Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives November 25 2015

Consensual review edit

File:Abbey_of_Saint_Scholastica,_Subiaco.jpg edit

 

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Poco a poco 19:35, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Portage Viaduct.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Iron trestle bridge in a New York State Park. It is likely to be demolished. --B137 03:48, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Oppose sorry, without the two, disturbing branches in the foreground, it would be QI for me. --Hubertl 07:29, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Hubertl. --Cccefalon 08:31, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Declined   --Hubertl 08:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

File:El_faress.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination cette photo ete prise a kherouba alger. By User:Amine loua --Vikoula5 14:25, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Support Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 12:57, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Comment Needs denoise and defringe. --C messier 17:51, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
      Question Contra or Pro, C messier, everything else doesn´t make any sense...--Hubertl 09:37, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
    It's an   Oppose until the issues are fixed. --C messier 15:18, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Posterized sky (banding). -- Smial 09:50, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Noisy and posterized. Alvesgaspar 15:23, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others + left crop. --Kadellar 18:26, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose →   Declined   --Hubertl 20:24, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Parque_Alameda,_Santiago_de_Compostela,_España,_2015-09-23,_DD_58.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination Alameda Park, Santiago de Compostela, Spain --Poco a poco 21:23, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Oppose Not sharp enough --Medium69 12:42, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Comment I disagree, strongly, and would like a third opinion. It does look sharp to me (not to talk about the resolution) --Poco a poco 23:31, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Oppose -- Not a good lighting. Also the image is slanted to the right although the horizontals are ok. Alvesgaspar 10:51, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   New version uploaded Poco a poco 18:30, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Support Looks better now--Ermell 21:10, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
  • No, it does not. All vertical are tilted clockwise. Alvesgaspar 23:40, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Corrected Poco a poco 18:20, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Comment good quality, but obviously perspective distortion (esp. in the left half of the image). Needs a correction, then I'll support. --Carschten 00:42, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
      One more try Poco a poco 21:22, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Info another straightned version is uploaded now –   Done --Carschten 22:44, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Support apart from the unsymmetric crop, very good. Clearly a QI to me now. --Carschten 22:44, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Support QI for me. --Hubertl 08:08, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
  •   Support if this isn't QI, we're fucked. --Kadellar 18:30, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose →   Promoted   --Jean11 19:27, 24 November 2015 (UTC)