Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives March 14 2022

Consensual review

edit

File:Painted_fire_hydrant_of_Barlow_Avenue_and_Vaughan_Street_in_Quesnel,_BC_(DSCF5031).jpg

edit

 

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Steindy 14:29, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lince_ibérico_(Lynx_pardinus),_Almuradiel,_Ciudad_Real,_España,_2021-12-19,_DD_06.jpg

edit

 

  • Nomination Iberian Lynx (Lynx pardinus), Almuradiel, Ciudad Real, Spain. --Poco a poco 19:01, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Oppose Pretty cat, but not sharp enough for QI, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek 20:10, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Yes, a pretty cat for which I drove 1000 Km, spent 2 days and waited for almost 10 hours to show up. The next one nominating another one with an iPhone from the Madrid zoo will be rewarded --Poco a poco 21:15, 5 March 2022 (UTC)
  •   Comment Take it to CR if you like. -- Ikan Kekek 08:53, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
  • No, will not argue about the status of the image, I just wanted to make people aware of the effort we sometimes put behind an image. Images like this are not comparable with those taken in a zoo and QI has unfortunately no rule to give those more value --Poco a poco 16:31, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
  •   Comment I surely appreciate your effort! I'm judging only the result. I do judge photos of wild animals taken in the field differently from photos shot in zoos. -- Ikan Kekek 19:46, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support While it may not be crispy, IMHO this image is QI and I would like to see the consensus in CR. --GRDN711 05:21, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Based on what is generally expected, I don't think this one is sharp enough for a 2021 QI.--Peulle 07:40, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Perfect composition, lighting, and exposure, but unfortunately unsharp even at A4 Size, and very noisy in full size. A real pity. --Smial 12:33, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
  •   Weak support Perfect composition, lighting, and exposure. The noise seems to give it an artistic dimension. It's very pretty, and it looks artistic--Lmbuga 13:10, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose sharpness isn't there. Tomer T 13:37, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support Sharpness is not perfect, but the image is highly valuable. --Nefronus 07:12, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
  •   Support per others. IMHO is QI --Rjcastillo 23:29, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Definitely not QI per others. Could be a VI candidate. --Tagooty 03:07, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose →   Declined   --Peulle 23:13, 13 March 2022 (UTC)