Open main menu

Wikimedia Commons β

Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list

< Commons:Quality images candidates


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]] 12:11, 23 January 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.

January 23, 2018Edit

January 22, 2018Edit

January 21, 2018Edit

January 20, 2018Edit

January 19, 2018Edit

January 18, 2018Edit

January 17, 2018Edit

January 16, 2018Edit

January 15, 2018Edit

January 13, 2018Edit

Consensual reviewEdit


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



  • Nomination Photographed at the Bharhut Gallery of Indian Museum, Kolkata. By User:Gangulybiswarup --Bodhisattwa 16:01, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Too soft, could you apply some sharpening, not sure whether it will make it, but it is worth a try --Poco a poco 20:45, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •   Support Good quality. --Basile Morin 13:58, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Basile, I don't understand why you go for a direct promote. As already said, IMHO it is not a QI as it's too sharp. Why that hurry to promote? --Poco a poco 18:24, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   ----Ermell 08:25, 23 January 2018 (UTC)



  • Nomination JBL Flip 3 bluetooth speaker (DSCF2653) --Trougnouf 21:04, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •   Support OK for me. --Basotxerri 21:00, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I disagree This is never a good still life. Bad Light, WA and the shadows are a pity. Ebay-Quality, not more sorry. --Hans-Jürgen Neubert 15:21, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment What's WA? --Trougnouf 16:25, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Probably "WA" equals "Weißabgleich" equals "white balance" equals "WB" ;-) --Smial 09:25, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   ----Ermell 08:22, 23 January 2018 (UTC)



  • Nomination Tomb of Queen Begum Hazrat Mahal of Avadh in Kathmandu --Bijay chaurasia 18:31, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •   SupportGood quality. PumpkinSky 20:22, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Sorry, but the image needs a perspective correction and is a bit oversharpened. IMO fixable, though. --Basotxerri 20:56, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   ----Ermell 17:50, 22 January 2018 (UTC)



  • Nomination Cessna 525B Citation CJ3 landing -- Sixflashphoto 00:14, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •   Support Good quality. --PumpkinSky 00:17, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I disagree. The crop is not ideal. With a proper crop the picture will get too small I think. --Ermell 20:42, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
    Changes made -- Sixflashphoto 00:37, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   ----Ermell (talk) 17:49, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

File:N443WN Southwest Airlines 1.jpgEdit


  • Nomination Southwest 737-700 landing -- Sixflashphoto 00:14, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion
  •   SupportGood quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 06:01, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
  •   OpposeNot sharp enough IMO --Ermell 20:44, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
  •   Comment Changes made -- Sixflashphoto 01:13, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   ----Ermell 17:45, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

File:Door of the Residence Dadon.jpgEdit


  • Nomination Door of the Residence Dadon, Conques, Aveyron, France. --Tournasol7 00:05, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Discussion Why are the stone arches cropped out? PumpkinSky 00:08, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
    The street is very narrow, you can not go back... Tournasol7 00:12, 21 January 2018 (UTC) And you used an 18mm lens. I invite other opinions on this one. PumpkinSky 00:13, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → More votes?   ----PumpkinSky 17:55, 22 January 2018 (UTC)