Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives November 10 2015

Consensual review edit

File:Novo-Rybinskaya_Street_SPB_01.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Novo-Rybinskaya Street in Saint Petersburg --Florstein 17:49, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Oppose Insufficient quality, sorry. --Billy69150 08:52, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Support I disagree. First, it is not polite to decline a photo without giving a reason. Second, that photo has no obvious, non-fixable flaws but only possiblities to enhance. I would propose to reduce the blue saturation. --Cccefalon 09:43, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing the colours.
  •   Support For me now QI. Please Billy69150, reconsider your judgement. --Cccefalon 18:06, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Weak support Lines are not fixed but it's acceptable --Billy69150 21:16, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   weak support Still wish something could be done about that blue in the left upper corner. Daniel Case 05:13, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Support after work on colours. --Cayambe 08:16, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Promoted   --Hubertl 13:05, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Orsilochus_daggerwing_(Marpesia_orsilochus)_underside.JPG edit

 

  • Nomination: Orsilochus daggerwing (Marpesia orsilochus), Cristalino River, Southern Amazon, Brazil --Charlesjsharp 17:34, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Review
  •   Oppose Posterization on rear tail  Support fixed. --Daniel Case 16:33, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
      Done New version of image uploaded. Charlesjsharp 11:41, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too shallow depth of field owing to wrong exposure solution. Most of the subject is out of focus. Alvesgaspar 14:04, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Hubertl 13:09, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Iglesia_de_la_Asunción,_Munébrega,_Zaragoza,_España,_2015-01-08,_DD_03.JPG edit

 

  • Nomination Church of the Assumption, Munébrega, Zaragoza, Spain --Poco a poco 14:07, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Support GQ. --Palauenc05 14:40, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry but the distortion is too imposing and the crop too tight for a QI -- Alvesgaspar 19:06, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Ist mir zu stark verzerrt. --Ralf Roletschek 18:51, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
      Comment Du meinst, die Entzerrung schafft eine zu starke Verzerrung, Ralf? Ich schau mal, was ich in meinem Erste-Hilfe-Kasten noch an Verbandsmaterial (elastische Binden) finde, damit man die beiden Türme wieder zusammenbringt. --Hubertl 22:41, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose With Alvesgaspar.--Jebulon 23:19, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose →   Declined   --Hubertl 13:09, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Belmond_Grand_Hotel_Europe_Saint_Petersburg_external_view.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Main facade Grand Hotel Europe in Saint Petersburg New version. --Moroder 20:59, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Support Yes, it´s good. --Hubertl 21:36, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Heavy barrel distortion. --Iifar 06:45, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Unnatural geometric distortion, extreme crop. Alvesgaspar 10:53, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
  •   Support Quality is good. --PetarM 16:47, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Support I like it as before. --Palauenc05 21:12, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I'm very sorry, but I know this building (I walk past it every week): this facade is absolutely straight, not curved like an amphitheatre. According to QI guidelines, as I understand, perspectives should stay natural in most cases. Am I wrong? --Alex Florstein (talk) 14:23, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. --Kadellar 15:32, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others. This kind of deformation could maybe find some supporters in FPC (not me !!!)--Jebulon 23:13, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose →   Declined   --Hubertl 13:08, 9 November 2015 (UTC)