Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives July 18 2021

Consensual review edit

File:Cessna 208 après l'embarquement (Colmar).jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Plane on Colmar - Houssen airport in Colmar (Haut-Rhin, France). --Gzen92 16:52, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
      Support Good quality. --George Chernilevsky 20:01, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
      Oppose I disagree. Categorization as an “unidentified aircraft” is insufficient. The aircraft model needs to be identified to be useful in Commons. Also, human legs dropping out of the fuselage seems odd to me. You just have to be patient and wait until the people leave before making your image. --GRDN711 02:08, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
  • The plane was already in motion, the person moves away. Gzen92 12:01, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support. Added one cat. I have no clue who came up with the categorization for aircraft models, but in the chaos below the "Cessna 208" category, no one with a shred of sanity will try to find an illustration that fits their particular need. "Unknown aircraft" is of course very poor, especially since the aircraft could be found with two mouse clicks via google based on the marking. But I think that inaccurate categorizations should not be the sole reason for rejection because of the in large parts chaotic category system on commons.--Smial 09:16, 14 July 2021 (UTC) Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
  • Seen for google, I categorize the other photos of this day, thanks. Gzen92 12:01, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support as the aircraft is now identified. The partial images of the people on the other side might be funny if you concentrate on them, but they're not a deal-breaker to me. -- Ikan Kekek 09:46, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 22:00, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

File:Railway_bridges_at_Vijayawada.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Railway bridges at Vijayawada. --IM3847 09:19, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion F-value is too low and focus not well done, left bridge is less sharper than right one --Michielverbeek 09:42, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
      Support Good quality. --Steindy 09:59, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
      Weak support Per Michielverbeek, but it’s acceptable. --Nefronus 07:26, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
  •   Comment I'll support per others, but IM3847, please eliminate the COM:OVERCAT and also add a category for railway bridges. -- Ikan Kekek 07:57, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
    Done changes to categories. --IM3847 14:02, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek 19:51, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Good effort but agree with Michielverbeek. --GRDN711 02:19, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 21:57, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

File:AUT_vs._TUR_2016-03-29_(134).jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Jakob Jantscher (Austria., left) in duel with Arda Turn (Turkey). --Steindy 00:00, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
      Support Good quality. --Uoaei1 04:37, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
      Oppose The Turkish player is out of focus. However, this one might be worth discussing. --Nefronus 04:38, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Motion blur, showing the game situation, OK with me. -- Ikan Kekek 22:16, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
  •   Support Per Ikan --Moroder 02:46, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
  •   Oppose For me, the sharpness is OK. The right crop, however, is not.--Peulle 14:33, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Peulle, that's because I don't take the long shots like you do at the bike race (for example: click, click, click). --Steindy 15:15, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
Your point, if there is one, escapes me. In the photos to which you refer, none of the cyclists' body parts are cropped.--Peulle 09:53, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 21:56, 17 July 2021 (UTC)