Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives March 14 2019

Consensual review

edit

File:Watertoren_(Sneek)_(d.j.b.)_03.jpg

edit

 

  • Nomination Water tower (Sneek). Water tower in Sneek. Detail.--Famberhorst 06:52, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Support Good quality. --XRay 07:26, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I disagree. Sorry, I´m not convinced by the composition. The foreground is disturbing. There are freer perspectives onto this tower in the category. --Milseburg 09:41, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality.--Fischer.H 18:34, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment I've seen a lot of worse compositions being reviewed QI. And if those at least 5 dust spots are corrected (see annotations), I will support it for it's technical quality. --PtrQs 22:17, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
  •   Done. Removed spots. Hopefully all. Thank you for your reviews.--Famberhorst 07:09, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality. --PtrQs 17:50, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - Good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 03:56, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry, there's just too much distraction in the foreground (people, colorful banners, road signs, etc.). On top the sky is pretty grainy. Not a QI for me like that. --MB-one 12:50, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Fine 4 me.--Palauenc05 15:15, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose there are still the spots (even after purge), but the sky is noisy - no QI, but fixable, I think. Composition and things in the foreground are not a problem for QI. -- DerFussi 21:07, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose →   Promoted   -- DerFussi 21:08, 13 March 2019 (UTC)