Wikimedia Commons

Commons:Featured picture candidates

Shortcut
This project page in other languages:

Other featured candidates:

Media 

Skip to current candidates Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates

Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures.

Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 and current month.

For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election.

Formal things edit

Nominating edit

Guidelines for nominators edit

Please read the complete guidelines before nominating.

This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:

  • Licensing – Images licensed with solely "GFDL" or "GFDL and an NC-only license" are not acceptable due the restrictions placed on re-use by these licenses.
  • Resolution – Raster images of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are strong mitigating reasons. This does not apply to vector graphics (SVGs).
    • Graphics on Commons are not only viewed on conventional computer screens. They may be used in high-resolution print versions, and the images may be cropped to focus on portions of the image. See Commons:Why we need high resolution media for more information.
  • Scans – While not official policy, Help:Scanning provides advice on the preparation of various types of images that may be useful.
  • General quality – pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality.
  • Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer. Digital manipulation for the purpose of correcting flaws in an image is generally acceptable, provided it is limited, well-done, and not intended to deceive.
    • For photographs, typical acceptable manipulations include cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and color/exposure correction. More extensive manipulations, such as removal of distracting background elements, should be clearly described in the image text, by means of the {{Retouched picture}} template. Undescribed or mis-described manipulations which cause the main subject to be misrepresented are never acceptable. For images made from more than one photo, you can use the {{Panorama}} or {{Focus stacked image}} templates.
    • For historic images, acceptable manipulations might include digitally fixing rips, removal of stains, cleanup of dirt, and, for mass-produced artworks such as engravings, removal of flaws inherent to the particular reproduction, such as over-inking. Careful color adjustments may be used to bring out the original work from the signs of ageing, though care should be taken to restore a natural appearance. The original artistic intent should be considered when deciding whether it is appropriate to make a change. Edits to historic material should be documented in detail within the file description, and an unedited version should be uploaded and cross linked for comparison.
  • Value – our main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that:
    • almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others,
    • night-shots are pretty but normally more details can be shown on pictures taken at daytime,
    • beautiful does not always mean valuable.
Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents edit

There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolors, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject.

Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the original painting are generally not considered featurable.

Works that may be scanned include most works created by processes that allow for mass distribution − for instance, illustrations published with novels. For these, it is generally accepted that a certain amount of extra manipulation is permissible to remove flaws inherent to one copy of the work, since the particular copy – of which hundreds, or even thousands of copies also exist – is not so important as the work itself.

Works created to serve a purpose include diagrams, scientific illustrations, and demonstrations of contemporary artistic styles. For these, the main requirement is that they serve their purpose well.

Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable:

  • Notable in its own right: Works by major artists, or works that are otherwise notable, such as the subjects of a controversy.
  • Of high artistic merit: Works which, while not particularly well known, are nonetheless wonderful examples of their particular type or school of art.
  • Of high historic merit: The historical method values very early illustrations of scenes and events over later ones. Hence, a work of poor quality depicting a contemporaneous historical event can be nonetheless important, even if the artistic merit is relatively low. Likewise, scans or photographs of important documents – which may not be at all artistic – nonetheless may be highly valuable if the documents are historically significant. The reason for the image's historical importance should be briefly stated in the nomination, for those reviewers unfamiliar with the subject.
  • Of high illustrative merit: Works that illustrate or help explain notable subjects, for instance, illustrations of books, scientific subjects, or technical processes. The amount of artistic merit required for these will vary by subject, but, for instance, an illustration that makes the working of a complicated piece of machinery very clear need not be notable as a piece of artwork as well, whereas an illustration for a book might well be expected to reach much higher artistic standards.

Digital restorations must also be well documented. An unedited version of the image should be uploaded locally, when possible, and cross-linked from the file description page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced."

Photographs edit

On the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.

  • Focus – every important object in the picture should normally be sharp.
  • Exposure refers to the shutter diaphragm combination that renders an image with a tonal curve that ideally is able to represent in acceptable detail shadows and highlights within the image. This is called latitude. Images can be on the low side of the tonal curve (low range), the middle (middle range) or high side (upper range). Lack of shadow detail is not necessarily a negative characteristic. In fact, it can be part of the desired effect. Burned highlights in large areas are a distracting element.
  • Composition refers to the arrangement of the elements within the image. The "Rule of thirds" is one useful guideline. Horizons should almost never be placed in the middle, where they "cut" the image in half. Often, a horizon creating a top or bottom third of the space works better. The main idea is to use space to create a dynamic image.
    • Foreground and background – foreground and background objects may be distracting. You should check that something in front of the subject doesn't hide important elements and that something in background doesn't spoil the composition (for example that the streetlight doesn't "stand" on someone's head).
  • Movement control refers to the manner in which motion is represented in the image. Motion can be frozen or blurred. Neither one is better than the other. It is the intention of representation. Movement is relative within the objects of the image. For example, photographing a race car that appears frozen in relation to the background does not give us a sense of speed or motion, so technique dictates to represent the car in a frozen manner but with a blurred background, thus creating the sense of motion, this is called "panning". On the other hand, representing a basketball player in a high jump frozen in relation to everything else, due to the "unnatural" nature of the pose would be a good photograph.
  • Depth of field (DOF) refers to the area in focus in front of and beyond main subject. Depth of field is chosen according to the specific needs of every picture. Large or small DOF can either way add or subtract to the quality of the image. Low depth of field can be used to bring attention to the main subject, separating it from the general environment. High depth of field can be used to emphasize space. Short focal length lenses (wide angles) yield large DOF, and vice versa, long focal lenses (telephotos) have shallow DOF. Small apertures yield large DOF and conversely, large apertures yield shallow DOF.

On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, color, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.

  • Shape refers to the contour of the main subjects.
  • Volume refers to the three dimensional quality of the object. This is accomplished using side light. Contrary to general belief, front lighting is not the best light. It tends to flatten subject. Best light of day is early morning or late afternoon.
  • Color is important. Oversaturated colors are not good.
  • Texture refers to the quality of the surface of the subject. It is enhanced by side lighting… it is the "feel" to the touch.
  • Perspective refers to the "angle" accompanied by lines that disappear into a vanishing point that may or may not be inside the image.
  • Balance refers to the arrangement of subjects within the image that can either give equal weight or appear to be heavier on one side.
  • Proportion refers to the relation of size of objects in picture. Generally, we tend to represent small objects small in relation to others, but a good technique is to represent small objects large contrary to natural size relationship. For example, a small flower is given preponderance over a large mountain…. This is called inversion of scales.
Not all elements must be present. Some photographs can be judged on individual characteristics, that is, an image can be about color or texture, or color AND texture, etc.
  • Noise refers to unwanted corruption of color brightness and quality and can be caused by underexposure. It is not a desirable quality and can be grounds for opposition.
  • Symbolic meaning or relevance … Opinion wars can begin here … A bad picture of a very difficult subject is better than a good picture of an ordinary subject. A good picture of a difficult subject is an extraordinary photograph.
Images can be culturally biased by the photographer and/or the observer. The meaning of the image should be judged according to the cultural context of the image, not by the cultural context of the observer. An image "speaks" to people, and it has the capacity to evoke emotion such as tenderness, rage, rejection, happiness, sadness, etc. Good photographs are not limited to evoking pleasant sensations …

You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating.

Video and audio edit

Please nominate videos, sounds, music, etc. at Commons:Featured media candidates.

Set nominations edit

If a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set. A set should fall under one of the following types:

  • Faithful digital reproductions of works notable in their own right, which the original author clearly intended to be viewed as a set. Examples: pages in a pamphlet, crops (puzzle pieces) of a prohibitively large scan, a pair of pendant paintings. Not acceptable: Arbitrary selection of sample works by an artist.
  • A sequence of images showing the passage of time. They could depict frames of a moving/changing object or a static object during different times of day or different seasons. Examples: diagrams illustrating a process, steps of a dance, metamorphosis of an insect, maps/drawings/photos of the same subject over the years (frame of view should be more or less the same).
  • A group of images depicting the same subject from different viewpoints, preferably taken under the same lighting conditions when possible. Examples: Exterior and interior of a building, different facades of a building, different interior views, obverse and inverse of a banknote/coin. Not acceptable: A selection of different rooms in a skyscraper, the facade of a church plus an organ, any images of fundamentally different scopes.
  • A group of images which show all possible variations of a particular class of object. Examples: Male and female versions of an animal (preferably in the same setting), all known species of a genus. Not acceptable: A few breeds of cats (unless they share a defining characteristic and represent all possible examples of that).

Simple tutorial for new users edit

Tutorial: Nominate on COM:FPC
How to nominate in 8 simple steps

STEP 1

  • STEP 1

    STEP 1


STEP 2

  • STEP 2

    STEP 2


STEP 3

  • STEP 3

    STEP 3


STEP 4

  • STEP 4

    STEP 4


STEP 5

  • STEP 5

    STEP 5


STEP 6

  • STEP 6

    STEP 6


STEP 7

  • STEP 7

    STEP 7


STEP 8

  • STEP 8 (last step)

    STEP 8 (last step)

NOTE: You don't need to worry if you are not sure, other users will try their best to help you.

Adding a new nomination edit

If you believe that you have found or created an image that could be considered valuable, with appropriate image description and licensing, then do the following.

Step 1: copy the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg. Then click on the "create new nomination" button.

All single files:

For renominations, simply add /2 after the filename. For example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2

All set nomination pages should begin "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/", e.g. "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/My Nomination".


Step 2: follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save that page.

Step 3: manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list: Click here, and add the following line to the TOP of the nominations list:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg}}

Galleries and FP categories: Please add a gallery page and section heading from the list at Commons FP galleries. Write the code as Page name#Section heading. For example: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports An image will only appear ONE time in the galleries. After a successful nomination, the image can be placed in several of the Featured pictures categories.

Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify them using {{subst:FPC-notice|Your image filename.jpg}} -- ~~~~.

Note: Do not add an 'Alternative' image when you create a nomination. Selecting the best image is part of the nomination process. Alternatives are for a different crop or post-processing of the original image, or a closely related image from the same photo session (limited to 1 per nomination), if they are suggested by voters.

Voting edit

Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for their own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed.

You may use the following templates:

  • {{Support}} ( Support),
  • {{Oppose}} ( Oppose),
  • {{Neutral}} ( Neutral),
  • {{Comment}} ( Comment),
  • {{Info}} ( Info),
  • {{Question}} ( Question),
  • {{Request}} ( Request).

You may indicate that the image has no chance of success with the template {{FPX|reason - ~~~~}}, where reason explains why the image is clearly unacceptable as a FP. The template can only be used when there are no support votes other than the one from the nominator.

A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above.

Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:

  • No reason
  • "I don't like it" and other empty assessments
  • "You can do better" and other criticisms of the author/nominator rather than the image

Remember also to put your signature (~~~~).

Featured picture delisting candidates edit

Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}}  Keep It deserves to remain a featured picture
{{Delist}}  Delist It does not deserve to be a featured picture anymore.

This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}}  Keep Do not replace the old image with the new image as a FP.
{{Delistandreplace}}  Delist and replace Replace the current FP with the proposed replacement.

If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box:


In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include:

  • Information on the origin of the image (creator, uploader);
  • A link to the original FP nomination (it will appear under "Links" on the image description page);
  • Your reasons for nominating the image and your username.

After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list.

As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the original creator, uploader(s), and nominator with a link to the delisting candidate. {{subst:FPC-notice-removal}} can be used for this purpose.

Featured picture candidate policy edit

General rules edit

  1. The voting period is 9 complete days counted from the nomination. After the end of this period the result will be determined. Votes added on day 10 and after are not counted.
  2. Nominations by anonymous contributors are welcome
  3. Contributions to discussion by anonymous contributors are welcome
  4. Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Exception: registered users can always vote in their own nominations no matter the account age and number of edits.
  5. Nominations do not count as votes. Support must be explicitly stated.
  6. Nominators and authors can withdraw their nominated pictures at any time. This is done by adding the following template: {{Withdraw}} ~~~~. Also, remember that if more than one version is nominated, you should explicitly state which version you are withdrawing.
  7. Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project.
  8. Rules of the 5th day based on vote counts on day number 5 (day of nomination + 5)
    1. Pictures are speedy declined if they have no support (apart from the nominator).
    2. Pictures are speedy promoted if they have 10 support votes or more and no oppose votes. (Note that if it takes more than five days to reach this threshold, the picture can be promoted as soon as it is reached.)
    3. Once either speedy criterion is reached, the voting period is considered closed, and no more votes may be added.
  9. Pictures tagged {{FPX}} may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied, provided there are no support votes other than that of the nominator.
  10. Pictures tagged {{FPD}} (FP-Denied) may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied.
  11. Only two active nominations by the same user (that is, nominations under review and not yet closed) are allowed. The main purpose of this measure is to contribute to a better average quality of nominations, by driving nominators/creators to choose carefully the pictures presented to the forum.

Featuring and delisting rules edit

A candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:

  1. Appropriate license (of course)
  2. At least seven  Support votes (or 7  Delist votes for a delist) at the end of nine days
  3. Ratio of supporting/opposing votes at least 2/1 (a two-thirds majority); same for delist/keep votes
  4. Two different versions of the same picture cannot both be featured, but only the one with higher level of support, as determined by the closer. Whenever the closer is not sure which version has consensus to be featured, they should attempt to contact the voters to clarify their opinions if not clear from the nomination page.

The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5. There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations.

The FPCBot handles the vote counting and closing in most cases, current exceptions are candidates containing multiple versions of the image as well as FPXed and withdrawn nominations. Any experienced user may close the requests not handled by the bot. For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished. Also note that there is a manual review stage between when the bot has counted the votes and before the nomination is finally closed by the bot; this manual review can be done by any user familiar with the voting rules.

Above all, be polite edit

Please don't forget that the image you are judging is somebody's work. Avoid using phrases like "it looks terrible" and "I hate it". If you must oppose, please do so with consideration. Also remember that your command of English might not be the same as someone else's. Choose your words with care.

Happy judging… and remember... all rules can be broken.

See also edit

Table of contents edit

List may contain works considered Not Safe for Work (nudity).

Nominators are requested, out of courtesy, to include the {{Nsfw}} template with such images. Users may select the gadget in user preferences "Deferred display of images tagged with {{Nsfw}} on COM:FPC" to enable the template's effect of hiding the image until selected.

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

Featured picture candidates edit

File:Casa de Leighton, Londres, Inglaterra, 2022-11-26, DD 04-06 HDR.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2023 at 22:00:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Bronze casting at Kunstgießerei München 01 - cropped.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2023 at 18:33:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Lessay Abbaye Bas-côté sud 2022 08 22.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2023 at 18:27:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Parque Estadual do Jalapão João Paulo Marques Dandretta (16).jpg edit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2023 at 13:34:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
I don't see that any rules are being broken, try to modify the nomination rules --Wilfredor (talk) 17:22, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
At the time this nom was made and added to this list, ArionStar already had two active noms here. This is not the first time this has happened. Are you suggesting that we modify the nomination rules so that we can have three active noms at once? If so please start a discussion about that on the talk page. --Cart (talk) 17:51, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  Discussion started! ★ 18:11, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Redshank on a pole.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2023 at 11:15:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:017 Great blue turaco at Kibale forest National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2023 at 06:58:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Damage in Gaza Strip during the October 2023 - 45.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2023 at 03:01:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Others
  •   Info A smiling Palestinian infant receiving treatment at the overcrowded emergency ward of Al-Shifa hospital in Gaza City following an Israeli airstrike on October 11, 2023. Created by Wafa (Q2915969) - uploaded by Batoul84 - nominated by ★ -- ★ 03:01, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Peacemaking support This moving image reveals a baby's innocence in the face of the horrors of war. The guideline part "[…] strong mitigating reasons" for low resolution is perfectly applicable in this striking case. BTW, it's clearly a POTY finalist. -- ★ 03:01, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I just   Support. ★ 16:15, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Jay.Jarosz (talk) 07:27, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Low resolution & one-sided propaganda. — Draceane talkcontrib. 07:52, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Yann: What is your opinion about this vote, based on this comment --Wilfredor (talk) 10:12, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
To make my vote clear: I don't trust Wafa at all (en.wiki: …the organization is viewed an arm of the Palestinian government, rather than an independent agency…) Simply, the quality of the image don't override possibly biased content. — Draceane talkcontrib. 11:30, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Gathering images for a neutral encyclopedia means that we need good images from ALL sides in conflicts. This includes photos taken by both biased and neutral photographers. This is what we've always done (History started one second ago.) And we should process them by and by as we get them. We don't need to get one from each side at the same time to keep some sort of balance. Today there is a photo from Wafa, and tomorrow we might get one from the Israeli military (I'm sure there ar equally emotional photos from them too). We should collect the images and sort/review them only by their quality, not political sides. --Cart (talk) 13:01, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Question - 1) I see nothing in the description indicating this child should be described here as "smiling". Is that just based on the impressions of FPC participants? People make faces that look like smiling while crying, of course. 2) This is listed as "own work" by Batoul84, but also attributed to Wafa. Batoul84, could you confirm that you took this photo (for Wafa)? Perhaps the "own work" just needs to change? — Rhododendrites talk |  14:09, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Decidedly mixed feelings here (because of the context as well as the photo). I agree with Cart that we absolutely should feature moving photos as we come across them. My only concern with featuring something that could be called "propaganda" is if it has the effect of deceiving the viewer, minimizes suffering, casts a group of people as less than human, or otherwise could be considered mis/disinformation or hateful. I don't think this falls into any of those, although I am unsure of whether it should have a star. If the goal is documenting historical events, I think we have other images that do this better. If the goal is documenting a human moment in the context of such an event, it may succeed, but it seems like this relies on provided context of a smiling child in a horrific moment ... and I'm just not sure that's what I see? Maybe it's just me. Holding off on voting to think more/get other opinions. — Rhododendrites talk |  14:09, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Comments like these surfaces every time someone nominates an image from a new/ongoing conflict. Perhaps we can't remain as objective as we should while we are caught up in the swirls of impressions from the event. We are better at analysing photos from say WWII and the Vietnam War; also time has often provided enough info about the photos as well as sifted out what images remain as important. Perhaps we should only gather the images now and put them on hold for FPC for say a year, when we can review them with clearer minds and more info? Just a thought.
+1 on questioning the image narration (as well as the pumped-up "Peacemaking support" and these unnecessary POTY predictions) made by the nominator. To me the baby looks like it's crying. --Cart (talk) 14:29, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I also think the WikiProject has enough data storage space, to document both historic events and the human moments in them. --Cart (talk) 14:37, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Oppose I have looked and pondered and looked and pondered. I don't want to add to the very difficult discussion on the context. I will only talk about the picture. It is moving, but it is not a techically excellent image. And I don't mean just the relatively low resolution. I don't want to go into too many details, as it is surely almost impossible to take excellent images under these conditions. Still - the crop of the feet, the blurry hands ... this just is not an FP for me, sorry. --Kritzolina (talk) 18:16, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  •   Support Could do without all the side comments. Small size but intriguing photo and framing gives plenty of context of what's happening. - Benh (talk) 18:57, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Cesenatico - Chiesa di San Giacomo Apostolo - (Porto Canale Leonardesco) 2023-09-06 17-57-26 001.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2023 at 20:26:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Панорама «Японський» манеж.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2023 at 17:06:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Porto Covo January 2022-1.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2023 at 16:10:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Natural_phenomena#Sun
  •   Info After a long break, I come back with a risky nomination (the kind I prefer!). Yes, most sunsets are equally beautiful but some are more equal than others; I believe this is one of them. I went through all FPs of sunsets/sunrises and realized that the subject is no longer popular. Of the 34 entries, the last is from 2019 and only 4 were promoted after 2015! All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:10, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:10, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, there have been plenty of sunsets and sunrises promoted since then, but these days they are mostly in the galleries of the place they were taken at. While you were gone, a lot has happened with the way Galleries and FP Categories are organized. Go to Category:Sunsets and click on the little icon tool for viewing FPs (or QIs, VIs, Media). That way you can see most of them. Or visit Featured pictures of sunsets or Featured pictures of sunrises. Recently promoted examples of shooting straight into the sun: 1, 2, 3, 4. --Cart (talk) 17:59, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  Comment Excellent, all of them! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:46, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Sabella pavonina - Hippocampus hippocampus - Porto Cesareo, Italy (DSC2314M).jpg edit

Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2023 at 14:30:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
The quality of finalists in any "Wiki loves..." competition varies. The "Wiki loves.." entries are reviewed in different ways from other criteria than Commons FPs (and QIs) are. Photos that didn't make the final top in "Wiki loves..." can become FPs on Commons, while the finalists might not. --Cart (talk) 14:02, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So can I make proposals of FPs of pictures found in it? I have identified at least 20 pictures found in "Wiki loves ..." that are stunning and would deserve to be submitted as FP.
And they are clearly more impressive than some recent proposals. Ndiver (talk) 14:22, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, you can propose any image you find on Commons at FPC. :-) But to stand a chance here, they have to be of excellent quality, so look at them carefully before making a nom. The "Wiki loves..." competitions usually have lots of really good images, and there are some users who go and search for them and nominate them here, but most of the FPC participants are more interested in nominating their own photos. ;-) More users who go through the photos from the competitions are very welcome! --Cart (talk) 14:54, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Winter in Beskid Śląski mountains, Ochodzita, Silesia 01.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2023 at 13:05:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Memmelsdorf Schloss Seehof Lindenallee-20231101-RM-115618.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2023 at 11:33:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Red Mill Clinton October 2021 003.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2023 at 07:59:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Luis Alvarez with a magnetic monopole detector - Restoration.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2023 at 01:15:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Ambigram Nothing written.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2023 at 00:48:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Agree it's written 🖋 something, but in reality nothing is "written" :-) Basile Morin (talk) 14:30, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 07:06, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support tbh I'm not familiar with the "Non-photographic media" category, but I love the symmetry of the way these two words are written. --Jay.Jarosz (talk) 07:39, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The gallery was chosen by W.carter and I agree it is appropriate. I think "Non-photographic media" includes paintings, printings, computer-generated works and all visuals that are not specifically photographic. Thanks! -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:30, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:09, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Nice idea but I can't help but see "Nottiny written" every time I look at this, sorry Basile. BigDom (talk) 10:12, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment I believe this is a montage i.e. the left word was cut, copied, flipped and pasted over the blank piece of paper on the right? If so, it seems worthwhile to identify it as such (e.g., 'Photomontages' category and 'Retouched picture' template) --Julesvernex2 (talk) 10:14, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I assumed it was computer-generated to look like pencil, but maybe you're right. If so, then agree. BigDom (talk) 10:22, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Nice ambigram! Maybe a tad underexposed? - Benh (talk) 10:57, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Giving depth to the background (and volume to the texture) was intentional, but my goal was above all to preserve contrast with text color. Is the blue distinguishable or do we see nothing? :-D -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:30, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • if the paper is white, it is definitely underexposed. It looks grey on the photo. It's a common mistake to underexpose photo with a dominant white context (because some metering modes will average across all the frame).
    Benh (talk) 18:48, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Panoramica do Pico das Agulhas Negras.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2023 at 11:45:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  •   Question What's the reason for this quick renomination? "Because it's too impressive not to be featured" is not a good reason. What has changed? Actually, it's still nominated below!!! We need to deal with this kind of inappropriate behavior on FPC, I think. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:03, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oops … Well, I’d agree that the parable of the Unjust Judge (Luke 18:1–8) is not a good model for nominations at FPC ;–). (Or, without irony: It’s not an advisable practice to repeat nominations of a photo so often until we get tired and finally promote it (this is what “too impressive not to be featured” suggests to me). Maybe we can give a photo a second chance when some time has passed because the photo has become more important due to recent events or because taste may have changed. But please dont’ post an image again and again on an almost daily base like the widow from the parable.) --Aristeas (talk) 09:17, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • And though I supported the previous (and overlapping) nomination, I will   Oppose this one per my remarks above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:07, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   I withdraw my nomination ★ 03:04, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:TCDD E 68 055 Araplı - Yeşilhisar.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2023 at 10:30:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Peking Lastenfahrrad-20110104-RM-102214.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2023 at 08:08:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
Clearly a case of De minimis imo. The poster is a very small part of the images and mostly hidden behind text.--ArildV (talk) 14:34, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not de minimis and will without doubt be deleted when nominated for deletion. The poster is definitely a part of the composition and not small. Pity. You could save the picture by blurring the photo, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:22, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  Comment IMHO the photograph is certainly de minimis. Almost nothing is visible. RodRabelo7 (talk) 01:40, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I can see it very distinctly even as a thumbnail. Maybe we need to request deletion and see how the closing admin rules. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:12, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not a copyright expert but has really De minimis to do with whether the protected object is clearly visible or not? If we look at our own examples; Pyramid clearly visible, Tower clearly visible and clearly visible? But I am happy to nominate the image again when the copyright status is investigated. I don't think the image has a fair chance now. Regards--ArildV (talk) 09:19, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This is addressed in Commons:De minimis#Guidelines. I see this photo as being beyond category 5, but the "keep" argument is that it's category 5. Could we have an advisory opinion of an admin like User:Yann, or do we need to test this by requesting deletion? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:14, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
IMO this is pretty clearly de minimis. The compositional reason for including the display is for the text above, which is below COM:TOO China as "simple factual information" (COM:NOP China). The poster is just intrusive advertising (COM:DM #2). -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:49, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree with KoH above. We could blur the lower part of the poster, and the picture would retain its meaning. That's a clear test for de minimis. Yann (talk) 13:47, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, thanks for your opinions, and sorry for the digression. I've been spending a lot of time at COM:Deletion requests, so these questions are very present in my mind. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:52, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Cedar waxwing in pokeweed (10132).jpg edit

Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2023 at 04:10:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Smn Cameron-SecofWar.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2023 at 16:43:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:092 Wild Mute swan in flight at Lake Geneva during golden hour of sunset Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2023 at 15:52:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Manarola NW Cemetery Corniglia Monterosso Cinque Terre Sep23 A7C 06872.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2023 at 13:17:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • @Ermell: Thanks -- I've corrected a slight tilt in the horizon. Please see the new version. --Tagooty (talk) 11:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Beautiful and typical view. – Hint: At the bottom left is now a white triangle (probably from rotating); cropping the image sligthly at the left should remove it. --Aristeas (talk) 16:16, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • No problem, it’s easy to overlook such small points. Thank you! --Aristeas (talk) 08:49, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Hampi - Hazara Rama Temple - Wall Reliefs.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2023 at 10:17:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  •   Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:40, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment The current crop does not seem optimum to me. The lower left corner is cut off, the lower right corner is distracting, and the upper side is cut off / bothering / useless -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:43, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Agreed 100% with Basile. Was going to write the same but he beat me to it :D --Jay.Jarosz (talk) 07:28, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Alt edit

 

File:Dunmanus Bay from Dun Lough.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2023 at 10:09:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Ireland
  •   Info created, uploaded, nominated by  Podstawko  ●talk  10:09, 10 November 2023 (UTC).Reply[reply]
  •   Neutral. I'm abstaining from voting as the author. The image depicts the westernmost part of Dunmanus Bay as seen from Dun Lough lakes. It was taken taken from almost the tip of the Three Castle Head, with the camera facing east, soon after sunrise. Dunlough lake on the right-hand side. No-name lake on the left-hand side. Coosfoilycroneen, Coosheenatowick ocean inlets -- parts of Dunmanus Bay -- visible in distance. The unsharp part at the bottom is deliberate to increase the sense of depth.  Podstawko  ●talk  10:09, 10 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 14:02, 10 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Really nice to look at. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:11, 10 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Breathtaking landscape, but I don't understand why F/5 with a 120mm focal length. I think F/11 would be the minimum (even if it means increasing the ISOs) to bring more details in the foreground -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:34, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you @Basile Morin for commenting and supporting. The wide aperture was a personal and deliberate decision to stress the impression of depth (see description above). I did make attempts with smaller apertures and the end result did not convey what I felt when standing there.  Podstawko  ●talk  08:42, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support But maybe a little bit lighter would have been a little nicer.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:52, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Impressive! I'm struggling with the blurred foreground. This is not really helpful or necessary for the impression of depth in this motif. --Milseburg (talk) 10:09, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Ermell (talk) 10:20, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:59, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Aristeas (talk) 16:17, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support A little bit dark but nice place and I don't mind the foreground at all. BigDom (talk) 19:08, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support The wow factor wins here. ★ 02:01, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Great picture and I don't want to nit-pick, but geocode would be useful --imehling (talk) 17:56, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you for voting and commenting @Imehling. Do you know if I can add the geocoding info without uploading a new version? If I need to upload a new version, I'll wait until the voting is over. And yes, I agree, geocoding info in images makes them way more useful.  Podstawko  ●talk  11:30, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Quite simple. Just add them to the Summary field. Copy the template from one of the pictures with geocode. You can pick up the coordinates of your picture from google map (and you can also use decimal format for them) imehling (talk) 16:47, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Done. With many thanks for the advice @Imehling. If you have any tips on how to preserve coordinates all the way from the camera (which sets them for me) through mixed Lightroom and PS pipeline all the way to Wikimedia upload (where they are lost somewhere on the way), I'd love to hear.  Podstawko  ●talk  21:56, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Aufbau der Republik-panorama.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2023 at 12:05:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Mary White Ovington.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2023 at 08:05:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • I'd want the chiaroscuro to make the blouse darker than the face. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:41, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 12:38, 10 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Question I'm new here and wondering is there any guidance on how these older photos are to be critiqued? I've seen people go quite strict on quality for newer images for sharpness, noise, artefacts, etc that this image would fail. At what time period do we drawn the line? And should we also be adjusting judgement of photos based on the camera used? (i.e. be more lenient on older cameras vs new top of the line ones?) --Jay.Jarosz (talk) 07:43, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Quality has to judged according to the technics used, and available at the time. All argentic pictures have some grain. Yann (talk) 10:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Ikan’s point is very good … But after looking a few times at the photo in full size, it really impresses me somehow, the chiaroscuro works even if the face in shadows is against all my visual habits. Maybe because the photo shows Mary White Ovington reading, and it works very well as a depiction of the deep contemplation of a reader. --Aristeas (talk) 08:53, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 17:39, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support -- Radomianin (talk) 13:45, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Corcovado sunset silhouette.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2023 at 07:57:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Brazil
  •   Info created by Jay.Jarosz - uploaded by Jay.Jarosz - nominated by Jay.Jarosz -- Jay.Jarosz (talk) 07:57, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support -- Jay.Jarosz (talk) 07:57, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Strong support Wow! A beautiful POTY candidate! ★ 08:30, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I still see quality issues on the edges looking like JPEG or other compression artefacts after we discussed offline. However, I really like the juxtaposition of the spiritual vs the technological, so I'm giving it a lukewarm   Support.  Podstawko  ●talk  08:32, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support(⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 09:51, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Anna.Massini(⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 09:51, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Great idea. Too bad it was poorly realized. Heavily reworked, artifacts, unnatural color. Compare the original image with the current version. The grid structure of the masts is barely recognizable. Sorry, but for "excellent" everything has to be right. Je-str (talk) 10:44, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      Question Thank you for the feedback. Can you please clarify the unnatural color comment? This is the version where I retained the natural colors. I have another variation where I play with the temperature and tint and it's much prettier and more colorful but not accurate so I didn't use it. And yes there are technical challenges with shooting something many kilometers away in low light so it's not going to be perfect but I think solid enough under the circumstances? Even today's Photo of the Day, which was taken under more favourable daytime conditions, has very visible compression artefacts in the sky. Jay.Jarosz (talk) 13:35, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Jay.Jarosz (talk) OK, I revise "unnatural color". The perception of color is indeed very subjective. About the artifacts: The masts look very processed (oversharpened), almost like a graphic. Likewise the mountain flanks. Please compare this Panoramic with a very good distant view. Look how sharp the wind turbines are: Dreisberg 15km away, Allberg 18km away, Großer Ahlertsberg 33km(!) away. And: "Picture of the day" is not to be confused with "excellent". --Sorry Je-str (talk) 19:59, 10 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Je-str Thank you, and yeah I also prefer the less sharpened masts but feedback I got from others, like during QI review, showed a preference for sharpened masts + noise reduction and this was the result. I'm happy to revert to less sharpened if that's the consensus here. The panorama example shared is a daytime shot so the quality is not comparable to nighttime photography. If you have good examples of nighttime distance shots I would be happy to learn from them. All POTD come from FP, so they are the most "excellent" of the "excellent" using your terminology ;) And even then, these most excellent of the excellent have artefacts sometimes so seems like it's not a deal breaker if we are to be consistent with judging criteria. Jay.Jarosz (talk) 07:10, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Some things bother me a little, but it is been overiden with the wow factor. Kruusamägi (talk) 13:23, 10 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --RodRabelo7 (talk) 01:44, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support I’d wish there was less sharpening on the masts, but else it looks like a classic silhouette photo to me, and the juxtaposition of the statue and the masts is too good. --Aristeas (talk) 08:55, 12 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Very cool idea. Dan Leonard (talk) 03:29, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Info File update: reduced sharpening on the masts. Thanks everyone for the support! 🧡 --Jay.Jarosz (talk) 07:17, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Romaška, 2023-04-23, ERM - 03.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2023 at 20:07:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
  •   Info created & uploaded & nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 20:07, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 20:07, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Quite beautiful, but the disembodied knee on the left is no good, the top crop might be acceptable but the bottom one seems too close to me, and even things in view that wouldn't have moved are not sharp. I think this is a valuable image and should be nominated as such at COM:VIC if it's the most valuable image in its scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:56, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Question Why not crop the left side? I don't see why it should be wider than the right side. To be fair, though, I should say that I wouldn't support, anyway, per my other remarks. In terms of the other photos, I like File:Romaška, 2023-04-23, ERM - 02.jpg best, though I'm not sure it's an FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:19, 10 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'd like to have some room on the left side. I think it looks better that way.
I personally like this, but I don't think it could ever get the votes. Kruusamägi (talk) 17:47, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Zumaia Algorri.jpg, featured edit

Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2023 at 16:45:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 22:00, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Spain#Basque Country

File:"Bolshoy Tkhach", Куэста Большого Тхача, Западный Кавказ.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2023 at 11:57:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
Yes, the light situation in morning daylight is contrasty, which I personally like. I find it fresh and dynamic as opposite to often boring sunset hues. But there are no blown highlights, there are areas of maximum natural luminosity in the cloud and this can hardly be called blown highlights. The luminosity histogram shows the brightest value is only twice as much as the next brightest. This is not even a soft clipping for this type of light, in my view. --Argenberg (talk) 12:59, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Casa de Leighton, Londres, Inglaterra, 2022-11-26, DD 13-15 HDR.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2023 at 07:51:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  •   Support ★ 19:30, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose The exposure looks to be more on the outside and it is another unproperly perspective adjusted photo. The kind of sight we stumble across often in European castles and this one doesn't really stand out in my view. Nice framing of the ceiling. - Benh (talk) 21:32, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment I quite like the feeling of relaxed domesticity of the curtains, light and view outside the window, but it doesn't seem right to have a small bit of a chair in the photo. I think you saved the wrong version. But isn't the solution to crop out the chair, rather than clone it out? The view you show should be one that a visitor could see, and visitors are surely not allowed to move antique chairs out of the way. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:08, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Oops, now I uploaded the right version where I finished the cloning. In my opinion whether the chair is 10 inches further to the right or the the left is accidental, so I don't think that cloning it out is wrong. I could also crop it but then the crop at the ceiling will get worse. Poco a poco (talk) 22:25, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Lobby lounge of Amantaka Suite Amantaka luxury Resort & Hotel Luang Prabang Laos.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2023 at 00:59:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Window in a cafe in San Gimignano (02182)2.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2023 at 13:47:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Manarola NW Cinque Terre Sep23 A7C 07233.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2023 at 06:12:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Italy
  •   Info Manarola is one of the 5 villages of the Cinque Terre National Park on the NW coast of Italy. The village is located on a small cliff over the Bay of Genoa. It is backed by a mountain range that plunges 2,000–2,500 ft (610–760 m) into the sea. There are no FPs of Manarola which is part of a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 06:12, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support -- Tagooty (talk) 06:12, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment Definitely has potential, but my immediate impression upon looking at this photo is that while the town and the breakwater are nice, there is too much sky. The left side beyond the town also isn't too interesting IMO. I had a go at making [[:File:Manarola NW Cinque Terre Sep23 A7C 07233 (16x9 crop)--imehling (talk) 17:53, 6 November 2023 (UTC).jpg|a 16:9 cropped version]] using the CropTool that puts the horizon on the halfway line and the centre of the town on the left third line. See what you think. BigDom (talk) 06:44, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @BigDom: I get your point, but crop removes the interesting patterns in the sky. I have another image from the same sequence that has less sky but retains the cloud patterns. What do you think of it? --Tagooty (talk) 06:52, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Fair point. Definitely prefer the composition of this one you just suggested. However, it would need a couple of edits to be ready for FP in my opinion - the buildings on the left are leaning in significantly and the texture of the sea looks quite strange. But a great motif. BigDom (talk) 07:05, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@BigDom: Thanks for your suggestions. I've cropped the original FPC to reduce the sky and the hillside, while retaining the cloud patterns. This emphasises the village, but retains the impression of sky + sea + mountains that is characteristic of Cinque Terre. Hope you like this. --Tagooty (talk) 08:34, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Looks good to me, the best of both worlds. Happy to   Support. BigDom (talk) 09:34, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Benh: If you've not already done so, please take a look at the new improved version. --Tagooty (talk) 03:28, 10 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I have I keep my oppose for the same reason. - Benh (talk) 10:59, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment I like this one, but the sky is posterized and needs to be smoothed out for me to support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:47, 6 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

*  Oppose Very nice, but the posterization in the sky is bothering me. --Milseburg (talk) 16:40, 8 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  •   Comment I've spotted 2 dust spots in the sky. I'll try to mark them. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:11, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Done @Ikan Kekek: Thanks for detecting these spots almost hidden in the clouds. New version uploaded. --Tagooty (talk) 08:59, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Neutral I switch to neutral. I'm not yet convinced to support it. On the other hand, it's too good to oppose. --Milseburg (talk) 15:06, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Albert Memorial, Londres, Inglaterra, 2022-11-25, DD 93-95 HDR.jpg edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2023 at 21:51:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  Question Out of curiosity - What is causing the 'star trails' on left hand side? I would not expect to see trails with 1.3s exposure time --Virtual-Pano (talk) 00:47, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The longest frame has an exposure time of 30 sec. The problem when blending to HDR is that Lr takes for the EXIF data the first (instead of the longest, which is the last one) frame as reference. It has been a topic here before. Poco a poco (talk) 07:31, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Thanks for the explanation. Beautiful motif, photographed very well in beautiful light. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:43, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support even though as a personal preference I would like more space in the top part above the cross.  Podstawko  ●talk  08:59, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --ArildV (talk) 11:21, 5 November 2023 (UTC) Great image but please remove dust spotsReply[reply]
    @ArildV: I thought I cleaned them up already, is it a cache issue from your side or are there still dust spots? If you still see them, can you please add a note? I cannot see anyone. Poco a poco (talk) 11:38, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The newest version is from October 15. Did you forgot to uploaded the new version mentioned above?--ArildV (talk) 11:41, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment Understandable, but for the record I would ask Poco a Poco not to crop the photo. In this case the empty sky is important; it’s exactly the contrast (also in size) between the vast blue background and the golden monument which gives the photo its royal air. --Aristeas (talk) 09:06, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 09:08, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose a harsh oppose. But the monument is overall very dark. You are not helped by the lighting scheme but then you'd need to go earlier. It could also be sharper on the upper part, as this picture taken 15 years ago shows. - Benh (talk) 11:45, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • To be honest, Benh, I don't understand this feedback. If my intention had been to light it as good as during the day, I wouldn't had taken the image during the blue hour. That was a photographer's choice and I see no problem with that. Also, if I had focused on the memorial building like in the other image, the resolution of it would be higher, but again I wanted to capture the whole ensemble. Poco a poco (talk) 17:43, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Hey Poco, just saying a few min earlier might have yielded a better lit monument and still the night light scheme on. A photographer's choice may not always mean mitigating circumstances. If you choose to take Mount Everest in the dark, I strongly suspect a few won't like it. About the resolution, it is the same as Diliff's. Just your crop is wider and I see why not you couldn't have achieved similar quality, despite your gear and software packing 15 years of progress. - Benh (talk) 17:58, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • btw, I do realise my comment is harsh. The picture is overall nice and I just share the shortcomings that I still see. I have no much doubt this will be a solid FP. - Benh (talk) 18:00, 7 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Edifício na Rua do Comércio nº 11 - Santa Leopoldina - 20220813162529.jpg, featured edit

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2023 at 18:33:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 21:58, 13 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Settlements#Brazil


Timetable (day 5 after nomination) edit 

Thu 09 Nov → Tue 14 Nov
Fri 10 Nov → Wed 15 Nov
Sat 11 Nov → Thu 16 Nov
Sun 12 Nov → Fri 17 Nov
Mon 13 Nov → Sat 18 Nov
Tue 14 Nov → Sun 19 Nov

Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting) edit 

Sun 05 Nov → Tue 14 Nov
Mon 06 Nov → Wed 15 Nov
Tue 07 Nov → Thu 16 Nov
Wed 08 Nov → Fri 17 Nov
Thu 09 Nov → Sat 18 Nov
Fri 10 Nov → Sun 19 Nov
Sat 11 Nov → Mon 20 Nov
Sun 12 Nov → Tue 21 Nov
Mon 13 Nov → Wed 22 Nov
Tue 14 Nov → Thu 23 Nov

Closing a featured picture promotion request edit

The bot edit

Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below. However after the bot has counted the votes a manual review step is used to make sure the count is correct before the bot again picks up the work.

Manual procedure edit

Any experienced user may close requests.

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|gallery=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}}
     (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    featured or not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    becomes
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. If it is featured:
    • Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate gallery of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
    • Also add the picture to the appropriate gallery and section of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images. An image should only appear ONE time in the galleries. After a successful nomination, the image can be placed in several of the Featured pictures categories.
    • Add the template {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
      • If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
      • If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessments template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
    • Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
      • The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
      • You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
    • Add == FP promotion ==
      {{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.
  5. As the last step (whether the image is featured or not; including {{FPX}}ed, {{FPD}}ed and withdrawn nominations), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/November 2023), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.

Closing a delisting request edit

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    '''Result:''' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg)
  2. Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
    delisted or not delisted
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted ===
  3. Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/November 2023.
  4. If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
    1. Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
    2. Edit the picture's description as follows:
      1. Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes).
      2. Remove the image from all categories beginning with "Featured [pictures]" (example: Featured night photography, Featured pictures from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, Featured pictures of Paris).
      3. Remove the "Commons quality assessment" claim (d:Property:P6731) "Wikimedia Commons featured picture" from the picture's Structured data.
    3. Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.
  5. If this is a Delist and Replace, the delisting and promotion must both be done manually. To do the promotion, follow the steps in the above section. Note that the assessment tag on the file page and the promotion tag on the nominator's talk page won't pick up the /replace subpage that these nominations use.

Manual archiving of a withdrawn nomination edit

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    In the occasion that the FPCbot will not mark withdrawn nominations with a "to be reviewed" template and put them in Category:Featured picture candidates awaiting closure review just like if they were on the usual list, put the following "no" template:
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=X|oppose=X|neutral=X|featured=no|gallery=|sig=--~~~~}}
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    becomes
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], not featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. Open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/November 2023), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates&oldid=804402179"