Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives November 21 2016

Consensual review edit

File:Fenêtre_du_château_d'Annecy-Vue_sur_le_Logis_Perrière-4.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Vue sur la cour et le Logis Perrière depuis une fenêtre du château d'Annecy. --B-noa 22:38, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Oppose Strong barrel distortion --Uoaei1 12:28, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Comment Correction done. --Yann 09:46, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Awkward crop. --C messier 09:40, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Support - Maybe I'm missing something, but to me, this is a good photo. The crop may not be ideal, but in no way is it a deal-breaker for me for QI. -- Ikan Kekek 06:12, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Oppose There are   chromatic aberrations — when fixed, I may reconsider my vote. --A.Savin 18:59, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Distortion and poor composition: Not QI, but nice picture: Too and too tight at right. It needs perspective correction. Sorry, clear not QI--Lmbuga 02:46, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose →   Declined   --A.Savin 00:54, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Montes de Vitoria - Pagogan 01.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Summit of Pagogan. Álava, Basque Country, Spain --Basotxerri 15:59, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion   Oppose Sorry, at least some part of the barb wire, or other part of the pic, should be sharp but I can't find it. --W.carter 07:05, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
      Support IMHO, sharp enough for QI. --C messier 09:04, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
      Support per C messier -- Ikan Kekek 06:13, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Promoted   --Hubertl 07:29, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

File:Disneyland June 2008-29.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Stunt action at Euro Disney, Paris. -- Alvesgaspar 21:57, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Support Good quality -- Spurzem 23:15, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Oppose It's just barely 2 mpix, the quality is not enough for this size, even not for an action photo --A.Savin 01:28, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Comment 2.6 Mpix is 30% larger than 2 Mpix, not 'just barely 2 Mpix'! -- Alvesgaspar 16:29, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
Yes. Still, it is no more than "two point something", for which I may demand better quality. --A.Savin 19:59, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per A.Savin; since the resolution is low, I would expect better sharpness. It doesn't seem to be a cropped zoom lens shot either, meaning the image seems to have been downsampled.--Peulle 21:01, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry, interesting, but not QI IMO. Per others--Lmbuga 01:50, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose →   Declined   --Hubertl 00:49, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

File:2016_Kuala_Lumpur,_Park_KLCC,_Fontanna_na_jeziorze_Symphony_(01).jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Water fountain on Symphony Lake. KLCC Park. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. --Halavar 15:02, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Oppose Nothing is sharp, sorry --Michielverbeek 06:03, 12 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Support Sharp enough IMHO for QI (although sharpening it a bit could help). It also needs some extra contrast. --C messier 09:03, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Support OK for QI --Milseburg 14:11, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Agree with Michielverbeek -- Alvesgaspar 18:52, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Agree with Michielverbeek --Alandmanson 10:14, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose →   Declined   --Hubertl 07:28, 20 November 2016 (UTC)