 19:31, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Milseburg (talk) 19:09, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - The standard of featured pictures of church interiors is extremely high, as witness User:Diliff's photos, but also several other people's work. The ceiling is unsharp in this picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:08, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Colin & Ikan. INeverCry 03:42, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose per Ikan. I can forgive the noise and blown windows given that it's a long exposure, but the image should at least be sharp. Colin's suggestion for HDR might well be one of the few instances where that would be desirable for FP status. Daniel Case (talk) 22:14, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Falcon 9 first stage at LZ-1(two).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 May 2016 at 11:27:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

First stage of a Falcon 9 Full Thrust rocket on Landing Zone 1 (LZ-1).
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Space exploration
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by SpaceX photos - uploaded by Juandedeboca - nominated by Msaynevirta -- Msaynevirta (talk) 11:27, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Msaynevirta (talk) 11:27, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I would crop the image a bit on the right to use the rule of third. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:40, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
    • I cropped it a bit. Is it better now? --Msaynevirta (talk) 11:52, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
      • Yes. Yann (talk) 08:56, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support enough I prefer the original crop. Great mood! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:42, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I would really rather support the original crop, as I feel that it's a more harmonious composition with the greater area of trees and the additional light right at the right margin. As a viewer, I don't find that the "rule of thirds" makes any sense to me. Maybe it's useful to some people as one general guideline, but I definitely don't like people emphasizing it over concrete considerations related specifically to a particular composition. Would you consider reverting? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:59, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
    • I'm fine with both crops, if the original is better, feel free to revert. --Msaynevirta (talk) 23:02, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
      • For me, the rule of thirds doesn't work better here. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 02:22, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support This is a very well-done image. I have uploaded a version that a) isn't tilted like the previous two, and b) keeps the original crop, except for a slight crop on the right to remove the distracting light in the bottom right. Cropping by the rule of thirds here leads to left-right inconsistencies, due to the wide lens used, so along with the "keep information where possible" guideline, it's best avoided. Revert it if you have a better reason. Thanks -- Thennicke (talk) 07:59, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support Great picture, beatiful sunrise. This is the future of space exploration! --Juandedeboca (talk) 16:04, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 21:32, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:47, 24 April 2016 (UTC) 
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I'm willing to support this version. It's beautiful, significant, etc., and it's the best of the 3 versions. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:13, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Fine colors, but rocket is leaning to left side (probably some PD), flare is problem and tight crop above. --Mile (talk) 07:40, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
    • Mile: How do you know that it should be vertical? The rocket is being lifted with a crane... Regards, Yann (talk) 08:56, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
      • @Yann I had that feeling, i put few notations, check again. Rocket might be in-moving, but other stuff not. --Mile (talk) 09:08, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I checked EXIF, so its FF cam, i see resolution is some 7-8 MPx on 24 Mpx sensor (croped so much or downsized ?). I use 16 MPx and i think all are at least some 9-10 MPx at least. Copy-paste for lens review: Distortion is quite a prominent factor for this lens...but the lens produces some of the widest distortion results we've seen. For FF camera i expect more, nice colors wont be enough. --Mile (talk) 09:47, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 03:52, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Based on FPC's normal expectation / requirement on verticals, I'll have to agree with Mile and Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. -- KTC (talk) 15:17, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Posterization on cloud, awkward composition. Daniel Case (talk) 01:56, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose with Daniel Case.--Jebulon (talk) 21:15, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Steinbock 14962940265.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 May 2016 at 07:34:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Berndthaller - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 07:34, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 07:34, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - This photo looks great at full-page size and it's a very nice portrait of the ibex in its natural environment and a very satisfying composition, so I'm willing to tolerate the unsharp areas in this macro photo. I also appreciate that the photographer explained what the bluish bokeh background is - the ice field of the glacier. At least in English. If someone wants to volunteer to translate that into German and/or Ukrainian (or any other language), that would be great. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:15, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 08:32, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:19, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:08, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. Charles (talk) 17:07, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose due to lighting - the majority of the subject is in shadow. --King of ♠ 05:04, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - When the subject is the only thing that's really in shadow, can't that itself be a kind of emphasis? I think that actually helps the subject stand out, in this case. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:16, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • It can be done to great effect but I don't think it works here. --King of ♠ 02:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Backlighting is a valid technique -- Thennicke (talk) 05:58, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per KoH. INeverCry 01:58, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The backlighting works for me here ... we don't lose any detail. Daniel Case (talk) 05:58, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 09:04, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The light comes from the wrong direction.--Jebulon (talk) 21:22, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Polar Bear at Amberley Museum Railway.jpg, not featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2016 at 12:52:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Polar Bear, a W. G. Bagnall 2-4-0 steam locomotive on the Amberley Museum Railway
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I'm not impressed, either. This is merely a decent picture, not close to one of the best on the site. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:44, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I have seen quite a number of photographs of narrow gauge steam locomotives, and this is indeed an unusually good one. --NearEMPTiness (talk) 18:06, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 03:53, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan and Colin. QI I'll grant even though the front seems unsharp, but there's no wow. Daniel Case (talk) 05:12, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:03, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Rheinturm - Gesamtansicht vom Medienhafen.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2016 at 05:47:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Düsseldorf: Rheinturm (Rhine Tower, television tower)
This crop is because of the central composition of the tower. I have some reserve on both sides and I'll try a different crop. But nevertheless should the tower be here the main object. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:17, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm suggesting a crop that's even closer to the tower on its right! However, if you're able to show all of that building, I'd like to see that version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:17, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good photo. Give us a excellent photo of the Lichtzeitpegel also... -- -donald- (talk) 11:12, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 17:30, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Conditional oppose No color-space metadata and no embedded color profile. If that is fixed I am ready to support. Very good light and exposure control. I enjoyed exploring the fine details at the top of the tower. When seen in its entirety it does not wow me that much, but it is compensated by the light and details. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:19, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
    Slaunger: color-space is added. For future: if there is no such info feel free to add always "sRGB" because I'll never use a different. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:47, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
    • Taxiarchos228: It is the EXIF which misses this information. That implies that an application which neeeds to convert the numbers in your file to colors have no information about how to do that. Most application will guess at sRGB, but there is no guarantee, especially not in the future. So an application may display colors entirely different from what you intended. You need to upload a version of the jpg, where the color space data are not stripped from the EXIF. See also User:Colin/BrowserTest. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:05, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
      • The information was added, no need for further editing any more. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:29, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
        • Symbol support vote.svg Support EXIF color space data checks out now. -- Slaunger (talk) 05:19, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 02:20, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sharpening halos around the subject. --King of ♠ 23:51, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
    Sorry, but they aren't --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:30, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
    To make it more obvious, if you tilt your laptop/LCD screen up (so that you're looking at it at an angle from below), you'll see that the tower is clearly surrounded by a band of lightness. --King of ♠ 02:47, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
    +1 Yes, I see it clearly in the thumb too, perhaps from your HDR-Software? It's typical for that. But ... it isn't visible in full resolution!!! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 06:42, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support There might be halos, but I don't really see them when looking at my laptop screen straight on. Daniel Case (talk) 05:11, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 05:43, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 21:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:03, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:PlayaForteSaoMateo2-CaboFrio-Brasil-feb2016-1.jpgEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2016 at 22:46:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

landscape
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - Don't you mean the rock is not sharp enough? <s?I'm undecided on this one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:03, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Edit summary maybe it's only my bad eyes + DEnglish, I meant "nothing else apart from the lower right rock is sharp". The crop is better, {{o}} disabled.Be..anyone 💩 09:03, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I will support if the crop suggested is done. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 00:30, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done --Ezarateesteban 00:48, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
I suggest other one. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 00:59, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
done, thanks!!! --Ezarateesteban 01:07, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Please, remove the cut off hill on the horizon at the right. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 01:20, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
done --Ezarateesteban 01:26, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
I Symbol support vote.svg Support now. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 01:29, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Flat lighting, no wow. --King of ♠ 02:49, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I'm not really feeling this one, either. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:48, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice picture, but nothing special for me, sorry -- Jiel (talk) 22:36, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 02:35, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, I'm afraid. -- Colin (talk) 18:31, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Seems like a nice place, but it is too dark, lacks detail, and has no clear idea with composition. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:17, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because at this point it would be beyond unlikely that enough support !votes would emerge to offset all these opposes Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Daniel Case (talk) 05:15, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - Isn't FPX against the rules if there are 2 support votes? Did you miss User:ArionEstar's support vote? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:00, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
    • @Daniel Case: Yes. –Be..anyone 💩 10:20, 25 April 2016 (UTC) updated after the following comment: Good FPX for comparison. 13:34, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
      • Do you guys really think it will get 12 solid supports in the next few days. I think FPX is appropriate here as a nearly unanimous negative opinion. No need to keep piling on. -- Colin (talk) 11:04, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
        • That wasn't my question. Perhaps you should propose a rule change. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:11, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
I was unaware of that rule; I would like to see it linked. But Colin stated my reasoning for essentially mercy-killing this nom as well as I could. (and the diff Be..anyone linked to says nothing about this rule). Daniel Case (talk) 05:07, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Where's COM:IAR when you need it? Face-wink.svg INeverCry 05:49, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Ikan I don't like citing IAR since it can often be misused but yes, a wiki can afford to be flexible. We don't need rules for everything. Most nominators would have withdrawn by now, so this kind of "mercy killing" is fairly rare. -- Colin (talk) 07:39, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm not going to fight this any further, because I see the sense in your position, but I'm surprised by unawareness of the rule on the part of regulars. It's right on this page, at "Featured picture candidate policy/General rules". Rule 9: Pictures tagged {{FPX}} may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied, provided there are no support votes other than that of the nominator. There really is no ambiguity there. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:01, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

┌──────────────────────────┘
Thanks. But I think some flexibility was required here, due to the age of the nomination and the amount of opposes, again as Colin has said. Daniel Case (talk) 01:53, 27 April 2016 (UTC) Ikan, I'm fully aware of the "rules". This isn't the first time this has been done, though. I seem to recall Jebulon doing it, and he's been around here forever. The point of IAR, is that regardless of what the rules say, is there actually a problem here? If not, why cause so much grief. Just let it be. -- Colin (talk) 07:02, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I thought we were just having a discussion. I didn't realize I was causing grief. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:10, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
The grief affects good faith nominations, abuses of FPX as referenced above, other known FPX abuses by among others you, and one case of vandalism by a 'crat. –Be..anyone 💩 02:00, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per opposers. But the FPX is not appropriate here: we have two supports.--Jebulon (talk) 21:33, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Well I don't know what Be..anyone is smoking but the only "abuse" I see here is the pile-on of oppose votes. So much argument about "rules", which helps nobody. The "rules" aren't going to make this picture into an FP. The point of IAR is that if you find yourself arguing with fellow Commoners about following rules for the sake of following rules, you are not helping. -- Colin (talk) 08:30, 28 April 2016 (UTC)


Contestations en coursEdit

Featured picture candidatesEdit

File:Rococo staircase (Gruber Mansion, Slovenia).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 9 May 2016 at 09:19:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Rococo staircase in Gruber Mansion, Ljubljana. About photo: behind window is white wall, not burned. Fresco above cant be seen like this in real, HDR make it looking better than in real. Shot with fisheye.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Mile (talk) 09:19, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 09:22, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:AT 50473 Justizpalast Wien, Iustitia - Emanuel Pendl 4388-HDR.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 9 May 2016 at 07:26:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Austria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info View from the second floor to the westside of the assembly hall with part of the stairway and arcades. Palace of Justice, Vienna. Architect: Alexander Wielemans von Monteforte (erected 1879). Iustitia, this sitting marble figure is almost 2.5 m high and made by Emanuel Pendl in 1881. All by -- Hubertl 07:26, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Hubertl 07:26, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support well done --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:57, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice. I like the symmetry. --XRay talk 10:51, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Ponte dos Ingleses, também conhecida como Ponte Metálica.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2016 at 21:12:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Mina de Chuquicamata, Calama, Chile, 2016-02-01, DD 110-112 PAN.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2016 at 19:42:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Chuquicamata is a state-owned copper mine located at 9,350 feet (2,850m) above sea level just outside Calama, north of Chile.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Industry
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Panoramic view of Chuquicamata, a state-owned copper mine located at 2,850 metres (9,350 ft) above sea level just outside Calama, north of Chile. It is by excavated volume the largest open pit copper mine in the world. The huge hole was started in 1882 as a mine to extract gold and copper. It is 3.5 kilometres (2.2 mi) long, 4.5 kilometres (2.8 mi) wide and with a depth of 850 metres (2,790 ft) it is the second deepest open-pit mine in the world (after Bingham Canyon Mine in Utah, USA). Note: to get a feeling of the scale spot out a haul truck, which is 9.5 metres (31 ft) long and 4.5 metres (15 ft) high. All by me, Poco2 19:42, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 19:42, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:48, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:30, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 08:31, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:55, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 10:54, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Impressive. --Pugilist (talk) 13:09, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:St. Pölten Dom Hochaltar 01.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2016 at 15:29:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

High altar of St. Pölten Cathedral, Lower Austria

File:Laon Porte d'Ardon 01.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2016 at 15:26:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Porte d'Ardon in Laon, Picardie, France

File:Winchester Cathedral Nave 1, Hampshire, UK - Diliff.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2016 at 10:46:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Winchester Cathedral

File:Rhapsody (ship, 1996), Sète cf01.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2016 at 05:14:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rhapsody (ship, 1996)
I was surprised by the size of the boat, I came with the prime 35mm lens, I applied a small perspective correction and this is the bigger size I can give. Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:54, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support You might try simple panorama, handheld, two shot then stitch. Just lock settings to be same. --Mile (talk) 12:42, 29 April 2016 (UTC)re
Yes indeed, I have not had the idea to do this... Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:38, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support crystal clear picture of a piece of ugliness! This ship is a candidate for the hall of shame. But maybe just in my humble opinion. --Hubertl 12:22, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Wladyslaw (talk) 13:12, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I must say that the bright effect here comes from the use of a UV filter, this one, this is also why I had chosen the 35mm lens despite the size of the ship, as my 14-24mm accepts no filter. Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:35, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:47, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It’s impressively sharp and rich in detail, yet the tight side crop does not appeal to me. So, it’s just a ship, no idea beyond the plain rendering (if only I could see the wide sea it’s going for! Oh, and I agree with Hubertl about its lack of beauty). Some pixelisation on the right side (look at the letters of the name), maybe due to your perspective correction. I rather tend to oppose in spite of the technical qualities and high resolution.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:44, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Outstanding capture of an ordinary subject. The dominance of the white and blue throughout the image makes for a strong motif. --King of ♠ 23:17, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 08:35, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good image. (Crop could be better left and right.) --XRay talk 10:55, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Imperial Academy of Arts Panorama.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 8 May 2016 at 00:15:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saint Petersburg, Russia: building of the Imperial Academy of Arts
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Russia
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Florstein - nominated by A.Savin --A.Savin 00:15, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --A.Savin 00:15, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 00:53, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another standard Florstein, but the colors in this picture are especially nice. --King of ♠ 01:25, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. Certainly a nice building, but I don't love what's on either side of it. I think that for me to consider this kind of shot a FP, it would need more sky, with nice clouds (especially, dramatic ones), or perhaps some really great light, such as the streaming yellow sunlight that you can get shortly after sunrise. Sorry, I know this may seem a bit nitpicky. It's a very good photo, but it's not quite FP to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:43, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It's a nice capture with good detail though I agree with Ikan that it would benefit from more sky. But it is way over-processed. Compare File:Imperial Academy of Arts.jpg. The white in the other photo is peach yellow/orange in this. While such a change could occur with "golden hour" lighting, this photo was taken at 13:16, 17 October 2015, which is far away from golden hour as one can get. And golden light wouldn't explain why all the grey elements (street signs, cars) are blue-grey. It's too contrasty too. I'd support a neutral version where Photoshop Lightroom sliders were more conservatively set. -- Colin (talk) 07:43, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Abbaye d'Hautecombe.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 7 May 2016 at 22:30:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Abbey of Hautecombe from the Lake of Bourget

File:AtardecerPlayaDoForte1-feb2016.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 7 May 2016 at 22:09:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunset in do Forte beach, Cabo Frío, Brazil
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me --Ezarateesteban 22:10, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ezarateesteban 22:09, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like the composition a fair deal. However, to me, this photo looks a lot better at thumbnail and full-page size than it does at full size. At full size, the sky looks noisy. Perhaps you could improve the photo by denoising the sky somewhat. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:01, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks @Ikan Kekek: I tried to denoise a bit all the image, look if it is enough, furthermore I provide the original source file, so if you or another user wants to improve the image I'll be very greatful, I authorize, off course, to upload the improves over this image. Best Regards and thanks for your revision --Ezarateesteban 23:24, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
That's a substantial improvement, to my eyes, though others may be able to do more. Moderate support from me now. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:32, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the composition --The Photographer (talk) 12:57, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry. Composition is good. Some details missing and a lot of disturbing elements (waste). Sharpness may be better too. --XRay talk 10:56, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Elite Residential Area Ottawa Lamanai 10.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 7 May 2016 at 14:30:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mayan ruin - Administrative and Elite Residential Area, Ottawa
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Cephas - uploaded by Cephas - nominated by Cephas -- Cephas (talk) 14:30, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Cephas (talk) 14:30, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I love the composition and subject matter. The only thing I find to be a real drawback is the hazy light, but that's not close to a reason for me not to support featuring this photo, overall. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:53, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Almost a painting… 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:31, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support more pictures from Lamanai! ;-) funny we both went there only a few days apart --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:03, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Cape Skink Flowers.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 7 May 2016 at 07:07:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cape Skink (Trachylepis capensis) on purple Aster flowers.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Prosthetic_Head - uploaded by Prosthetic_Head - nominated by Prosthetic Head -- Prosthetic Head (talk) 07:07, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Prosthetic Head (talk) 07:07, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Interesting and high-quality photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:22, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Flash colors, shallow DOF, composition could be much better, now i dont know is it animal or flower about. --Mile (talk) 10:22, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your comment, I'm not sure what you mean by "Flash colors", I didn't use a flash - just sun light. DoF is quite somewhat shallow, but I don't personally find it a problem. I disagree about the compostition but respect your oppinion, it can be rather subjective. Prosthetic Head (talk) 10:54, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
    • I see its made with compact, hence some low IQ, i still dont like reflection on skin, and compo could be better. --Mile (talk) 06:31, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • {{neutral}}, I like it, but without Meta-data the experts here (not me) have no good clues what might be wrong.Be..anyone 💩 10:39, 28 April 2016 (UTC) Symbol support vote.svg Support, updated. –Be..anyone 💩 11:20, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your comment, the meta-data must have got stripped from the file when I did the crop. I'll try to add it back. Prosthetic Head (talk) 10:54, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done New version with complete meta-data included. Thanks for pointing this out Be..anyone. Prosthetic Head (talk) 11:14, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Laguna Hedionda, Bolivia, 2016-02-03, DD 50.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 6 May 2016 at 20:19:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Colourful shop oasis near the Laguna Hedionda, Nor Lípez Province southwestern Bolivia.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Colourful shop oasis near the Laguna Hedionda, Nor Lípez Province southwestern Bolivia. All by me, Poco2 20:19, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 20:19, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support More Bolivia! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:58, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:16, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Strong support for this amazing photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:42, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
    Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Also, to further explain, the reason I wanted this photo to be nominated is that it's an amazing sight, the strip of habitation and colorful mural in the middle of the desert. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:58, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Not convinced yet, technically. Colours appear oversaturated (esp. the red house near center) with some overexposed areas to the left (not blown but washed-out), and there’s a bright seam along the horizon line suggesting that the sky is unnatural. --Kreuzschnabel 09:55, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
    Kreuzschnabel, please, have a new look, I have reduced slightly the brightness and retouched the blues Poco2 18:04, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Shows the barrenness of the landscape. --King of ♠ 02:04, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support what an amazingly colorful picture of a barren landscape --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:08, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

File:I-DPCN at work 03 (4203528315).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 May 2016 at 14:45:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bombardier 415 dropping water.

File:Cathedral of Mount Mary, Old Goa.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 May 2016 at 11:15:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cathedral of Mount Mary, Old Goa
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Black and white
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Dey.sandip - uploaded by Dey.sandip - nominated by Dey.sandip -- Dey.sandip (talk) 11:15, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Dey.sandip (talk) 11:15, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question What’s that terracing in the foreground, taking up 60 percent of the frame? For a picture of a church building, I’d like to see more of the building. --Kreuzschnabel 14:25, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
    • First of all, thank you for your interest. To clarify, it's not a picture of just the church building, in that case I would have put up an image (or a close-up) of only the building itself. The intention here was to show the church in the context of its surroundings by using a low-angle composition and framing. This image presents the point-of-a view of a little kid who is standing on the base of the steps and looking up to take all the steps that lead up to the church. The church is located at an elevated level. The foreground is worn out steps covered with dry grass and leaves and convey the feeling of deserted and lonely surrounding of the church and they are very much integral part of the photo to establish the mood and lead the viewer to the church which is at the end of the steps. I hope this explains my idea as I captured it. -- Dey.sandip (talk) 08:26, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
      • It works in those terms. I'm sort of Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral about whether that makes it a deserving FP, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:53, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I'm tempted to oppose, unless there's a good explanation of how unusual or important those terraces are. I give you credit for trying a non-traditional composition, which I think is a good thing to try, but I lean against this being a really good and featurable composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:53, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
    • Thanks for your interest. I have tried to explain my intention/idea above, if that helps. -- Dey.sandip (talk) 08:26, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Узкоколейный тепловоз ТУ8-0427 с туристическим поездом на станции Гуамка..JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 6 May 2016 at 11:02:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Narrow-gauge diesel locomotive TU8-0427 with the tourist train on station Guamka.

File:Mengshäuser Kuppe mit Kruspis.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 6 May 2016 at 06:12:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Jörg Braukmann (Milseburg) - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:12, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I don't know whether this will be judged an FP or only a good QI, but this is the only way to find out. I think it's a beautiful landscape, and it reminds me of some of the landscapes my father painted in New England in the late 60s and early 70s. It's a composition with several distinct grounds, if you like, rather than just a foreground, middleground and background, and then a sky with dramatic clouds. Among other things, I really love the very green mown grass crops in the foreground. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:12, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose from me, sorry. Certainly it is a nice scenery, but the image as such does not strike me outstanding nor even flawless (overexposed clouds). The ruined house on the lower right might have given an impressive subject :-) Foreground shows no mown grass but growing crops on a field, as does the middleground. Cropping, err, the crop out would give a better composition IMHO. Altogether nice but not exceptional. --Kreuzschnabel 09:07, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I respect your opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:06, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Paseo Ciclista.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2016 at 14:42:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Français : Cyclistes sur la piste cyclable du pont de San Juan de Aznalfarache, en Andalousie, en Espagne.English: Cyclists on the bike path San Juan de Aznalfarache, Andalusia, Spain. (Google traduction)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Abel Maestro Garcia - uploaded by Tyseria - nominated by Tyseria -- Tyseria (talk) 16:42, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tyseria (talk) 16:42, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • regretful Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose – it’s really a brilliant idea and beautiful lighting, lots of wow. But then you somehow overdid it. Severe colour fringing on all structure edges, haloes from tonemapping, many blown/oversaturated patches, sharpening artifacts. Can it be redone? It’s a pity for the fine idea. --Kreuzschnabel 18:13, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Per Kreuz, but also, pictures with watermarks are per se disqualified from FP consideration. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:42, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel, and I'm not sure about the Flickr transfer with no review. This image is tagged with a CC-0 license here but is PD-Mark on Flickr. @Yann: @Jameslwoodward: Is PD-Mark from Flickr still a no-go? I haven't dealt with PD-Mark images in depth since I've never really seen many uploaded, but this image lacks a license review. INeverCry 20:12, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above. I hope you can solve the issues mentioned --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:59, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above, especially the PD Mark issue. -- Poké95 06:25, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As noted above, the license is not valid. I have removed the {{cc-0}} tag, because it is not CC-0. A CC-0 license is irrevocable. The Public Domain Mark is simply an expression of opinion that the work is PD, but it can be changed at any time. Licenses for Commons must be irrevocable. Technically this is a {{speedy}}, but I have put a {{delete}} on it. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because license issues, watermark, none possibility to succed here Ezarateesteban 11:26, 27 April 2016 (UTC) Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ezarateesteban 17:29, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Khaoyai 06.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2016 at 16:13:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Khunkay - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 16:13, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 16:13, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Solid FP --The Photographer (talk) 16:22, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good compo --Mile (talk) 16:25, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tyseria (talk) 17:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:38, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lots of heehee but no wow on my side, sorry. In other words: Definitely funny but not outstanding as a photograph. Sharpness impaired by noise. --Kreuzschnabel 18:10, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Per Kreuz, and I find the blurring in the middle of the picture frame very distracting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:45, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Yann (talk) 20:10, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 20:18, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hehe trumps technical issues --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:05, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Mainly because of the blurring in the middle. It's a funny image though. --Cayambe (talk) 08:08, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 09:56, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Would be probably better with more DoF + less ISO, but I like it nonetheless --A.Savin 15:49, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kasir (talk) 10:48, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question A crop of the road below maybe ?--Jebulon (talk) 20:10, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Guepier d'europe au parc national Ichkeul.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2016 at 15:18:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
The main subject is the bird, however, everything else is important too and pay attention to every detail is relevant because small details is what make a ecepcional image. --The Photographer (talk) 19:04, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For 500mm on K5 its OK. That shadow in eye problem a bit. I dont mind that stick, not problem. --Mile (talk) 16:27, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 16:44, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tyseria (talk) 17:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:39, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Bit loss of detail on the plumage but still very impressive. --Kreuzschnabel 18:15, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:58, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Zcebeci (talk) 12:55, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 03:45, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support good. Charles (talk) 16:40, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good picture, bad work. All over posterisation and luminance noise. Maybe it comes from over-sharpening and de-noising at the same time. --Hockei (talk) 18:54, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

File:2014 Cenzura.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2016 at 14:55:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Allegory of communist censorship, analogue picture taken in 1989 in Poland
  • @Jacek Halicki: In the description, the date is given as 1989, while in the date field it says "1 October 1982, 19:00:00". INeverCry 21:31, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Pictogram voting keep.svg Fixed --Jacek Halicki (talk) 22:28, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Noisy background does not fit this one. I like 4th version, but face. --Mile (talk) 05:25, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above. I guess it was impossible to avoid a certain degree of grain --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:09, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 08:59, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 19:30, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 07:36, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

File:2015 Swaledale from Kisdon Hill.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2016 at 09:48:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by -- Kreuzschnabel 09:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I hesitated long if I should nominate this one but finally decided to get your opinions about it. Beyond a very fine view into Swaledale, it also conveys the contrasting Yorkshire Dales scenery formed by the green pastures below and the more brownish moorlands on the hills. Took some effort to avoid overexposure in the clouds which, of course, shone brightly in the backlight. --Kreuzschnabel 09:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kreuzschnabel 09:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very well done! --Hubertl 09:56, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like this landscape a lot. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely. Looks like a painting. Very well done technically, too. --Code (talk) 10:08, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above. Great! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:26, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nice view and well executed. --Pugilist (talk) 15:02, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Maybe some crop in bottom. --Mile (talk) 16:02, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
    • I already cropped some of the foreground off. Found it best this way to maintain a U-shaped darker frame around the sunlit curved valley. --Kreuzschnabel 17:12, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 16:45, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tyseria (talk) 17:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 17:06, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It is so attractive নকীব সরকার (talk) 01:19, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:02, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 09:00, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Santa Maria dell'Orto (Rome) - Ceiling.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2016 at 08:57:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Santa Maria dell'Orto (Rome) - Ceiling.jpg
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by LivioAndronico (talk) 08:57, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- LivioAndronico (talk) 08:57, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I'm not sure what others will say, but I love the decorations and the resplendent shafts of light, and I'm willing to accept the shadow at the bottom of the picture as a side effect of natural lighting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:19, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support interesting light effects, maybe a bit overprocessed (sharpness, saturation) but FP for me. --Hubertl 09:59, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Put some contrast down or minus saturation. --Mile (talk) 16:17, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 16:45, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 17:08, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:07, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:56, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:10, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 09:01, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 19:30, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Annunciation (Leonardo).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2016 at 08:53:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Annunciation (Leonardo).jpg

File:Saint Kitts - Brimstone Hill Fortress 04.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2016 at 06:45:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Brimstone Hill Fortress, detail of the Orientation Center.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Caribbean feeling (Brimstone Hill Fortress, St. Kitts: Orientation Center). All by me --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:45, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:45, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Not obviously spectacular - it looks like a private house, not a fortress - but, perhaps ironically, a very peaceful picture. The area to the right of the fortress is a bit blurred at full size, but it looks fine at full-page size, and the picture would suffer if it were much more closely cropped on the right side (a bit closer might be fine). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:30, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 09:05, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good composition and colour management. --Kreuzschnabel 09:12, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as Kreuzschnabel --Hubertl 10:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I was thinking of nominating this myself -- Thennicke (talk) 11:47, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Tyseria (talk) 16:59, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 17:10, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:16, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Hubertl. --Johann Jaritz (talk) 09:02, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:08, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Magnolienbaum, Wiesbaden-Biebrich, 360x180, 160409, ako.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 5 May 2016 at 06:00:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A flowering magnolia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Spherical panorama of a flowering magnolia. The picture was taken from underneath the tree. I think it's an unusual view of an interesting subject and therefore could be special enough for FP. Please do me the favour and look at it in the panellum viewer before voting. All by me -- Code (talk) 06:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Code (talk) 06:00, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 06:14, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Almost a hypnotic effect. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:32, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very fine rendering, and excellent lighting control. --Kreuzschnabel 09:14, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 10:01, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question How do you plan to fit in some article if viewer isnt part of Wiki ? --Mile (talk) 16:14, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Not at all - at the moment. I hope there will a suitable technology in the future. --Code (talk) 18:32, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Rosapelikan beim Putzen des Gefieders.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2016 at 20:58:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rosapelikan while cleaning the plumage.

File:Gruga-Mustergärten-Bee-Home-Garden-2016.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2016 at 20:58:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Show garden Bee Home Garden inside Grugapark
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Show garden Bee Home Garden inside Grugapark. This area of the park is a "showroom" for landscape contractors.
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 20:58, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 20:58, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I'm not sure if all is enough sharp Ezarateesteban 22:31, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice scenery + well composed, sharpness is OK --A.Savin 00:04, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Per A.Savin. Interesting and unusual photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:34, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but the composition is too busy. The elements on the left pull toward the left while the elements on the right pull toward the right, leaving nothing to draw the eye to the center. The cut-off tree on the top right is also not ideal. --King of ♠ 02:51, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per KoH. INeverCry 04:08, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose technically as good as usual, but the composition is too busy, therefore not FP for me. --Hubertl 17:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I really like this composition because it seems full but well-ordered, the quality is good, beautiful colors. Ultimately it looks messy, but it is not.--LivioAndronico (talk) 18:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too many straights lines in too many directions.--Jebulon (talk) 20:08, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per all the other opposers. There are all the elements of a featured picture here. Trouble is, there's more than enough for one picture. Daniel Case (talk) 06:22, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Daniel: It's not my fault that there is more than enough :) In this case I tried to photographed the show garden in a favourable way. The characteristic of a show garden is that all elements of a "normal" garden are concentrated at small space. The same, Jebulon,the same is the case with the straight lines. Normally all these elements had been distributed over a larger area - but here gardeners show many possibilities. --Tuxyso (talk) 12:08, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Basel - Roche-Turm mit Stadtansicht bei Abenddämmerung.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2016 at 19:50:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Basel: Roche Tower during dusk
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Switzerland
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 19:50, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 19:50, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I'm impressed that you avoided star trails completely, but could you please talk about the shape of the moon? I thought I was looking at some kind of eclipse, as the light and dark parts of the moon don't form a circular shape together. I like the rest of the picture but wish the upper crop of the trees on the left were less random-looking. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:05, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Image with very short exposure
Hi Ikan Kekek: I can't say much conserning shape of the moon. This is exactley how the camera the moon caputured. Look at the example image with the very short exposure. To retouch this eclipse-effect is not really difficult, but is it so distracting? Why do you think the crop is random? The image object is clearly defined: tower on the right side, the far away cityscape on the left side connected by the river rhine. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:28, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Yes, the strange shape of the moon is distracting to me, or I wouldn't have mentioned it, and for what it's worth, I don't see it in the short-exposure picture. The crop looks random on the trees on the left side of the picture, not above the building. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:31, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
The image example with the short exposure was to demonstrate the moon-shape taken by the camera. Sadly you don't argue why the crop should be random. Do you want more or less trees? The trees on the left enframe the image in my opinion, I see no need to chance this, sorry. --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:31, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
I didn't tell you to change the crop of the trees. Not all my comments require action. However, I would need for the moon to look more normal for me to consider supporting this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:52, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
You asked what I meant about the crop of the trees, so I'll try to explain. The trees have a very jagged shape. If there were a way to either include their tops or crop them in a way that seems satisfying (such that some thought about the uppermost shapes clearly was taken, however that could be done), I'd consider that superior. I'm looking again, and yeah, the moon really bothers me because it looks like a partial eclipse of the sun by the moon. But again, high praise for your stars! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:10, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
The trees look like they are looking after being cut in autumn-time the year before. Either the trees nor the shape of the moon are main objects of this image and I can't understand how they are distracting the whole image. But there is no need that we agree. If other users also mention that the moon-shape is disturbing I'll retouch it, but for the shape of the trees I'm not liable and I like this shape. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:51, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Because I look at the entire picture, not just whatever the photographer may think their subject was. I didn't say I insist you do anything with the trees. I may feel impelled to vote against what's otherwise a very nice picture because of the weird moon, and in spite of the great stars, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:09, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support the moon is a bit weird but you don't have to retouch it imo, it's not that important an element here. I like the composition and image quality very much. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:38, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poké95 06:18, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:57, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 07:37, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Looking again, I think I see a dust spot just below the upper rightmost tree branch. Please fix that (even if you won't fix the moon). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:46, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Following your description I can't find a dustspot. Please make a mark on the image. Thx. --Wladyslaw (talk) 09:40, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
You have to look at the picture at full size. It's a black spot under the downward curve in a branch off the upper rightmost branch. I don't know how to mark a dustspot. How do I do it? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:49, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
This wasn't a dustspot but a bird or s.th. like that. Dustspots are regulary not so black and much more bigger. I have erased it nevertheless. But for the image impression/quality it is irrelevant IMO. For the Annotation tool look at Help:Gadget-ImageAnnotator. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:32, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. If it was a bird, no need to erase it. It just looked like a black spot to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:03, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 02:26, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another impeccable blue-hour skyline (IIRC, don't we have a day version of this shot somewhere?) Daniel Case (talk) 06:19, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Hornbill closeup profile 01.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2016 at 13:16:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Southern yellow-billed hornbill (Tockus leucomelas). Pilanesberg national park, South Africa.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Prosthetic_Head - uploaded by Prosthetic_Head - nominated by Prosthetic Head -- Prosthetic Head (talk) 13:16, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Prosthetic Head (talk) 13:16, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, the sharpness is not enough and I also would not have promoted it to QI. --A.Savin 14:06, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Savin, & I see the the lighting and the close crop on the beak as issues. INeverCry 18:09, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment A.Savin, INeverCry, I think you are being too harsh on sharpness. Many of our bird FPs are low MP such as 6MP or much less. This is 16MP from a compact camera. Downsized to 6MP version would be a fairer comparison to many FP. The crop is tight and the face in some shadow but the backlit beak is extraordinary. I can't find another photo like it. I think it shouldn't be dismissed so easily. I wonder if extending the left a little (possibly with a little creative Photoshop if no wider crop possible) and lifting the shadows might help. -- Colin (talk) 20:09, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • For me, the main issues are the crop (it almost gives the visual impression that the bird's beak would straighten out a bit if he had more room) and the shadow on the face and neck. I could support the image if something like what you suggest was done about that. INeverCry 20:21, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • There are also some sharpening artefacts at 6mpix, and given a relatively small resolution like 6mpix I may demand better quality. --A.Savin 23:58, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Mild Symbol support vote.svg Support - Nice picture, but I do feel the crops are tight on both the left and right. However, I completely agree with Colin on the backlit beak. Being able to see the blood vessels in the beak is amazing, and for that reason, I offer this photo mild support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:29, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Like INeverCry I don't like the cropping --Rettinghaus (talk) 09:39, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Thanks for the comments, I personally like the lighting - it's a matter of taste and which features one wants to highlight. I agree the crop is a little close to the end of the beak, unfortunatly the only way to extend it would be to add "background" by synthesis which I don't want to do. If that means it's not suitable for FP I'm ok with that. Cheers! Prosthetic Head (talk)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I had a play with synthesising a little more background, not sure about the result and even if I can get it looking perfect I don't really like the idea of inventing pixels.
    Hornbill with synthetic BG
    Prosthetic Head (talk) 21:28, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - In that version, there are some strange artifacts to the left of the beak. Otherwise, I like it better, and since you're using a bokeh that blurs the boundaries of everything beyond recognition, anyway, why is it a problem for you also to fudge things by extending those blurred colors a bit to the left? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:51, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The crop is never going to work for me. Daniel Case (talk) 05:45, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Palazzo Fontana Rezzonico Canal Grande Venezia.jpg, not featuredEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2016 at 12:29:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Palazzo Fontana Rezzonico from the Canal Grande in Venice


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:03, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Lápida cerca de San Pedro de Atacama, Chile, 2016-02-01, DD 147.JPGEdit

Voting period ends on 4 May 2016 at 04:52:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:52, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I find this photograph very moving. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:52, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For me it was really shocking,… There are many places in the world where the location of an accident becomes in a kind of memorial where temporarily flowers, candles but also permanently gravestones are placed/erected. In this case they left a big deal more there and just removed the bodies. I happened to talk to Chilean colleagues a few days ago about this picture and they confirmed me that this is quite unique in their country and don’t know another example of this. Thank you Ikan for the nomination! Poco2 09:31, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Thank, you, Poco, for the photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:52, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • I think stuff might be interesting, but that have to be explained (description). --Mile (talk) 11:11, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Poco, would you like to add a bit more content to the file description? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:37, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I’d prefer to see the horizon in the background to get a better feeling of dimensions. --Kreuzschnabel 09:36, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
    Sorry, Kreuzschnabel, I can only offer this crop Poco2 20:01, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Moving and technichally good photograph. Agree with others it could be improved by a bit more description and perhapse a very similar photo that includes the horizon would give sense of place. Prosthetic Head (talk) 13:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I didn't expect to support this one until I looked at it in closeup. What makes it, I guess, is that background, perhaps the way it suggests the vastness of time juxtaposed with this one life, and death. Daniel Case (talk) 20:38, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 21:12, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Solitaire berk (Betula) in een prachtig landschap. Locatie, natuurgebied Delleboersterheide – Catspoele 03.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2016 at 17:08:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Solitary birch (Betula) in a beautiful landscape.
Zie this photo: Solitaire berk (Betula) in een prachtig landschap. Locatie, natuurgebied Delleboersterheide – Catspoele 02.jpg Other composition.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:59, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, Dominicus. I like that composition better. It gives my eyes more to travel around. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:52, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

File:2013.07.01-21-Wustrow-Neu Drosedow-Blaugruene Mosaikjungfer-Maennchen.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2016 at 17:06:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Blue hawker - Aeshna cyanea, male.
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Please consider that insects don't have real colours. The colour arises from light refraction in its skin (or what ever the name is). --Hockei (talk) 19:06, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 21:50, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The bokeh is a nice abstraction all by itself. Daniel Case (talk) 04:23, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Cordoba Center Hotel in Cordoba, Spain.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2016 at 16:31:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cordoba Center Hotel by night.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by ElBute - uploaded by ElBute - nominated by ElBute -- ElBute (talk) 16:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info It is a night view of the Cordoba Center Hotel in Cordoba, Spain, illuminated in blue because of the World Autism Awareness Day 2016.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ElBute (talk) 16:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, it´s a fine motif and well done, but not good enough to be featured. Especially because of the ghosts. They are avoidable. Therefore only QI IMO. --Hubertl 17:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I agree with Hubertl. Also, the composition is good but not super-compelling to me, though the context is a strong supporting point for the nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:59, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • (weak) Symbol support vote.svg Support Well, I like it, especially the colours (blue lighting in blue hour) are nice. Regarding the ghosts, I see only one issue (people to the right of the entrance) and it is somewhat not a big deal for me. However, I would like to see this photo used somewhere (WP articles or so). So far only weak support. --A.Savin 02:05, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 11:24, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support though I would have crop a big part of the empty road at bottom. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:01, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Yeah, I think your suggested crop would help a lot. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:00, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Ok guys, you're right. Could I do it right now or not because the image is being reviewed? In any case, I'll crop it as soon as the review process is finished. --ElBute (talk) 10:38, 28 April 2016 (UTC).
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Yes, you can do it now and then ping everyone who's voted. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:51, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice blue-hour image of a street and lit building. Daniel Case (talk) 21:22, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - The image has been cropped for some of you requested such action. I agree it looks better now. --ElBute (talk) 07:40, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks. I'm still not wowed by it, but it's enough better that I seriously considered supporting it for the message. In the end, I'm Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:37, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

File:2016.04.21.-01-Mannheim Vogelstang--Vierfleck-Zartspinne-Weibchen.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 3 May 2016 at 13:35:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Anyphaena accentuata, female

File:Thurston the Great Magician - Strobridge Litho. Co..jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2016 at 18:57:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Mordechai Keidar.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2016 at 18:53:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mordechai Keidar - Ph.D Israeli Scholar, researcher and lecturer of Islam and Arab culture. Became famous for being one of the few Arabic-speaking Israelis interviewed for Arabic satellite channels such as Al-Jazeera. Image created as part of the People Pictures Project of Wikimedia Israel.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Portrait
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Arielinson - uploaded by Arielinson - nominated by Arielinson -- Arielinson (talk) 18:53, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Arielinson (talk) 18:53, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 18:03, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark at bottom, and the book is too obviously a prop. I'd prefer a more natural/relaxed pose with more even light, and maybe more space. INeverCry 02:13, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support works for me - well done --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:05, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - This is really somewhat of a gut-level oppose vote: I react differently to a laptop screen than to books on a shelf. I find the text on the TV segment on the laptop behind and to the right of the subject to be overly distracting and a little gimmicky, though I understand the reason for it, as described in the second sentence of the file description: "Became famous for being one of the few Arabic-speaking Israelis interviewed for Arabic satellite channels such as Al-Jazeera." But I don't see that sentence as necessitating a laptop picture of him appearing on Al-Jazeera with a particular message. If the laptop were cropped out, I'd give the photo another look and might support it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:30, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the idea of this as an environmental portrait, but this is too much environment at the expense of the portrait; per Ikan, I find the computer screen unnecessary. Cropping it out would probably simplify the image wonderfully, although it would also make it much less environmental. Daniel Case (talk) 03:34, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

File:William McIlvaine - The Chickahominy - Sumners Upper Bridge.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 2 May 2016 at 18:38:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Chickahominy - Sumners Upper Bridge

File:Cathedral of Petrópolis, Brazil.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 May 2016 at 18:37:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cathedral of Petrópolis, Brazil
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Catedral de Petrópolis or Catedral de São Pedro de Alcântara (St. Peter of Alcantara Cathedral) is located in Petrópolis, near Rio de Janeiro, in Brazil. All by. -- The Photographer (talk) 18:37, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- The Photographer (talk) 18:37, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:02, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm sure there's another way to re-nominate an FP than changing part of the tile to English. A /2 or something? Anyway, the original nomination is at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Catedral de Petrópolis, Brasil.jpg. -- Colin (talk) 19:14, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Doesn't address any of the issues I raised in the previous nomination. All that seems to have happened is that the image has been cropped vertically, lightened a little, some reflections on the floor cloned-out, and the white parts of the walls and dark wood gone over with a very heavy NR brush. The rest of the image is still as noisy, the stained glass no clearer or sharper, and the colourspace still AdobeRGB. The crop is an improvement, but the interior really would benefit from multi-frame HDR to capture this dynamic range noislessly. -- Colin (talk) 19:14, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
I corrected noise specifically located on the roof shadow areas and some areas that seem noise is really cement texture, the reflection of the floor was corrected using cloning, stained glass no clearer or sharper and QI criteria overexposed.svg Overexposed because its not a HDR, I'm fixing right now AdobeRGB to RGB. I don't have a equipment (external shooter) to do HDR. Thanks for your comments. --The Photographer (talk) 19:31, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Milseburg (talk) 19:09, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - The standard of featured pictures of church interiors is extremely high, as witness User:Diliff's photos, but also several other people's work. The ceiling is unsharp in this picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:08, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Colin & Ikan. INeverCry 03:42, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose per Ikan. I can forgive the noise and blown windows given that it's a long exposure, but the image should at least be sharp. Colin's suggestion for HDR might well be one of the few instances where that would be desirable for FP status. Daniel Case (talk) 22:14, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Falcon 9 first stage at LZ-1(two).jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 May 2016 at 11:27:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

First stage of a Falcon 9 Full Thrust rocket on Landing Zone 1 (LZ-1).
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Space exploration
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by SpaceX photos - uploaded by Juandedeboca - nominated by Msaynevirta -- Msaynevirta (talk) 11:27, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Msaynevirta (talk) 11:27, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I would crop the image a bit on the right to use the rule of third. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:40, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
    • I cropped it a bit. Is it better now? --Msaynevirta (talk) 11:52, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
      • Yes. Yann (talk) 08:56, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support enough I prefer the original crop. Great mood! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:42, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - I would really rather support the original crop, as I feel that it's a more harmonious composition with the greater area of trees and the additional light right at the right margin. As a viewer, I don't find that the "rule of thirds" makes any sense to me. Maybe it's useful to some people as one general guideline, but I definitely don't like people emphasizing it over concrete considerations related specifically to a particular composition. Would you consider reverting? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:59, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
    • I'm fine with both crops, if the original is better, feel free to revert. --Msaynevirta (talk) 23:02, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
      • For me, the rule of thirds doesn't work better here. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 02:22, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support This is a very well-done image. I have uploaded a version that a) isn't tilted like the previous two, and b) keeps the original crop, except for a slight crop on the right to remove the distracting light in the bottom right. Cropping by the rule of thirds here leads to left-right inconsistencies, due to the wide lens used, so along with the "keep information where possible" guideline, it's best avoided. Revert it if you have a better reason. Thanks -- Thennicke (talk) 07:59, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support Great picture, beatiful sunrise. This is the future of space exploration! --Juandedeboca (talk) 16:04, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 21:32, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:47, 24 April 2016 (UTC) 
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I'm willing to support this version. It's beautiful, significant, etc., and it's the best of the 3 versions. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:13, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Fine colors, but rocket is leaning to left side (probably some PD), flare is problem and tight crop above. --Mile (talk) 07:40, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
    • Mile: How do you know that it should be vertical? The rocket is being lifted with a crane... Regards, Yann (talk) 08:56, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
      • @Yann I had that feeling, i put few notations, check again. Rocket might be in-moving, but other stuff not. --Mile (talk) 09:08, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I checked EXIF, so its FF cam, i see resolution is some 7-8 MPx on 24 Mpx sensor (croped so much or downsized ?). I use 16 MPx and i think all are at least some 9-10 MPx at least. Copy-paste for lens review: Distortion is quite a prominent factor for this lens...but the lens produces some of the widest distortion results we've seen. For FF camera i expect more, nice colors wont be enough. --Mile (talk) 09:47, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 03:52, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Based on FPC's normal expectation / requirement on verticals, I'll have to agree with Mile and Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. -- KTC (talk) 15:17, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Posterization on cloud, awkward composition. Daniel Case (talk) 01:56, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose with Daniel Case.--Jebulon (talk) 21:15, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Steinbock 14962940265.jpgEdit

Voting period ends on 1 May 2016 at 07:34:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created & uploaded by Berndthaller - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 07:34, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Tomer T (talk) 07:34, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - This photo looks great at full-page size and it's a very nice portrait of the ibex in its natural environment and a very satisfying composition, so I'm willing to tolerate the unsharp areas in this macro photo. I also appreciate that the photographer explained what the bluish bokeh background is - the ice field of the glacier. At least in English. If someone wants to volunteer to translate that into German and/or Ukrainian (or any other language), that would be great. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:15, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 08:32, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:19, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:08, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice. Charles (talk) 17:07, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose due to lighting - the majority of the subject is in shadow. --King of ♠ 05:04, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - When the subject is the only thing that's really in shadow, can't that itself be a kind of emphasis? I think that actually helps the subject stand out, in this case. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:16, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • It can be done to great effect but I don't think it works here. --King of ♠ 02:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Backlighting is a valid technique -- Thennicke (talk) 05:58, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per KoH. INeverCry 01:58, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The backlighting works for me here ... we don't lose any detail. Daniel Case (talk) 05:58, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 09:04, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The light comes from the wrong direction.--Jebulon (talk) 21:22, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Polar Bear at Amberley Museum Railway.jpg, not featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2016 at 12:52:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Polar Bear, a W. G. Bagnall 2-4-0 steam locomotive on the Amberley Museum Railway
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I'm not impressed, either. This is merely a decent picture, not close to one of the best on the site. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:44, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I have seen quite a number of photographs of narrow gauge steam locomotives, and this is indeed an unusually good one. --NearEMPTiness (talk) 18:06, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 03:53, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan and Colin. QI I'll grant even though the front seems unsharp, but there's no wow. Daniel Case (talk) 05:12, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:03, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Rheinturm - Gesamtansicht vom Medienhafen.jpg, featuredEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2016 at 05:47:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Düsseldorf: Rheinturm (Rhine Tower, television tower)
This crop is because of the central composition of the tower. I have some reserve on both sides and I'll try a different crop. But nevertheless should the tower be here the main object. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:17, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm suggesting a crop that's even closer to the tower on its right! However, if you're able to show all of that building, I'd like to see that version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:17, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good photo. Give us a excellent photo of the Lichtzeitpegel also... -- -donald- (talk) 11:12, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Hubertl 17:30, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Conditional oppose No color-space metadata and no embedded color profile. If that is fixed I am ready to support. Very good light and exposure control. I enjoyed exploring the fine details at the top of the tower. When seen in its entirety it does not wow me that much, but it is compensated by the light and details. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:19, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
    Slaunger: color-space is added. For future: if there is no such info feel free to add always "sRGB" because I'll never use a different. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:47, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
    • Taxiarchos228: It is the EXIF which misses this information. That implies that an application which neeeds to convert the numbers in your file to colors have no information about how to do that. Most application will guess at sRGB, but there is no guarantee, especially not in the future. So an application may display colors entirely different from what you intended. You need to upload a version of the jpg, where the color space data are not stripped from the EXIF. See also User:Colin/BrowserTest. -- Slaunger (talk) 19:05, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
      • The information was added, no need for further editing any more. --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:29, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
        • Symbol support vote.svg Support EXIF color space data checks out now. -- Slaunger (talk) 05:19, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 02:20, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sharpening halos around the subject. --King of ♠ 23:51, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
    Sorry, but they aren't --Wladyslaw (talk) 08:30, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
    To make it more obvious, if you tilt your laptop/LCD screen up (so that you're looking at it at an angle from below), you'll see that the tower is clearly surrounded by a band of lightness. --King of ♠ 02:47, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
    +1 Yes, I see it clearly in the thumb too, perhaps from your HDR-Software? It's typical for that. But ... it isn't visible in full resolution!!! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 06:42, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support There might be halos, but I don't really see them when looking at my laptop screen straight on. Daniel Case (talk) 05:11, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 05:43, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 21:04, 27 April 2016 (UTC)


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 13:03, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

File:PlayaForteSaoMateo2-CaboFrio-Brasil-feb2016-1.jpgEdit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Apr 2016 at 22:46:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

landscape
  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - Don't you mean the rock is not sharp enough? <s?I'm undecided on this one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:03, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Edit summary maybe it's only my bad eyes + DEnglish, I meant "nothing else apart from the lower right rock is sharp". The crop is better, {{o}} disabled.Be..anyone 💩 09:03, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I will support if the crop suggested is done. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 00:30, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done --Ezarateesteban 00:48, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
I suggest other one. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 00:59, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
done, thanks!!! --Ezarateesteban 01:07, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Please, remove the cut off hill on the horizon at the right. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 01:20, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
done --Ezarateesteban 01:26, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
I Symbol support vote.svg Support now. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 01:29, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Flat lighting, no wow. --King of ♠ 02:49, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I'm not really feeling this one, either. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:48, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose nice picture, but nothing special for me, sorry -- Jiel (talk) 22:36, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 02:35, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, I'm afraid. -- Colin (talk) 18:31, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Seems like a nice place, but it is too dark, lacks detail, and has no clear idea with composition. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:17, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Nuvola apps important yellow.svg
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed because at this point it would be beyond unlikely that enough support !votes would emerge to offset all these opposes Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Daniel Case (talk) 05:15, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

  • Pictogram-voting-question.svg Question - Isn't FPX against the rules if there are 2 support votes? Did you miss User:ArionEstar's support vote? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:00, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
    • @Daniel Case: Yes. –Be..anyone 💩 10:20, 25 April 2016 (UTC) updated after the following comment: Good FPX for comparison. 13:34, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
      • Do you guys really think it will get 12 solid supports in the next few days. I think FPX is appropriate here as a nearly unanimous negative opinion. No need to keep piling on. -- Colin (talk) 11:04, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
        • That wasn't my question. Perhaps you should propose a rule change. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:11, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
I was unaware of that rule; I would like to see it linked. But Colin stated my reasoning for essentially mercy-killing this nom as well as I could. (and the diff Be..anyone linked to says nothing about this rule). Daniel Case (talk) 05:07, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Where's COM:IAR when you need it? Face-wink.svg INeverCry 05:49, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Ikan I don't like citing IAR since it can often be misused but yes, a wiki can afford to be flexible. We don't need rules for everything. Most nominators would have withdrawn by now, so this kind of "mercy killing" is fairly rare. -- Colin (talk) 07:39, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
I'm not going to fight this any further, because I see the sense in your position, but I'm surprised by unawareness of the rule on the part of regulars. It's right on this page, at "Featured picture candidate policy/General rules". Rule 9: Pictures tagged {{FPX}} may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied, provided there are no support votes other than that of the nominator. There really is no ambiguity there. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:01, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

┌──────────────────────────┘
Thanks. But I think some flexibility was required here, due to the age of the nomination and the amount of opposes, again as Colin has said. Daniel Case (talk) 01:53, 27 April 2016 (UTC) Ikan, I'm fully aware of the "rules". This isn't the first time this has been done, though. I seem to recall Jebulon doing it, and he's been around here forever. The point of IAR, is that regardless of what the rules say, is there actually a problem here? If not, why cause so much grief. Just let it be. -- Colin (talk) 07:02, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

I thought we were just having a discussion. I didn't realize I was causing grief. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:10, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
The grief affects good faith nominations, abuses of FPX as referenced above, other known FPX abuses by among others you, and one case of vandalism by a 'crat. –Be..anyone 💩 02:00, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per opposers. But the FPX is not appropriate here: we have two supports.--Jebulon (talk) 21:33, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Well I don't know what Be..anyone is smoking but the only "abuse" I see here is the pile-on of oppose votes. So much argument about "rules", which helps nobody. The "rules" aren't going to make this picture into an FP. The point of IAR is that if you find yourself arguing with fellow Commoners about following rules for the sake of following rules, you are not helping. -- Colin (talk) 08:30, 28 April 2016 (UTC)


Planning (9e jour après proposition)Edit

Thu 21 Apr → Sat 30 Apr
Fri 22 Apr → Sun 1 May
Sat 23 Apr → Mon 2 May
Sun 24 Apr → Tue 3 May
Mon 25 Apr → Wed 4 May
Tue 26 Apr → Thu 5 May
Wed 27 Apr → Fri 6 May
Thu 28 Apr → Sat 7 May
Fri 29 Apr → Sun 8 May
Sat 30 Apr → Mon 9 May