Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 26 2016

Consensual review edit

File:São_Paulo_downtown,_São_Paulo_city,_Brazil_03.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination São Paulo --The Photographer 00:16, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Oppose The reflections in the main subject are pretty disturbing. --Rodrigo.Argenton 15:10, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
  •   Comment - The Photographer, I don't mind the reflections, but the upper part of the building is rather unsharp for QI, in my opinion (some other people might not agree, but I think you can sharpen it at least a bit more). -- Ikan Kekek 05:52, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Declined   --A.Savin 14:34, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Chladni_plate_01.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Mathematical object for illustrating Chladni patterns on display at Matemateca (IME/USP), by Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton --Joalpe 00:48, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Support - Very dusty, but OK for QI, I think. -- Ikan Kekek 03:25, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I disagree. Remains of unclean masking work. --Ermell 11:45, 21 December 2016 (UTC).
  •   Comment Ikan Kekek, dust?, this is a object made of a lot of literally dust, File:Chladni plate 10.jpg, so we will have this issue. And Ermell you are right, something weird happen, I'm looking the TIFF file, and it's not like that. ASAP I'll reupload it. --Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton 23:00, 21 December 2016 (UTC)   Fixed --Rodrigo.Argenton 23:34, 21 December 2016 (UTC)
  •   Question Are the patterns being illustrated by the shapes in the dust? The object looks like it's made from wood and metal. -- Ikan Kekek 01:28, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
  •   Comment @Rodrigo.Argenton. I can see your efforts removing the mistakes but when you look at the left brass plate there is still something to be fixed in the dark area--Ermell (talk) 08:33, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
  •   Comment - Actually, this explains what we're looking at: w:Ernst Chladni#Chladni figures. It's not dust but sand, and the sand is integral to what is being demonstrated on the apparatus. -- Ikan Kekek 11:27, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
  •   Comment Ermell   Fixed, could you pleas check it now? I made a massive cleaning, apparently I just had a old version of the file, now it's in the quality that we search. :). Rodrigo.Argenton 15:06, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
  •   Support o.k. now for me--Ermell (talk) 09:43, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose →   Promoted   --Peulle 13:47, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

File:2016_Dom_Książąt_Brzeskich_w_Strzelinie_2.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination House of the Dukes of Brzeg in Strzelin 2 --Jacek Halicki 00:00, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Support Good quality. --Cvmontuy 03:21, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The clouds are blown, can you do something about it? --A.Savin 15:27, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Blown sky.--Peulle 20:15, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
  •   Support Sky looks light grey for me.--Ermell 08:45, 20 December 2016 (UTC)
  •   Support Per Ermell, acceptable IMO. --Basotxerri 16:40, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Promoted   --A.Savin 14:30, 25 December 2016 (UTC)