Open main menu

Featured pictures in language 'pedias

Is there any reason not to start a mass transfer of Featured Pictures from, say, en:Wikipedia:Featured Pictures? The FP criteria for the English wikipedia include free-as-in-speech, so that should not be an obstacle. I don't envision doing this with a bot; there aren't *that* many pictures (and it gives me an excuse to look at them all again). But it seems like all those pictures are worth spreading around... On the other hand, it sets the bar for Commons featured pictures rather high. Thoughts? --Andrew 23:12, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean, simply transfer them to Commons or make the featured as well? For the first of course this should be done, the second is maybe not so good. I saw en featured fail in de and the other way round, and thats only the two lists I'm watching. -guety 23:22, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC) PS.: Why do you think the bar is set high on commons?
What I meant was, the featured pictures on en are very good, and so putting them here would raise the bar here quite high (not that the pictures here aren't good). Anyway, as I say below, the whole question was based on a misunderstanding on my part. --Andrew 06:12, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
They should certainly all be uploaded on commons (presuming they are under free licenses - this is a requirement for en featured pictures, but I don't know about other languages). However, they should be re-nominated for featured picture status here, for the reasons Guety stated. Dan | Talk 00:13, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Do we actually have a nomination process here yet? If not, they could be put in Featured directly and then cycled through the process once we get one. --Andrew 06:09, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

A nomination process is described in the article related to this very talk page, Commons:Featured pictures. Have a look at Commons:Featured pictures candidates to see the process. I don't see why we should take for granted that English FP would certainly be FP here in the Commons. Commons community is different, thanks to a strong multilingualism. villy 08:03, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Well, I feel foolish. Of course you're right; there is no reason they should be featured here automatically. Most of them will probably be featured eventually, just because they really are very nice, but they should go through the process like any other picture. I had become confused and thought that the Commons had not yet set up a FPC process (perhaps I was thinking of the picture of the day). --Andrew 06:12, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

All featured files from en are now on Commons. --Saperaud 22:49, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Subpages instead of templates

I notice this page uses a lot of Template namespace pages. For example, Template:Featured pictures, list, which links to Template:Featured pictures/Animals. I suggest these should be Commons namespace pages. They aren't really used as templates at all, except that Template:Featured pictures, list is included from the various translations of COM:FP. Any objections to moving these pages to the Commons namespace? User:dbenbenn 02:25, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

No objection. Can't really remember why I choose templates in the first place ... villy 03:00, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
I went ahead and did it. Next step is to do the same thing with Commons:Featured picture candidates and Commons:Picture of the day ... User:dbenbenn 00:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Un-nominated featured pictures

On February 4, 2005, User:MarkSweep created Template:Featured picture, then tagged 36 featured pictures from the English Wikipedia. These pictures were apparently never nominated at Commons:Featured picture candidates. Shall they remain featured? I expect most or all of them would pass FPC if nominated; is it worth the bother to put them through the formal nomination process? User:dbenbenn 21:41, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

I would go for either renominating them or tagging them as "featured on en" (or maybe both). There is also an ongoing discussion on this. But it clearly can't stay like this until a common solution for all featured pictures from all wikipedias has been found -- Gorgo 22:29, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
I just realised that none of these pictures where ever featured anywhere (I thought before that were fp from en). I left him a note on his user page, but I guess we have to remove the fp-status of these pictures completely. -- Gorgo 23:44, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Nuh-huh, they were nominated and went through the regular process. But, you may recall that before March of last year, the FPC pages were organized differently. A record of the nominations can be found on Template:Featured pictures candidates, list. Check the history. --MarkSweep 03:40, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
I have looked in the history. Can you point out where, for example, Image:Sake barrels.jpg was ever nominated? You tagged it as a featured picture on February 5, 2005, but the February 3, 2005 version of Template:Featured pictures candidates, list doesn't list it. Perhaps I'm looking in the wrong place? User:dbenbenn 04:41, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
I tagged every image that was listed on the February 4, 2005 revision of Commons:Featured pictures, list. The sake barrels picture received its featured status in November 2004. [1] [2] --MarkSweep 06:04, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for solving that problem, I'm probably going to create an archive page for these pictures so the nomination is nicely traceable. -- Gorgo 14:45, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
I created logfiles for November 2004 - February 2005 out of the history so there should be a link to the nomination on every featured picture candidate page now, like it's supposed to be. I hope I didn't miss any. -- Gorgo 23:52, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

RSS feed

Is there any way to get an RSS feed of this page?

-biggins

I also would like to know this... feed for all FPs would be nice. However, you definitely can get a feed for particular FP pages as an article history.--Kozuch (talk) 17:56, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

Jury

Who is the jury for new featured pictures? I would like to suggest this one: church in East Frisia, Germany. -- Simplicius 10:29, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Misuse of QI & FP tags?

(Also posted to Commons talk:Quality Images) Image:Il Vittoriano (particolare)14 11.jpg and Image:Il Vittoriano (particolare 2).jpg are tagged as quality image and featured picture, but I see no links to the evaluation pages of either group and it appears it was never submitted. Also added to Commons:Quality_images/Subject/Places by author. Anyone else care to check this. If I'm right, should anything be done apart from removing the tags? --Tony Wills 21:47, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Also Image:Palatino (Giardini Palatini dei Farnesi).jpg, Image:Arco di Costantino (particolare).jpg. looks to me like a misunderstanding of the tag usage. --Tony Wills 22:00, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I have removed the tags from all these images. I will post an explaination on his talk page --Tony Wills 22:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

1000FP

Hello,

Something interesting is coming up. It's still a few months away, but soon Commons will have one thousand Featured Pictures. That's pretty special, isn't it? :)

I just checked a couple of minutes ago and we have 816. So what kind of things could we do to celebrate having 1000 FPs? My ideas below. --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 06:32, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

  • press release, obviously :)
  • organise some kind of prize for the winning photograph/er? (maybe not that appropriate, also problematic if it's like a NASA photo)
    • We could just only open the prize draw to active editors who have featured pictures. That way we don't have to worry about picking someone who we cannot contact or is no longer active. Lcarsdata 07:55, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
      • Actually ignore that comment, I didn't read the thing properly. Lcarsdata 07:55, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
  • organise a lucky-draw prize kind of thing for Wikimedia editors who have contributed a FP? (their own work) then one FP = one entry in the "barrel" (maybe the Foundation offices would hold/draw an actual barrel for us! :)) something like this would be good to publicise now, so people who want to be considered still have lots of time to nominate FPs. and plus organise prizes of course. [does this idea make sense? I kinda like it :)]
  • organise some kind of commemmorative printed effort? /me looks at blurb.com longingly... we could print all the FPs, the Foundation could get some copies for promotional use, photographers could order themselves a copy to feel special (guess we'd need Foundation approval for this one - worth pursuing?)
    • This could also be a lucrative way to make some money ;) Lcarsdata 07:56, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
      • Coffee table book ? Sounds like a good idea. -- Bryan (talk to me) 09:28, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
        • possibly better and more realistic idea: we should sell a CD with all the images on it... that is much more do-able and perhaps more desirable too. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 13:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
          • Well... When I read this suggestion, I didn't think it a bad idea. What we need is someone to layout this thing in InDesign and then sell it through a Print on Demand publisher. It's worth exploring, I think. Do remember coffee table books can be expensive. We'd have to sort by topic, agree on which langues we'd add captions, etc. Think big and anything is possible. CDs are so... predictable! :) Siebrand 14:43, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
            • Excactly! also take a look at http://lulu.com/, which seems to offer printing on demand for acceptable prices. -- Bryan (talk to me) 14:58, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
              • Just a random paragraph from their website: Lulu.com partners with Getty Images to enable Lulu users to enhance their work with licensed photographs of Getty Images, while Lulu protects and compensates the copyright holders. Parts of three extended Getty Images photograph collection — Stockbyte, Digital Vision and Photodisc — will be available for Lulu.com users. Do you smell it too? Siebrand 15:10, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
                • I've been thinking some more about this idea in my car during a traffic jam, and I'm still enthousiastic about it. We simply HAVE TO create out coffee table book Wikimedia Commons Exposed: 1,5 million free images at your fingertips. Siebrand 22:53, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Commons:Coffee table book -- Bryan (talk to me) 09:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
  •  ??????
  • Perhaps make a photographic mosaic of the FPs, and sell it as a print and puzzle? -- Hmmwhatsthisdo (talk) 04:13, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

FP wallpaper

Be aware that we now have Category:Commons featured desktop backgrounds and Category:Commons featured widescreen desktop backgrounds for those who are interested. Please help change it to give it a Commons feel so it doesn't look exactly like Wikipedia featured desktop backgrounds :). --Digon3 talk 19:02, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Image:Tsunami by hokusai 19th century.jpg

That image was voted featured image in 2005. In 2006 a different version was uploaded using the same filename. Now all uses of the image has been replaced by Image:The Great Wave off Kanagawa.jpg, which is a duplicate of the file from 2006 (but not of the file from 2005). The featuredpicture template has also been moved to the description page of Image:The Great Wave off Kanagawa.jpg. What image is really the featured picture? Should Image:Tsunami by hokusai 19th century.jpg be reverted to the version from 2005? /81.231.248.85 08:11, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I think it has now been reverted (following a deletion/undeletion) and once the current deletion request is cleared it can be renamed. --Tony Wills 00:39, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Award for best picture

Hi,
Have you ever thought of handing out an award for the best picture of the year/of all times on commons? You could e.g. only nominate real pictures made by users with an account. It would be really nice, and cool to see the best of the best picture. Newspapers will maybe post the winning pictures, resulting in free publicity for wikipedia.
Richardprins 22:22, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

We have such a competition coming up: Commons:Picture of the Year/2007. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 00:28, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Chronological glintch?

This image, Image:Four pulleys.svg is a featured picture (with discussion and vote, etc.) and is not in the chronological list. What is the problem? --Berru 09:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Image:African penguins.jpg

This image shows up on Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds, but the description page makes no mention of its Featured status. Anrie 14:30, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

The nomination is here. It was also nominated for removing from FP, the decision was to keep it. So i think it should get the FP status in the summary. --AngMoKio 15:24, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:The Earth seen from Apollo 17.jpg

This image is listed as being an FP at Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy, but it doesn't have a tag on the image's description page. I can't find any link to a FP-nomination of delisting page. Anrie 16:23, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Moves from w:en (maybe others)

Just as a note, w:en has uses the template FeaturedPicture, Commons has a redirect to that template for FP pictures, so an FP from w:en that gets transfered from Commons will have the template in it and be marked as FP in Commons when it probably shouldn't. --Dori - Talk 15:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I also saw a duplicate FP (Image:Arc Triomphe-1.jpg when it should be just Image:Arc Triomphe.jpg). If someone is so inclined, it might be useful to do a search in all FPs that do not have a nomination page. Most of them will probably have the nomination page under some other name (e.g. edits) and in that case we can put in the parameter for the actual page. For the other ones we can remove the FP template as they're not FP. --Dori - Talk 15:42, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

And yet another possibility, for a while the subpages were under "Commons:Featured pictures candidates" whereas they are now (along with the template), under "Commons:Featured picture candidates" so many have broken nomination links because of that. --Dori - Talk 15:52, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Pic of the day 18-8-2008

A bug pissing... really great subject! will it ever be possible to select a less disgusting picture to show in each wikipedia's main page, by the way? We had something like 15 pics of bug out of 31 days in August... I think we shoul be more carefull choosing pics which may disgust the watcher --Sailko (talk) 14:09, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

    • This kind of beastly comments is not welcome here. Maybe you should be more carefull choosing the words ... and the place to use them. May I also suggest you use your fingers to help counting? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:57, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Discussion moved to Commons talk:Featured picture candidates -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 17:42, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

File:Boxing080905 photoshop.jpg

This is listed as being a featured picture, but there are no links from any FP nomination to it or a template identifying it as such. Anrie (talk) 15:39, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

  •   Info - It is indeed a FP, but in the English WP, not in Commons -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:05, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Then why is it listed under Commons:Featured pictures? Anrie (talk) 18:36, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

File:USAF F-15C fires AIM-7 Sparrow 2.jpg

This particular picture is listed as being a Featured Picture, but is of inferior quality, and does not have a nomination. In addition, it is listed as the POTD for 23rd June, 2006, but a quick check of the records reveals that it wasn't (This one was). This information was added by User:Athaenara in Feb 2009. What's the go? Sarcastic ShockwaveLover (talk) 12:11, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Looks like the templates were copied over from en:wp where it was featured, I have cleaned up the page. It was indeed POTD on en:wp. --Tony Wills (talk) 02:57, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Making pictures featured images

How do you make a picture a featured image candidate? --154.20.103.216 02:52, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Movie for Wikipedia

I have uploaded a short featured movie for Wikipedia: link here --TudorTulok (talk) 18:49, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Two original contributions and the rest are old pictures. Not very representative of FP. --Dschwen (talk) 22:16, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Mailman not seeing commons FP list anymore?

I just noticed that the Mailman list has no entries for March '10. Is anyone aware of this? Hmmwhatsthisdo (talk) 03:04, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Questions about File:Different Slant on Orion (495636660).jpg

This image was created from this

  • Should there be source link to Hubblesite original,
  • As its a manipulated image should it be in Orion Categories
  • How does a PD-NASA licensed image become CC-by,
  • Is it even in scope,

I ask this during the Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Different Slant on Orion (495636660).jpg but there was no response Gnangarra 12:11, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Featured pictures

Please remove FP status from all my images. I regret having ever contributed here. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:44, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that's helpful, and I'm sad that you're gone. But I don't have the call on this. fetchcomms 03:03, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

10 million files

Commons is approaching 10 million files, and should get there in within the week. There's a draft release in progress at Commons:Press releases/10M. I think it would be appropriate for some description of FP's work to be there.--Nilfanion (talk) 10:55, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

Is there a way to remove a picture from featured pictures list?

Thanks for not sharing... how does one go about de-featuring an image? --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:35, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

One visits Commons:Featured_picture_candidates#Featured_picture_delisting_candidates --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:47, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Preponderance of insects

The "Animals" section shows only insects as examples, and of those, two are dragonflies.

I'd really like to see a more representative selection of the subsections. Perhaps one from each of: arthropods, fish, birds, mammals? -Miskaton (talk) 20:19, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

These are just the last four promoted FP of animals and will change dinamically. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:44, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Categories

Please take a look at: Commons:Village_pump#QI/VI/FP_categories. Thanks - A.Savin 11:17, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Circa 1890? Seriously?

File:Card puncher - NARA - 513295.jpg
"A woman using a keypunch to tabulate the United States Census, circa 1890."
And we all accept that? We even make it a picture of the day, without any comment on the date?
The full description in the archives at least indicates 1890 - 1950. This picture clearly is much closer to 1950 than it is to 1890.
Whaledad (talk) 19:29, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. As a rough guess I'd say this picture was made in the 1930s or 1940s, but certainly not in 1890. Trijnsteltalk 19:39, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Category astronomy

I find unfortunate that the images used in the display page for the category astronomy gives 3 videos, with very similar visual experience. This page is meant to navigate quickly within categories, but also to give an idea of what is within the categories. The astronomy category contains great stuff. Could not it be better displayed with more visual and non similar examples ? Anthere (talk)

Two new focus-stacked images

Just bringing these to your attention. Not sure if they're exceptional by your standards, but they blow up nicely.    

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:23, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Valmy battle.jpg needs to be reviewed

This file needs a review as seemingly nobody checked that User:Jack Bufalo Head uploaded a version of a different painter. See my comments on the disc concerning related articles and file description. -- Хрюша ?? 09:29, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

File:11-09-fotofluege-cux-allg-25a.jpg

Hi @ all!

This image has been promoted to a featured image with the version from 4 September 2011. The version of 4 September 2011 has a lower resolution and quite sharp. In 2013 the creator of this photo uploaded a higher resoluted version over it without any community consens. The recent version is surely not a featured picture because it is very blurry and unsharp. Is that ok to act like this? 178.2.53.107 17:30, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

What you said makes no sense at all. Both images have pretty much the exact same resolution. The second image has a considerably higher pixel count. That does not add much new detail, but it certainly cannot make the image worse. I wish people would get a grip on the concept of resolution and wouldn't just mindlessly count pixels and look at the images at 100% magnification. --Dschwen (talk) 21:38, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

0.0003% ?

"5,098 of such images in the Commons repository which is roughly 0.0003% of the available images (16848753)"? Someone should correct that statement. Kruusamägi (talk) 01:30, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Picture of the day - other Wikipedias

Hello,

I noticed that one of my images was promoted to 'Featured Photo' and was elected 'Image of the day' on August 19th, 2011 on Hebrew Wikipedia. Is this worthy of mention, and if so, how would I go about tagging it on English Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons? Thanks for any insight, cheers. THEPROMENADER 07:01, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

I may have answered my own question: the Template:Assessments. Unfortunately I can't link to the Hebrew FA Nomination Page using the 'henom=' attribute - I'm sure that it's my English input messing things up. Can anyone help? Thank you…ThePromenader (talk) 09:13, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
Return to the project page "Featured pictures/Archive 1".