Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives April 18 2021

Consensual review edit

File:Pörtschach_Leonstein_Seeburger_Weg_Burgruine_Leonstein_äußeres_Tor_05042021_0764.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Ruin of the gateway at the eastern outer curtain wall of castle ruin Leonstein, Pörtschach, Carinthia, Austria -- Johann Jaritz 02:47, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Support Good quality. --XRay 03:47, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose How many QIs are we going to promote from this same absolutely dull view? --Kallerna 16:56, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
  •   Comment Sorry, but: Even if it were a dull view, it wouldn't be a reason to reject it. And "dull" is a subjective view. --XRay 05:12, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Good composition, not dull to me and good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 05:35, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support per Ikan Kekek --LexKurochkin 06:48, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support per Ikan. The image possibly appears "dull" on some screens, because it has sRGB IEC61966-2.1 as a colour profile. This profile may result in lightened, less contrasty shadow areas on some display devices. Adobe-RGB has similar effacts. --Smial 10:07, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Image is technically acceptable but lacks visual focus on the essential castle ruins with too much area in the image devoted to road, ditch and foreground which are not notable. --GRDN711 15:18, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Per Ikan --Moroder 19:08, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Per IkanSeven Pandas 23:26, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Total: 6 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Promoted XRay 06:18, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

File:Pörtschach_Leonstein_Burgruine_Vorwerk-Gebäude_im_äußeren_Hof_05042021_0765.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Forwark building north of the castle ruins Leonstein, Pörtschach, Carinthia, Austria -- Johann Jaritz 02:47, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Support Good quality. --XRay 03:47, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose How many QIs are we going to promote from this same absolutely dull view? --Kallerna 16:56, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
  •   Comment Sorry, but I think it's time to make a comment: I think it's good to bring Commons:Image guidelines to mind, especially "Above all, be polite." --XRay 05:18, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Not dull to me and good quality. If this were FPC, you could say this is not interesting enough for an FP, but this is not FPC, and it's far from devoid of interest to the viewer. -- Ikan Kekek 05:38, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support IMO and as far as I understand the QI Guidelines, it does not matter if the subject "dull" or not. Technically I do not see any problem. This is high quality image. Personally I think that beauty of nature is not always bright and shining. Actually it rarely is. --LexKurochkin 06:45, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support per others and my comment at the other image above. --Smial 10:09, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The image is technically high quality but IMHO does not have sufficient value per QI guidelines in illustrating the “Forwark building part of the castle ruin”. This image is not presented as a scenic landscape but presumed to illustrate a historic building of the town. Unfortunately, the building makes up at most 10% of the image area with rest devoted to a non-descript road, tree stumps, bushes, ditches and telephone lines. If the building is the focus, the presentation should be better. --GRDN711 15:40, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Great photo, so what? --Moroder 19:10, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Seven Pandas 23:27, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Total: 6 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Promoted XRay 06:18, 16 April 2021 (UTC)