Open main menu

Wikimedia Commons β

Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list

< Commons:Quality images candidates

NominationsEdit

Due to the Mediawiki parser code ~~~~ signatures are only working on this page if you have JavaScript enabled. If you do not have JavaScript enabled please manually sign with:

--[[User:yourname|yourname]] 15:37, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Please open a new date section if you are nominating an image after 0:00 o'clock (UTC).
  • Please leave a blank line between your new entry and any existing entries.
  • Please help in reviewing "old" nominations here below first, many are still unassessed.
Thank you.

April 23, 2018Edit

April 22, 2018Edit

April 21, 2018Edit

April 20, 2018Edit

April 19, 2018Edit

April 18, 2018Edit

April 17, 2018Edit

April 16, 2018Edit

April 15, 2018Edit

April 14, 2018Edit

April 13, 2018Edit

April 11, 2018Edit

April 7, 2018Edit

Consensual reviewEdit

Rules

These rules are in accordance with the procedures normally followed in this section. If you don’t agree with them please feel free to propose changes.

  • To ask for consensual review, just change the /Promotion, /Decline to /Discuss and add your comments immediately following the review. An automatic bot will move it to the consensual review section within one day. Alternatively move the image line from the main queue to Consensual Review/Images and follow the instructions in the edit window.
  • You can move an image here if you contest the decision of the reviewer or have doubts about its eligibility (in which case an 'oppose' is assumed). In any case, please explain your reasons. Our QICBot will move it for you. When the bot moves it, you might have to revisit the nomination and expand your review into the Consensual Review format and add "votes".
  • The decision is taken by majority of opinions, including the one of the first reviewer and excluding the nominator's. After a minimum period of 48 hours since the last entry, the decision will be registered at the end of the text using the template {{QICresult}} and then executed, according to the Guidelines.
Using {{support}} or {{oppose}} will make it easier to count your vote.
Votes by anonymous contributors aren't counted
  • In case of draw, or if no additional opinions are given other than the first reviewer's, the nomination can be closed as inconclusive after 8 days, counted from its entry.
  • Turn any existing comments into bullet points—add   Oppose and   Support if necessary.
  • Add a comment explaining why you've moved the image here - be careful to stay inside the braces.
  • Preview and save with a sensible edit summary like "+Image:Example.jpg".


Consensual ReviewEdit

File:Close wing position of Burara amara Moore, 1865 – Small Green Awlet WLB DSC 9170.jpgEdit

 

  • Nomination Close wing position of Burara amara Moore, 1865 – Small Green Awlet (by Sandipoutsider) --Atudu 15:37, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •   Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 17:18, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose over-processed, false background. Charlesjsharp 22:21, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   ---Ermell 06:30, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Garden Lizard (Calotes) in village chotian, punjab.jpgEdit

 

  • Nomination Calote in village Chotian, Punjab, India -- Satpal Dandiwal 11:13, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •   Support Good quality. --Martin Falbisoner 12:20, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Image is fine, but you should identify with genus if not species. Charlesjsharp 22:13, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment File name's changed. Done with "Garden Lizard (Calotes) in village chotian, punjab.jpg" --Satpal Dandiwal 03:39, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Charlesjsharp 09:54, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Ermell 06:29, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Wandelingen door de laagveenmoerassen De Deelen 01.jpgEdit

 

  • Nomination Walks through the low moorland marshes De Deelen. Frozen draw hole.
    --Famberhorst 06:06, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •   Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 06:59, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   OpposeThis is an excerpt from this picture. I don't think it's a good idea to just re-nominate a slightly expanded copy of an existing QI. --Ermell 07:14, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I agree. Charlesjsharp 09:56, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Me too. Derivative works really need to be significantly altered.--Peulle 10:29, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Good quality, and the composition feels significantly different to me. I disagree with you guys. -- Ikan Kekek 13:35, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   ---Ikan Kekek 13:35, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Heldburg_Heißluftballon_8068379.jpgEdit

 

  • Nomination Launch preparation for a hot air balloon --Ermell 06:30, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •   Oppose Oversharpened, scarf blown. Good composition, but sorry, not QI for me. --Yerpo 07:20, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality for me --Ercé 09:23, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
    More opinions will be helpful. --Ermell 08:24, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Not the nain subject I know, but the man is not in focus. Charlesjsharp 09:57, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The composition doesn't look thought through.--Peulle 10:30, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Slight overexposure, but not really disturbing. IMO very nice composition. --Smial 12:01, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   ---Ermell (talk) 06:24, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Wolf Creek valley, Ivvavik National Park, YT.jpgEdit

 

  • Nomination Looking up the valley of Wolf Creek, one of the Firth River tributaries in Canada's Ivvavik National Park --Daniel Case 05:43, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •   Support Good quality. --XRay 05:48, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I´m not totally convinced. In my eyes the colors are too saturated. Are the trees really tilted at the same angle or is the picture tilted to the left? --Milseburg 19:41, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  • First, as I've said about a lot of these other pictures from the Canadian Arctic, it was the "day" after a rainstorm and the sky was extremely clear and clean, so yes it was that blue. As for the trees, they tend to be rather scraggly on the tundra and tilt every which way. Daniel Case 04:43, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Kein QI für mich - Blaustich --Fischer.H 11:51, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Basotxerri 16:32, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Warnschild an einem Autobahnparkplatz in Baden-Würtemberg bei Bickelberg 02.jpgEdit

 

  • Nomination Multilingual warning sign in Germany because of the african swine fever --Verum 13:56, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •   OpposeThe composition isn't quite good enough for QI, I feel. There's a cropped sign at the top, for instance. --Peulle 14:05, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  • @Peulle:new v ersion with smaller crop. look at the text of the sign with the opeb trash container --Verum 08:20, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support QI for me --Ermell 20:33, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment I really wasn't anticipating this going to CR, but since it's here I'm still at oppose, given the disturbing garbage bags in front of the subject.--Peulle 10:08, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Peulle. --Bgag 13:57, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Erm... the garbage is essential for this image and belongs to the composition. --Smial 22:33, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Basotxerri 20:40, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Catedral_de_Oporto,_Portugal,_2012-05-09,_DD_16.JPGEdit

 

  • Nomination Cathedral of Porto, Portugal --Poco a poco 18:58, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •   Oppose Light too harsh --Daniel Case 19:46, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  • To be honest, I see no problem with the light here, I'd like to discuss this one. --Poco a poco 17:38, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support It's OK for me. --Bgag 15:50, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support OK for me, although a local correction would make it better. --Basotxerri 16:30, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
    Basotxerri: what do you mean by "local correction"? Poco a poco 19:14, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Lowering the highlights locally using the adjustment brush (talking in Lightroom terms). --Basotxerri 07:56, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Nothing wrong with it.--Ermell 20:36, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Maybe it's a bit bright in some places, but that's not a reason to deny that it's a photo of quality, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek 22:46, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   --Ikan Kekek 22:46, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

File:2012_Jastrzębie-Zdrój,_Miejsce_pamięci_żołnierzy_Armii_Czerwonej_i_Czechosłowackiej_poległych_w_1945_roku_(02).jpgEdit

 

  • Nomination Memorial of Red Army and Czechoslovakia soldiers who died in 1945. Jastrzębie-Zdrój, Silesian Voivodeship, Poland. --Halavar 11:40, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •   Support Good quality. --GT1976 12:45, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  • {{o}} Sorry, see notes. I think the image is not easily improved. Strong chromatic aberrations (head). Pour detail (head). In my opinion, too tight at top--Lmbuga 21:34, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Done New fixed version uploaded now. Please take a look again. --Halavar 21:49, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Deleted notes about CAs. Much better, but the detail (head) is not good IMO to be QI, sorry. And too tight at top (composition) --Lmbuga 22:21, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Good and detailed enough, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek 06:02, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support OK for me. --Basotxerri 17:38, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Good enough -- DerFussi 19:02, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Weak support--Lmbuga 21:32, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Still many small remains of CA (green/cyan). --Smial 12:04, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --DerFussi 19:02, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Inge Keller - Dorotheenstädtischer Friedhof - Mutter Erde fec.JPGEdit

 

  • Nomination Grave of German actress Inge Keller in Dorotheenstadt cemetery --Mutter Erde 09:24, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •   Support Small photo, but not too small. Stronger colours would have ben an improvement. Qualuity high enough for Q1 --Michielverbeek 07:49, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Poor proposal when taking the image. It's distorted (It needs perspective correction). Not QI IMO--Lmbuga 23:35, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Seems good enough to me. -- Ikan Kekek 06:59, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Needs perspective correction. --Basotxerri 17:35, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support I disagree, a perspective correction of the base would distort the sculpture excessive and look strange. Its ok as it is. -- DerFussi 17:46, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Distracting perspective, too low resolution for an easy-to-take image, which should have at least 4, better 6 MPix nowadays. --Smial 14:03, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → More votes?   --Basotxerri 14:58, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Teatro_Don_Pedro_V,_Macao,_2013-08-08,_DD_01.jpgEdit

 

  • Nomination Dom Pedro V Theater, Macau --Poco a poco 07:44, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •   Comment Strong purple fringes and I don't like the way perspctive distortion is handled and the blurring that comes with it.--Tobias "ToMar" Maier 15:15, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support OK for me. --Basotxerri 16:17, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Strong perspective correction. Excessive perspective correction. Unnatural image--Lmbuga 23:42, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support - Good enough quality, perspective OK to my eyes. -- Ikan Kekek 07:02, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose - Took me long time to decide.... but at the end per Lmbuga. It looks too unnatural due to the excessive perspective correction. -- DerFussi 17:36, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:51, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others.--Peulle 10:47, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Perspective is ok but didn't anybody else notice the sky is completely blown out? --Code 19:26, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Decline?   --Code 19:26, 21 April 2018 (UTC)