Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives October 19 2023

Consensual review edit

File:Wachten_op_hoog_water_(beeld_van_Jan_Ketelaar)_14-08-2023._(actm.)_03.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination A thin woman looks out to sea.
    --Agnes Monkelbaan 04:27, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion   Support Good quality --Michielverbeek 04:35, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
      Oppose incorrect descrpition --Charlesjsharp 09:18, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
    *  Done. description adjusted. Thank you for your attention.--Agnes Monkelbaan 15:17, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Support --GRDN711 03:46, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Support --AFBorchert 05:33, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Support --XRay 07:41, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose →   Promoted   --C messier 15:42, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

File:Sand_Dunes_sa.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination A dune is a landform --Meshari Alawfi 01:25, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
    A better filename, description, location and categorization is necessary. --XRay 09:48, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
      Support Looks like everything ok now. --Nino Verde 14:48, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Oppose No, it isn't. Categories for example are very common. Categories are not tags. --XRay 04:40, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Support Categories fixed by other users. So it's acceptable now. --XRay 07:39, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Support QI for me --Moroder 13:26, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Oppose for now. I am sorry, but the categories are indeed very general. Subcategories should be used instead. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 16:32, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
  • @Meshari Alawfi: Your photograph is good for QI and the issues are very easy to fix. So please fix description and categories. --XRay 04:50, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Support I do not look for any categories but for the picture and I see a good and interesting one. -- Spurzem 20:52, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Comment Beautiful and could be worth a COM:FPC nomination. However, the others are right that it should have narrower categories, such as Category:Deserts of Saudi Arabia. Meshari, could you please do a little bit of searching to see what the more detailed subcategories for your other categories are? -- Ikan Kekek 03:34, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality. --Sebring12Hrs 18:12, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Comment In addition to the description that explains what a dune is (as if Commons were Wikipedia), there are captions that don't explain what can be seen here, but also provide a kind of a definition of dunes. And of course, there is inappropriate categorization, which means cluttering categories very high up the category tree. Unfortunately, quite a lot of voters just don't care at all about issues that are not about photographic quality, even though the requirements for proper categorization and an accurate description are also parts of the guidelines, see Commons:Quality_images_candidates#Image_page_requirements. Of course, I thought about just fixing the issues before opposing this beautiful photograph, but I cannot correct the part that is in Arabic language. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 20:28, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Neutral for now even though it is an excellent shot from the technical point of view. - I have replaced the generic dunes and sand categorizations with the respective Saudi Arabian version of it- Happy to support this nomination once the description has been modified to meet QI guidelines (I am unable to do that, same as RFF) --Virtual-Pano 23:40, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
  Support now that all conditions of the nomination have been met --Virtual-Pano (talk) 08:56, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Support This is good quality. But the description should indeed describe where this has been photographed. --AFBorchert 05:41, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
  • @Meshari Alawfi: If you nominate an image, please have a look to the issues. Cooperation is part of the nomination. --XRay 10:05, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
Total: 7 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose →   Promoted   --C messier (talk) 15:40, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

File:Ναός_Αγίας_Σοφίας,_Μονεμβασιά_0591.jpg edit

 

  • Nomination The west facade of the church of Agia Sofia in Monemvasia. --C messier 17:21, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion   Oppose High noise, person in the door --Plozessor 17:53, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
    This isn't FP for the person in the portal to be an issue. Please discuss. --C messier 19:39, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Support QI to me. --Sebring12Hrs 10:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Support As long as we are fiddling around with 8-bit JPGs here, a low noise component is always better than merciless denoising, which often enough leads to LEGO plastic-like surfaces and/or posterization. --Smial 23:23, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Support -- Spurzem 14:11, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality --Jakubhal 12:53, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Support Very good. Noise is quite subtle and acceptable for QI. -- Ikan Kekek 03:52, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
  •   Support --AFBorchert 06:46, 15 October 2023 (UTC)
Total: 6 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Promoted   --C messier 15:39, 18 October 2023 (UTC)