Commons:Valued image candidates

Skip to image nominations

Skip to most valued reviews

Skip to set nominations

These are the candidates to become valued images. Please note that this is not the same as featured pictures or quality images. If you simply want some feedback on your pictures you can get that at photography critiques.

Single images can be proposed for valued image (VI) status. Candidates must be proposed as being the most valuable of all Commons' images within a specified scope. Judging is carried out according to the valued image criteria.

A Most Valued Review (MVR) is opened where there are two or more candidates competing within essentially the same scope.

The rules for promotion can be found at Commons:Valued image candidates/Promotion rules.

An image which has previously been declined can be renominated within the same scope only if the issues leading to the original decline have been addressed. Previously nominated images that were closed as "undecided" can be renominated at any time. Once a candidate achieves VI or VIS status it can normally be demoted only if some better candidate replaces it during an MVR.

If you would like to nominate an image for VI status, please do so following the instructions below. If you are proposing a better candidate within essentially the same scope as an image which already has VI status, please open an MVR.

Valued Image links:

How to nominate an image for VI status

Nominations will be evaluated using the criteria listed at Commons:Valued image criteria. Please read those criteria before submitting an image to help cut down on the number of candidates that have a low chance of success. Make sure you understand the concept of scope and how to choose the correct scope for your nomination.

Please make sure that your proposed image fulfills all of the necessary criteria before nominating it. For example, if it needs to be geocoded, do that in advance. If no appropriate categories exist, create and link them beforehand. Although some reviewers may help by fixing minor issues during the review process, it is your responsibility as nominator to ensure your image ticks all the necessary boxes before you propose it. If you nominate an image that ignores one of the criteria, don't be surprised if it fails VI review.

Adding a new nomination (image)

Step 1: Copy the image name into this box (excluding the File: prefix), at the end of the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Valued image candidates/My-image-filename.jpg. Then click on the "Create new nomination" button.

Step 2: Follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save the resulting VIC subpage.

Step 3: Manually add the candidate image towards the end of Commons:Valued image candidates/candidate list (under the heading "New valued image nominations"), as the last parameter in the VICs template. Click here, and append the following line as the last parameter of the relevant section:

|My-image-filename.jpg

so that it looks like this:

{{VICs
 ...
 |My-image-filename.jpg
}}

and save the candidate list.

Renomination

Declined VICs can be renominated by any registered user, but only after one or more of the root cause(s) leading to a decline has/have been addressed. Undecided VICs can be renominated as is although it is still recommended to consider and fix issue(s) which may have hindered a promotion of the candidate in the previous review.

Besides fixing issues with the previous nomination the following procedure shall be followed upon renomination.

Step 1: Edit the candidate subpage you intend to renominate. All declined and undecided VICs are placed in either Category:Declined valued image candidates, or Category:Undecided valued image candidates and sorted by the date of the previous nomination.

Step 2: Replace the previous nomination date and time by pasting in

|date={{subst:VI-time}}

Step 3: Replace the "undecided" or "declined" status with "nominated" (or "discussed" if you intend to add it to a Most Valued Review).

Step 4: If the previous nominator was a different user replace the nominator parameter with

|nominator=~~~

Step 5: If the candidate does not already have an archive link to previous reviews: Create one using the following procedure.

Cut the text in the previous review section (leave the closing braces "}}")
replace the review parameter with

|review=
{{subst:VIC-archive}}
}}

Save the page.
There is now a red link to Previous reviews. Click the link to create the archive subpage and paste in the previous reviews.
Save the previous reviews archive page

Step 6: Add the candidate to the candidates list.

How to open a Most Valued Review

There must be at least two candidates competing within essentially the same scope to open an MVR. Each needs its own VIC subpage, which should be created as above if it does not already exist, but with status set to "discussed". Then, add the following section at the end of the page Commons:Valued image candidates/Most valued review candidate list:

=== Scope ===
{{VICs
  |candidate1.jpg
  |candidate2.jpg
}}

where Scope is the scope of both images, and candidate1.jpg and candidate2.jpg are the respective candidates. If need be, also remove the relevant image(s) from the list in Pending valued image candidates

If one of the candidates is an existing VI within essentially the same scope, the original VIC subpage is re-opened for voting by changing its status to status=discussed and new reviews are appended to the original VIC subpage. However, any original votes are not counted within the MVR.

The status parameter of each candidate should remain set to "discussed" while the MVR is ongoing.

How to review the candidates

How to review an image

Any registered user can review the valued image candidates. Comments are welcome from everyone, but neither the nominator nor the original image author may vote (that does not exclude voting from users who have edited the image with a view to improving it).

Nominations should be evaluated using the criteria listed at Commons:Valued image criteria. Please read those and the page on scope carefully before reviewing. Reviewing here is a serious business, and a reviewer who just breezes by to say "I like it!" is not adding anything of value. You need to spend the time to check the nomination against every one of the six VI criteria, and you also need to carry out searches to satisfy yourself on the "most valuable" criterion.

Review procedure

On the review page the image is presented in the review size. You are welcome to view the image in full resolution by following the image links, but bear in mind that it is the appearance of the image at review size which matters.
Check the candidate carefully against each of the six VI criteria. The criteria are mandatory, and to succeed the candidate has to satisfy all six.
Use the where used field, if provided, to study the current usage of the candidate in Wikimedia projects. If you find usage of interest do add relevant links to the nomination.
Look for other images of the same kind of subject by following the links to relevant categories in the image page, and to any Commons galleries.
- If you find another image which is already a VI within essentially the same scope, the candidate and the existing VI should be moved to Most Valued Review (MVR) to determine which one is the more valued.
- If you find one or more other images which in your opinion are equally or more valued images within essentially the same scope, you should nominate these images as well and move all the candidates to an MVR.
Once you have made up your mind, edit the review page and add your vote or comment to the review parameter as follows:

You type	You get	When
`*{{Comment}} My Comment. -- ~~~~`	Comment My comment. -- Example	You have a comment.
`*{{Info}} My information. -- ~~~~`	Info My information. -- Example	You have information.
`*{{Neutral}} Reason for neutral vote. -- ~~~~`	Neutral Reason for neutral vote. -- Example	You are uncertain or wish to record a neutral vote.
`*{{Oppose}} Reason for opposing vote. -- ~~~~`	Oppose Reason for opposing vote. -- Example	You think that the candidate fails one or more of the six mandatory criteria.
`*{{Question}} My question. -- ~~~~`	Question My question. -- Example	You have a question.
`*{{Support}} Reason for supporting. -- ~~~~`	Support Reason for supporting. -- Example	You think that the candidate meets all of the six mandatory criteria.

If the nomination fails one of the six criteria, but in a way that can be fixed, you can optionally let the nominator know what needs to be done using the {{VIF}} template.

Your comment goes immediately before the final closing braces "}}" on the page.

Finally, change the status of the nomination if appropriate:
- status=nominated When no votes or only neutral votes have been added to the review field (blue image border).
- status=supported When there is at least one {{Support}} vote but no {{Oppose}} votes (light green image border).
- status=opposed When there is at least one {{Oppose}} vote but no {{Support}} votes (red image border).
- status=discussed When there is at least one {{Oppose}} vote and one {{Support}} vote (yellow image border).

Remember the criteria: 1. Most valuable 2. Suitable scope 3. Illustrates well 4. Fully described 5. Geocoded 6. Well categorized.

Changes in scope during the review period

The nominator is allowed to make changes in scope as the review proceeds, for example in response to reviewer votes or comments. Whenever a scope is changed the nominator should post a signed comment at the bottom of the review area using {{VIC-scope-change|old scope|new scope|--~~~~}}, and should also leave a note on the talk page of all existing voters asking them to reconsider their vote. A support vote made before the change of scope is not counted unless it is reconfirmed afterwards; an oppose vote is counted unless it is changed or withdrawn.

You can submit new nominations starting on COM:VIC.

Pending valued image candidates

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache

55,736 closed valued image candidates
Closed as		Nominations
Promoted	50,136 (90%)
Undecided	3,103 (5.6%)
Declined	2,497 (4.5%)

New valued image nominations

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2024-07-16 05:00 (UTC)
Scope: decorative opening in the wall of the courtyard. (The Hidden Kingdom of Ming in the (Hortus Haren Groningen)
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 05:03, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Zzzs (talk) on 2024-07-18 05:28 (UTC)
Scope: Psephotellus chrysopterygius (Golden-shouldered parrot), mixed pairs
Comment Should we have VIs of pairs of (sexually dimophic) animals. Probably. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] Yes. Zzzs (talk) 11:02, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] Comment Is there something wrong with this nomination too? Four days and no votes. --Zzzs (talk) 15:02, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] Comment I would respect Archaeodontosaurus's views on this. I have no strong views either way. The question must be - is having a pair any more valuable than two images of a male and a female (unless they are feeding, copulating etc.) Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:03, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] @Charlesjsharp Well, there's a few similar VIs, but with ducks so I'm inclined to say yes. Zzzs (talk) 18:38, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] Support This face to face is interesting, there is a courtship display there, with the male courting. The image is beautiful. By the absurd: there is no reason why it should not be acceptable in VI. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:00, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 05:03, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Davekern (talk) on 2024-07-18 15:01 (UTC)
Scope: Views of Minato, Tokyo
Used in: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minato,_Tokyo
Comment Must connect the scope to the category or gallery that contains the image --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:21, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] Comment The beginning of the scope could be: Views of Minato, Tokyo. But we must also add the sense of orientation of sight. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:05, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] I've replaced the scope to Views of Minato, Tokyo. This was taken in Shibuya Stream - is there a specific category that would be better suited? There's Views from Shibuya Stream, but doesn't seem as well suited as Minato specific. Davekern (talk) 15:16, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Thi (talk) on 2024-07-18 15:19 (UTC)
Scope: Reconstruction of statue of Epicurus, Göttingen University
Used in: de:Epikur, en:Epicurus, es:Epicureísmo
Support Useful and used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:23, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 05:03, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Thi (talk) on 2024-07-18 15:29 (UTC)
Scope: Martin Luther by Lucas Cranach (I), 1528 – Veste Coburg
Used in: en:Germany, en:Martin Luther, en:Lutheranism, es:Reforma protestante
Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:27, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 05:03, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2024-07-19 04:29 (UTC)
Scope: Crinkle crankle wall in Ecokathedraal (Mildam) by an unknown artist.
Comment The scope is too broad, another image is already nominated, File:Ecokathedraal, 29-04-2024 (actm.) 01.jpg in this scop. --Pierre André ^(talk) 09:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)][reply] Comment Crinkle crankle wall, in Ecokathedraal (Mildam), would be better to me --Pierre André ^(talk) 15:34, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] Answer: Thank you for your comment. This scope was recommended in my other nominations about the Ecocathedral. Everyone is allowed to build and create “sculptures” in this “Ecocathedral” alone or in groups. These are all separate sculptures. I offer here what I consider the most beautiful buildings.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] Would you like me to use your chope?--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:24, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] I think it's better to use my chope Crinkle crankle wall in Ecokathedraal (Mildam), by an unknown artist. Best regards --Pierre André ^(talk) 16:28, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] Done, category adjusted. Thanks for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:36, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] Support Best in scope OK for me Thank you.. --Pierre André ^(talk) 14:33, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 05:03, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-07-19 05:07 (UTC)
Scope: Donna con sigaretta (Woman with cigarette) by Lino Selvatico
Support Useful and used --Pierre André ^(talk) 08:54, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-07-19 05:16 (UTC)
Scope: Adolfo Wildt - Un Rosario MCMXV - Museo d'arte moderna (Venice)
Support --Thi (talk) 10:35, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-07-19 05:15 (UTC)
Scope: La marchesa Casati come capo Sioux 1925 - Alberto Martini
Support Useful and used --Pierre André ^(talk) 08:44, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Sebring12Hrs (talk) on 2024-07-19 08:16 (UTC)
Scope: Portal of Sant'Atanasio (Rome)
Support Best in scope --Pierre André ^(talk) 08:47, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Atudu (talk) on 2024-07-19
Scope: Callerebia narasingha (Mottled Argus) - ventral
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:07, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review. May be closed as Promoted if the last vote was added no later than 05:03, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Martinvl (talk) on 2024-07-19 15:32 (UTC)
Scope: Blending of Moorish and Christian architecture in the Mosque-Cathedral of Córdoba
Reason: This UNESCO-listed site is probably the world's best example of a building that has retained both the Moorish architecture and Christian architecture. I believe this to be the best image in Commons that illustrates how the two architectural styles are blended. SInce it was last submitted, I have fine-tuned the image perspective. -- Martinvl (talk)
Previous reviews Support --Thi (talk) 09:10, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

}}

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: ReneeWrites (talk) on 2024-07-19 14:37 (UTC)
Scope: Engelbert I, Count of Nassau-Siegen
Used in: Engelbert I of Nassau
Comment The scope is too broad and We must connect the scope to the category or gallery that contains the image.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:08, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] @Archaeodontosaurus: I linked the Commons category. I'd like to choose this category over Grafmonument Engelbrecht I van Nassau because this image focuses on Engelbert (and his wife Joanna), who can be seen kneeling in the front, rather than the monument in its entirety. ReneeWrites (talk) 07:16, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Gzen92 (talk) on 2024-07-19 17:59 (UTC)
Scope: Chapelle Saint-Wendelin, Niedermorschwihr
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:09, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Gzen92 (talk) on 2024-07-19 17:58 (UTC)
Scope: Église Notre-Dame-de-l'Assomption de Wintzenheim
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Gzen92 (talk) on 2024-07-19 17:58 (UTC)
Scope: Chapelle Notre-Dame-de-l'Assomption et Sainte-Thérèse-de-Lisieux de Logelbach
Support Useful & Used --Pierre André ^(talk) 08:40, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Gzen92 (talk) on 2024-07-19 17:59 (UTC)
Scope: World War I and II memorial in Logelbach
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:12, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2024-07-20 04:21 (UTC)
Scope: Stained glass window in the Kapelle St. Johannes Baptista (Vulpera) Biblical scene.
Comment It is difficult to identify this biblical scene. It is essential to be able to differentiate the images otherwise the scope is too broad.--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:15, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] Answer: I had hoped you knew what the picture represents. I myself thought of Doubting Thomas.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:15, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] Support Even if it's not obvious, it's plausible. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:05, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] Thank you for explaining.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:39, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-07-20 04:43 (UTC)
Scope: Mattina d'estate‎ (Summer morning) by Ludovico Pio Barlaffa (Pinacoteca Querini Stampalia)
Support Useful and used --Pierre André ^(talk) 08:48, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] Question Just worried Archaeodontosaurus that the lighting has overexposed the left hand side but nothing to compare this image with. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:32, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] Comment It's a museum that I really like, but the lighting in certain rooms could be improved...--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 04:40, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-07-20 04:46 (UTC)
Scope: Giovanni Boldini - Portrait of The Marchesa Luisa Casati - Roma, Galleria Nazionale d'Arte Moderna - Preparatory drawing
Support Best in scope --Pierre André ^(talk) 08:43, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-07-20 04:49 (UTC)
Scope: Notre-Dame-de-la-Platé church in Castres - The entrance porch
Support Useful and used --Pierre André ^(talk) 08:51, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Pierre André ^(talk) on 2024-07-20 10:47 (UTC)
Scope: Plaques de cocher Flers (Le Breucq), view from Rue Jean Jaurès
Used in: Flers-Breucq
Support Useful and used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:26, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-07-21 04:57 (UTC)
Scope: *Arturo Martini - Il Piave* in Pinacoteca Querini Stampalia Venice**
Support useful. Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:32, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-07-21 04:58 (UTC)
Scope: Notre-Dame-de-la-Platé church in Castres - The nave and the choir
Support useful. Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:31, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-07-21 05:04 (UTC)
Scope: Ritratto dell'attrice Virginia Reider - Giacomo Grosso
Support useful. Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:31, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2024-07-21 07:27 (UTC)
Scope: Gyps africanus (White-backed vulture) showing white back
Reason: many images in many categories, but I couldn't find a better one that shows the white back.> -- Charlesjsharp (talk)
Support Useful & used. The white spot was the deciding factor.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:04, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Pierre André ^(talk) on 2024-07-21 14:41 (UTC)
Scope: Plaques de cocher in Lille, view from rue de Gand
Used in: Global usage
Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:59, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Pierre André ^(talk) on 2024-07-21 15:48 (UTC)
Scope: Plaques de cocher in Bellaing, view from Rue Jean Jaurès
Best in Scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:12, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2024-07-21 15:51 (UTC)
Scope: Buitenaanzicht van de kapel van de Naadloze mantel van Jezus, Kathedraal van Trier.
Comment This only shows a small part of the north side of the cathedral - a better scope would be "Exterior view of the CHapel of the Category:Seamless robe of Jesus, Trier Cathedral" which is what the image depicts. Martinvl (talk) 20:45, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] @Martinvl: Done. Category and description adjusted. Thank you. for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:37, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-07-22 04:54 (UTC)
Scope: Il palazzo Vendramin Calergi sul Canal Grande‎ by Carlo Grubacs (Pinacoteca Querini Stampalia)
Support best in scope.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-07-22 04:59 (UTC)
Scope: **Oedemera nobilis male on Knautia arvensi**
Support Useful & used.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:41, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Archaeodontosaurus (talk) on 2024-07-22 05:03 (UTC)
Scope: Scorcio di Campo San Giovanni e Paolo a Venezia (Glimpse of Campo San Giovanni e Paolo in Venice) by Erma Zago (Pinacoteca Querini Stampalia)
Support --Thi (talk) 09:24, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Charlesjsharp (talk) on 2024-07-22 08:39 (UTC)
Scope: Merops Bullockoides (White-fronted bee-eater) in flight
Open for review.

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Famberhorst (talk) on 2024-07-22 16:37 (UTC)
Scope: *Flower of one Succisa pratensis* devil’s-Bit.**
Best in Scope --Terragio67 (talk) 18:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Palu (talk) on 2024-07-22 19:17 (UTC)
Scope: Rye fields in the Czech Republic; Fields in Nature park Džbán
Reason: I am new in valuable, featured or good pictures, so maybe I am wrong, but maybe this picture will be good enough? Sorry for my poor experiences with this procedure :) Thank you for your patience -- Palu (talk)
Open for review.

Review it! (edit)
Nominated by: Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) on 2024-07-23 04:32 (UTC)
Scope: Detail of the monumental work of art Deltawerk // Breakwater.
Open for review.

Pending Most valued review candidates

Trithemis annulata (Violet dropwing) female, lateral view

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Zzzs (talk) on 2024-06-17 21:54 (UTC)
Scope: Trithemis annulata (Violet dropwing) female, lateral view
Support Useful & Used --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply] `Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:20, 14 September 2021 (UTC)`[reply]
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 05:03, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

Review Page (edit)
Nominated by: Zzzs (talk) on 2024-06-17 21:53 (UTC)
Scope: Trithemis annulata (Violet dropwing) female, lateral view
Open for review. May be closed if the last vote was added no later than 05:03, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

To initiate a most valued review, please go to the dedicated MVR sub page.

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache

All open candidates in an MVR have to have their status set as "discussed" while the review is ongoing. Only when all candidates are due for closure can the MVR be closed.

Refer to Most valued review, the promotion rules and the instructions for closure for details.

Pending valued image set candidates

This section has been deactivated because of technical issues. Please do not add any VI set candidate.