Commons:Featured picture candidates
Other featured 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:
Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents[edit]There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolors, paintings, etchings, and various others.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:
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.
On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, color, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.
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:
Simple tutorial for new users[edit]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 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:
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: Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify them using 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:
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:
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:
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:
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:
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]
Featuring and delisting rules[edit]A candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:
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]
Featured picture candidates[edit]
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Settlements#Italy
Info created, uploaded and nominated by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 20:26, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 20:26, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Ukraine
Info created & uploaded by Сергей Орлик – nominated by Ivar (talk) 17:06, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Ivar (talk) 17:06, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Wow! ★ 18:46, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 23:32, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Very good, and something different from the usual types of nominations. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:59, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Very nice roof and symmetrical image -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:13, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:10, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
- 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)
Comment Excellent, all of them! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:46, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Family_:_Syngnathidae_(Seahorses,_Pipefishes_and_Seadragons) Commons:Featured pictures/Animals#Class_:_Polychaeta
Info created by Romano Gianluca - uploaded by Romano Gianluca - nominated by Ndiver -- Ndiver (talk) 14:30, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Ndiver (talk) 14:30, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support beautiful! Some minor blue CA on the top, but nevertheless a solid FP for me. -- Ivar (talk) 17:12, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Impressive, beautiful and useful for educational purposes - clear support --Kritzolina (talk) 17:17, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support ★ 18:45, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support--XRay 💬 20:09, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Ermell (talk) 20:42, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 23:32, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:01, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Poland
Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 13:05, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Pudelek (talk) 13:05, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment Great winter composition; if only the person to the left had taken a few steps and stood next to the one on the right, that would have made the image. You don't happen to have a version where they stand together? --Cart (talk) 19:40, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Works for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:02, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Germany
Info Avenue of lime trees in the park of Seehof Castle. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 11:33, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Ermell (talk) 11:33, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support--XRay 💬 20:10, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support I really like this. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:03, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Support The crop is a bit tight at the bottom, compared to the space granted to the sky, but the light is nice and the bench unusual centered in the path -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:06, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry#United States
Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:59, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:59, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support. I would clone the advertising banner out, but otherwise I like the image, especially the movement of the wheel and the general composition. Podstawko ●talk 10:12, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Pudelek (talk) 13:06, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support ★ 18:46, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Nice light -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:59, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Very well captured. Please don't clone out the sign for the Haunted Red Mill, which is not merely an advertising banner but marks the place. I've been to Clinton. The entrance to that attraction is next to the mill. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:06, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
Info created by Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory - restored (a bit), uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:15, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:15, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Top as usual. ★ 01:53, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support, but can you do something about the red-linked category? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:10, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
- Fixed. There was another image already in Category:Magnetic monopoles so I just created the category page and linked to the Wikidata item. Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:06, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --imehling (talk) 10:41, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support (I have added a comment on the image.) — Draceane talkcontrib. 17:07, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Ivar (talk) 17:13, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Very high level of detail for the period -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:58, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Science#Text
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:48, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Category humour :-) Basile Morin (talk) 00:48, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --RodRabelo7 (talk) 01:39, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support —Bruce1eetalk 07:03, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 07:37, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Ceci n’est pas une pipe ;–). Not only a nice ambigram, but also a beautiful handwriting. --Aristeas (talk) 09:19, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --imehling (talk) 10:43, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 11:41, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 17:04, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Brazil
Info Panoramic view of the Agulhas Negras Peak, the fifth-highest mountain in Brazil. It is located in Itatiaia National Park, in the Mantiqueira range, on the border of the states of Rio de Janeiro and Minas Gerais. Created and uploaded by Erick Yu Mikam (generously edited by Poco a poco) - nominated by ★ -- ★ 11:45, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Renominating because it's too impressive not to be featured. Thanks DD again for the edits! -- ★ 11:45, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
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)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?
- 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)
- +1 -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:55, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
- 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)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles
Info created by David Gubler - uploaded by David Gubler - nominated by Bruce1ee -- —Bruce1eetalk 10:30, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- —Bruce1eetalk 10:30, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Ivar (talk) 11:20, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Ю. Данилевский (talk) 12:20, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Jay.Jarosz (talk) 15:01, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support ★ 01:54, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Interesting landscape and nice composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:12, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 07:37, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Fascinating spot, great contrast between the beautiful trees and the surrounding wasteland. --Aristeas (talk) 09:03, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Ermell (talk) 16:06, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 17:09, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support--XRay 💬 20:11, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Other land vehicles
Info : Defective cargo bike parked in a subway in Beijing. I really like the minimalistic composition with some clear clues where the picture was taken. Excellent technical quality. Created and uploaded by Ermell - nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 08:08, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- ArildV (talk) 08:08, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Thanks for the nom Arild.--Ermell (talk) 10:13, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment no FoP in China for 2d artwork, the poster is clearly visible when zoom is done Ezarateesteban 12:49, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
Comment IMHO the photograph is certainly de minimis. Almost nothing is visible. RodRabelo7 (talk) 01:40, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Bombycillidae_(Waxwings_and_allies)
Info Cedar waxwings love pokeweed -- finding ripe pokeweed in late summer is one of the best ways to find them, since they can't seem to resist (it's very poisonous for humans, though). all by — Rhododendrites talk | 04:10, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support — Rhododendrites talk | 04:10, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:48, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Jay.Jarosz (talk) 07:22, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support. He spotted you too. Podstawko ●talk 07:33, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:23, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:52, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 11:42, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support ★ 02:05, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 17:09, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info created by unknown photographer, uploaded by Justass - nominated by Yann
Support Very clean portrait. -- Yann (talk) 16:43, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:40, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Restoration is needed, see on dress suit in left shoulder Ezarateesteban 12:45, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Subfamily : Anserinae (Swans and Geese)
Info created by Giles Laurent - uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 15:52, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 15:52, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Beautiful to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:03, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 16:38, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support huge reso with good light. -- Ivar (talk) 18:33, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support yes, it is an exceptional photo. --Terragio67 (talk) 20:15, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:40, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Very high resolution and excellent action frozen at high speed. Congrats! -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:52, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Beautifully composed action shot. --Tagooty (talk) 03:00, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:49, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment Amazing capture! The only thing holding me back from supporting it is the photographer shadow hitting most of the subject. --Jay.Jarosz (talk) 07:25, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support. The crop is too tight for my taste -- the swan needs somewhere to fly to! But still well caught. Podstawko ●talk 07:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Ermell (talk) 10:14, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support per Basile. --Aristeas (talk) 10:22, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Fabulous! --SHB2000 (talk) 10:36, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:54, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 11:41, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Laitche (talk) 11:49, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Schnobby (talk) 13:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Je-str (talk) 16:29, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support A classic amazing Laurent's quality photography! ★ 02:04, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 17:09, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Italy
Info Cinque Terre National Park stretches for about 20 km (12 mi) along the coast of NW Italy. Terraces for vineyards and olive groves have been built over the past 1,000 years. Cinque Terre is a UNESCO World Heritage Site for its “harmonious interaction between people and nature to produce a landscape of exceptional beauty". This image shows the upper half of the Park, about 10 km (6.2 mi) NW from Manarola. Created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 13:17, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Tagooty (talk) 13:17, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 14:10, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:04, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:40, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Very nice view and authentic presentation. --Milseburg (talk) 09:57, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment Slightly leaning to the right IMO. Ermell (talk) 10:17, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
Support ★ 02:02, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Reliefs
Info all by imehling
Support -- imehling (talk) 10:17, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support I don't know if the crop is ideal, but it seems like something will get cut off, no matter what, and the motif is beautiful and sharp. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:08, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose now, in favor of the alt. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:08, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:40, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
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)
Alt[edit]
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Reliefs
Info all by imehling
- I have uploaded an alternative version with a different crop and some slight perspective correction. The cut offs at the right corner and the upper side have been removed. The rest is probably unavoidable --imehling (talk) 08:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Better, much more of a composition to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:08, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:56, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 17:40, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:21, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support ★ 18:43, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
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).
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)
Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 14:02, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Really nice to look at. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:11, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
- 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)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support But maybe a little bit lighter would have been a little nicer.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:52, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
Support Ermell (talk) 10:20, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:59, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Aristeas (talk) 16:17, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
Support The wow factor wins here. ★ 02:01, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Great picture and I don't want to nit-pick, but geocode would be useful --imehling (talk) 17:56, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info All by -- Fernando (talk) 12:05, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Fernando (talk) 12:05, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment Nice composition and interesting communist mural, but I feel like it could be sharper toward the left and right sides. You might be able to achieve that in post-processing, in which case I'll be happy to take another look. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:07, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Benh (talk) 23:12, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Jay.Jarosz (talk) 07:30, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Welcome to FPC, Fernando! ★ 01:58, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --imehling (talk) 17:59, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
Support--XRay 💬 20:12, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Women
Info created by Charles J. Dampf - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 08:05, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 08:05, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment I'm having trouble with her face being kind of in shadow, with her blouse being so much brighter and therefore more emphasized. Was that some kind of stylistic vogue in those days? It feels like a bad practice in portraiture to me. Maybe this is really a VI, rather than an FP, through no fault of your own. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:02, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
- I think it was. Chiarascuro was a thing. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:03, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
- I'd want the chiaroscuro to make the blouse darker than the face. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:41, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 12:38, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
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)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 17:39, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
Support -- Jay.Jarosz (talk) 07:57, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Strong support Wow! A beautiful POTY candidate! ★ 08:30, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
- 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)
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)
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)
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)
- @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)
- @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)
Support Some things bother me a little, but it is been overiden with the wow factor. Kruusamägi (talk) 13:23, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --RodRabelo7 (talk) 01:44, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
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)
Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 20:07, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
Comment I'm not overly familiar with the VIC. Kruusamägi (talk) 13:19, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Nice shot and colours, but the picture isn't sharp enough, and it should be cropped to centre the subject, or at least remove the knee. --Fernando (talk) 11:22, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Per Ikan. — Draceane talkcontrib. 16:10, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment When nominating I was also wondering if that elbow on the side might be considered unsuitable. So no surprise there. I now cloned it out. One wider image of the area and one even wider. Kruusamägi (talk) 13:19, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
- 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)
Support New version looks much better --Jay.Jarosz (talk) 07:32, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 10:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support ★ 11:58, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Zumaia Algorri.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2023 at 16:45:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Spain#Basque Country
Info Flysch formation on Algorri beach near Zumaia, Basque Country. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 16:45, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Milseburg (talk) 16:45, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support very interesting and nice place. Light stitching error on the sky, easy to fix. -- Ivar (talk) 17:27, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support ★ 19:29, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Some might say that the sky is posterized, but I like the place nonetheless. Stitching seam visible on the left sky and the waves on the right side - Benh (talk) 21:34, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Amazing sight! The textures on the right side are just delicious! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:00, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Ein tolles Bild, eine saubere Arbeit! -- Radomianin (talk) 10:18, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Oso ondo, as locals say. --Fernando (talk) 11:19, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Done Thanks for the advance praise. I fixed the little issues mentioned. --Milseburg (talk) 14:57, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Ermell (talk) 15:51, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 16:10, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 20:34, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --imehling (talk) 10:10, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Very impressive and informative. --Aristeas (talk) 10:18, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 15:55, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Light and composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:21, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 05:53, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:58, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 11:37, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Russia#Southern Federal District
Info Cliffs of Mount Bolshoy Tkhach, Adygea. Triassic geology of the Western Caucasus. There is also an alternative: File:Bolshoy Tkhach, Cliffs, Mountains of Adygea, Western Caucasus.jpg. All by -- Argenberg (talk) 11:57, 8 November 2023 (UTC).
Support -- Argenberg (talk) 11:57, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support ★ 19:29, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment Quite interesting to look at, but the highlights are so bright, they're hurting my eyes a little. I wonder whether that was really the best time of day to take that photograph with that much direct sunlight. Secondarily, I feel like I'd prefer to see the tops of what's on the left and right, though I don't actually know how much further up they extend. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:03, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Highlights too blown out and too harsh contrast. Interesting photo, but not FA material, sorry. --Fernando (talk) 11:19, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
- 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)
Weak oppose per Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 20:35, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose thinking same as Ikan as well. It's a decent shot but far from wow. --Jay.Jarosz (talk) 07:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#United_Kingdom
Info Leighton House, Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, west London, England. The art museum and historic house is located in the Holland Park area and was the London home of painter Frederic Leighton, 1st Baron Leighton (1830–1896), who commissioned the architect and designer George Aitchison to build him a combined home and studio. The resulting building, noted for its elaborate Orientalist and aesthetic interiors, has been open to the public since 1929. The museum was awarded the European Union Prize for Cultural Heritage / Europa Nostra Award in 2012. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 07:51, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 07:51, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Very nice interior design and excellent light through the windows. However the left side is not optimum : the end of the chair deserves to be cropped in my opinion. Perhaps a symmetrical adjustment -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:52, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Done Poco a poco (talk) 19:09, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support ★ 19:30, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
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)
- 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)
Support Point taken. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:10, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Impressive interior, good photograph. --Aristeas (talk) 10:16, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --imehling (talk) 11:33, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 11:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support--XRay 💬 20:14, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Running in Vancouver.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2023 at 05:35:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Statues_outdoors
Info created by Jay.Jarosz - uploaded by Jay.Jarosz - nominated by Jay.Jarosz -- Jay.Jarosz (talk) 05:35, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Jay.Jarosz (talk) 05:35, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose. I love the idea of capturing a runner next to the sculpture of a runner. I'm opposing for quality reasons: the photo is not sharp enough, the edits (automated by Google Pixel or human) are too crude (check the outline of the sculpture). The moon and people on that path (except for the person running) should have been cloned out. I would go there again, during the same hours of the day, and retake from further distance but with a longer focal length -- that will make anyone running behind that sculpture appear larger compared to the sculpture. Podstawko ●talk 07:39, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose I agree with Podstawko; nice idea, but the technical quality is not high enough for FP. The perspective warp on the buildings in the background is also an issue.--Peulle (talk) 08:18, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Question I managed to fix the haloing and perspective warp and clone out the non-runners. Do you think it would be of sufficient quality now? Or should I give up on this particular shot? Jay.Jarosz (talk) 14:08, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose It's nice but could be less noisy and sharper. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:59, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Ecola Point October 2019 panorama 3.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2023 at 05:20:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United States#Oregon
Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:20, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:20, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support. I like the light, the mist, the view, and colors, and the details (because many pixels!!). What I would do differently: make shadows less pitch black, clone out the fallen tree on the left (or make the panorama slightly shorter by cutting maybe 1000px off from the left), and walk up closer to the edge to eliminate the grass on the bottom which adds nothing to the picture. Still supportive. Podstawko ●talk 07:49, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Giant size and nice mood -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:55, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- It's a no brainer support for me, but it's also noticeably tilted to the right. - Benh (talk) 13:04, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- Actually I think it's just natural curvature of the horizon (i.e. if the horizon extended all the way to the left, it would be tilted to the left on the left side); see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Chimney Rock Trail Point Reyes December 2016 009.jpg for an explanation. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:59, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- I would be surprised if we could see the curvature so obviously at sea level. I've never seen it on my photos with a proper lens barrel correction or panorama with rectilinear projection. Quick google gets me this https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19037349/ - Benh (talk) 21:24, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- Looking at user-submitted photos on Google Maps, I see the same phenomenon on many of them. For example, in this photo you can see a clear bend in the horizon, which is almost centered so it can't be barrel distortion. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:11, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- it's the same photo as you and only the right side show the horizon... - Benh (talk) 19:06, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
- By "bend" I don't just mean that the horizon is tilted CW - I'm saying that the more right you go, the more tilted it gets. I intentionally chose the same scene to prove that this is how the scene actually looks and is not an artifact of my lens or stitching technique. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:17, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
- it's the same photo as you and only the right side show the horizon... - Benh (talk) 19:06, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
- Looking at user-submitted photos on Google Maps, I see the same phenomenon on many of them. For example, in this photo you can see a clear bend in the horizon, which is almost centered so it can't be barrel distortion. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:11, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- I would be surprised if we could see the curvature so obviously at sea level. I've never seen it on my photos with a proper lens barrel correction or panorama with rectilinear projection. Quick google gets me this https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19037349/ - Benh (talk) 21:24, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- Actually I think it's just natural curvature of the horizon (i.e. if the horizon extended all the way to the left, it would be tilted to the left on the left side); see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Chimney Rock Trail Point Reyes December 2016 009.jpg for an explanation. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:59, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 16:22, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support My second favorite of September's challenge. --Milseburg (talk) 16:38, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support small CW tilt on the horizon. -- Ivar (talk) 17:29, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support ★ 19:30, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Great in full-screen view. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:13, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:14, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support OR is beautiful. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:27, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 15:56, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:55, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:56, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 11:34, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 12:02, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Hummel Cosmea-20231018-RM-170758.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2023 at 22:44:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera#Family_:_Apidae_(Bumble_Bees,_Honey_Bees,_Carpenter_Bees,_Cuckoo_Bees,_Orchid_Bees,_and_Stingless_Bees)
Info Earth bumblebee on a cosmea flower in a garden in Bamberg, Upper Franconia, Bavaria, Germany. Focus stack of 28 pictures. All by Ermell -- Ermell (talk) 22:44, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Ermell (talk) 22:44, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support I like how this closeup shows how the pollen goes all over the place. Impressive details! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:03, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Amazing capture and spectacular level of detail. Nice light. Very well done -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:02, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support !!! per Ikan and Basile -- Terragio67 (talk) 02:52, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Agreed, Ikan and Basile summarized it best! --Jay.Jarosz (talk) 05:38, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:19, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:27, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:56, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Excellent capture. Possible POTY.--Peulle (talk) 08:22, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:50, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Ivar (talk) 13:44, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support ★ 19:30, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Checking what camera you used, the link for OM-1 goes to the 1972 camera. I suspect you used the new one! Charlesjsharp (talk) 06:57, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Je-str (talk) 10:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 16:11, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Strong support I’m late to the party, but want to second the applause. Your macro photographs are wonderful! --Aristeas (talk) 10:13, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --imehling (talk) 12:33, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 15:12, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 15:56, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:39, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 11:33, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support and
Question How did you manage the bee not to move during the focus stacking process? Poco a poco (talk) 12:01, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
File:014 Wild Red Deer Switzerland Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg, featured[edit]
Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2023 at 20:59:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Cervidae (Deer)
Info created by Giles Laurent - uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 20:59, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 20:59, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:00, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 02:56, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Jay.Jarosz (talk) 05:39, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:20, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 07:13, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:52, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Argenberg (talk) 12:02, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support - Benh (talk) 13:05, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Ivar (talk) 13:45, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 10:08, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 13:20, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 16:11, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support--ArildV (talk) 20:46, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Beautiful, atmospheric, authentic. --Aristeas (talk) 10:08, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 12:42, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 11:33, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 12:02, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Ruitjesbovist (Calvatia utriformis), featured[edit]
Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2023 at 16:24:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page
-
Calvatia utriformis on 18-07-2023.
-
The same Calvatia utriformis now in decline on 23-10-2023.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Fungi#Family : Lycoperdaceae
Info All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:24, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:24, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment I like this, but is there any way to get the same aspect ratio on both? (is a wider crop possible on the "before" photo?). — Rhododendrites talk | 16:37, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your question. I don't think so, but I'll check it out. It is the exact same mushroom.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:53, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- For the set, I'd just like to see the two photos be a bit more similar in shape. I may still support even if that's not possible, though. — Rhododendrites talk | 16:56, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- I checked it in Lightroom, but unfortunately I can't make the photo wider. Sory.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:43, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Really good to me. Does the spider, or whatever it is, merit its own category? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:47, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- Answer: I don't know the subspecies of the spider, but I can add the general spider category.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:03, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
weakSupport Nice set and transformation but I agree with Rhododendrites it would be much better if both images had the same ratio. In case the first picture cannot be enlarged, then perhaps the second one could be slightly arranged. Currently the size of the subject seems bigger, the borders on both sides are wider and the top & bottom shorter. A bit mismatched -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:56, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Done. Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:03, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks I find the pair more harmonious now -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:41, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:52, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Ermell (talk) 16:18, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support ★ 19:31, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support for the set. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:10, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 13:21, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:07, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Schnobby (talk) 15:18, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 15:59, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 11:32, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Good idea for a valid set Poco a poco (talk) 12:03, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Cathédrale Saint Julien du Mans.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2023 at 11:05:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#France
Info created by Yannig Photo - uploaded by Yannig72 - nominated by Yannig72 -- Yannig Photo (talk) 11:05, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Yannig Photo (talk) 11:05, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose. The crop is too tight, the building is not straight up, and there is a strange brownish tint. Not enough light in shadows too. Podstawko ●talk 12:15, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comments. With this photo I wanted to highlight the low light of the autumn sky (the last ray of sunshine) on this building. I could have avoided the perspective effect by enlarging the shot, but then there would have been buses, cars, road signs, etc. My point of view was to have the cathedral alone. Yannig Photo (talk) 15:45, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Agree with Podstawko --Jay.Jarosz (talk) 12:56, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Not sharp enough. Why this size for this file ? --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 21:50, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- What do you mean by "size" ? 88.160.88.144 10:11, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- Presumably Sebring12Hrs is referring to the resolution. There's no EXIF data so we don't know what camera you used, but any modern digital camera produces photographs much larger than the 2.8 megapixels presented to us here. BigDom (talk) 09:38, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
- You are right ! Sebring12Hrs (talk) 20:01, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
- Presumably Sebring12Hrs is referring to the resolution. There's no EXIF data so we don't know what camera you used, but any modern digital camera produces photographs much larger than the 2.8 megapixels presented to us here. BigDom (talk) 09:38, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
- What do you mean by "size" ? 88.160.88.144 10:11, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Too small and leaning. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:30, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Yeah, per others. I expect more from FPs. Might be a VI, though. --Peulle (talk) 08:24, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Laos
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:59, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:59, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support - Mr. Rasel Hasan (talk) 06:09, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 06:54, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Good interior. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:19, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 09:18, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Jay.Jarosz (talk) 11:48, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Neutral leaning weak oppose. Well captured and certainly worthy of a QI (maybe even a VI). I just cannot find "wow" in this room (or, likely, most hotel lounges, waiting areas, lobbies, rooms, etc.). The thing that's stopping me from opposing is respect for managing difficult lighting conditions. — Rhododendrites talk | 16:50, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 20:40, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:50, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Nothing wrong but nothing great either. And it also looks like flash was fired up on the ceiling (yes EXIF says it didn't) - Benh (talk) 13:09, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Info No flash used. Camera on tripod (3 seconds) -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:03, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose per Benh. -- Karelj (talk) 16:41, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support ★ 19:32, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Picture is nice and crisp, but it's very uninteresting. Lots of empty space on the upper half. --Fernando (talk) 11:23, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Personally I regard a good and interesting photo of a (rather) boring room as a real achievement. --Aristeas (talk) 10:06, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
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.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Settlements#Italy
Info A window in a cafe in San Gimignano, Italy. all by — Rhododendrites talk | 13:47, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support — Rhododendrites talk | 13:47, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support The plastic hangers complete the picture.--Ermell (talk) 15:39, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Nice use of the open window motif, known from so many paintings. And a beautiful view from that cafe too! I'm opposing because of the uninspiring light, both indoor and outdoor. Podstawko ●talk 16:21, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Appealing composition in my view. The colors of the plants in the foreground are okay. Bucolic landscape, like a painting on the wall. The clouds have enough texture to make the whole interesting -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:47, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Very pleasant. I think it's deserving. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:24, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support per Basile. Indeed the landscape detail shown by this window is an almost perfect pars pro toto for that part of Tuscany. (And Ermell is so right about the plastic hangers: normally they are just ugly, but in this case they add a funny twist to the composition.) --Aristeas (talk) 09:15, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support But I'd remove the dust spots (= birds) in the sky --Llez (talk) 09:16, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Jay.Jarosz (talk) 11:52, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Beautiful! -- Radomianin (talk) 14:10, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:30, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --XRay 💬 19:17, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 21:04, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:24, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Milseburg (talk) 16:34, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support ★ 19:32, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 12:04, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
Support -- Tagooty (talk) 06:12, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
- @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)
- 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)
- @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)
- @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)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 12:10, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support. I like how the arch in the clouds corresponds to the arch of the bay. And I love the overall feel of the photo. Podstawko ●talk 13:06, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support per Podstawko. --Terragio67 (talk) 14:27, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support —Bruce1eetalk 17:22, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support ★ 17:32, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --imehling (talk) 17:53, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose great view but spoiled by oversharpening - Benh (talk) 19:00, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
Done @Benh and Ikan Kekek: I've fixed posterisation and reduced sharpening. Please see the new version. --Tagooty (talk) 03:06, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Thanks. Not perfect, but beautiful and good enough. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:25, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:28, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Thank you for the improvements! --Aristeas (talk) 09:11, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 09:14, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:09, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 11:16, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support I think the sky could use a slight boost in whites, but other than that I love the vibe of this image! --Jay.Jarosz (talk) 12:59, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support — Rhododendrites talk | 16:51, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Ivar (talk) 17:26, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 21:05, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Nice composition and viewpoint -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:39, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
* Very nice, Oppose
but the posterization in the sky is bothering me. --Milseburg (talk) 16:40, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
Done @Ikan Kekek: Thanks for detecting these spots almost hidden in the clouds. New version uploaded. --Tagooty (talk) 08:59, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:35, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Albert Memorial, Londres, Inglaterra, 2022-11-25, DD 93-95 HDR.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2023 at 21:51:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Monuments and memorials
Info Albert Memorial, Kensington Gardens, London, England. It was commissioned by Queen Victoria in memory of her beloved husband Prince Albert, who died in 1861. Designed by Sir George Gilbert Scott in the Gothic Revival style, it takes the form of an ornate canopy or pavilion 176 feet (54 m) tall, in the style of a Gothic ciborium over the high altar of a church, sheltering a statue of the prince facing south. It took over ten years to complete and was opened in July 1872 by Queen Victoria, with the statue of Albert ceremonially "seated" in 1876. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 21:51, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:51, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment Could you please remove the dustspots? I spotted six of them. Thanks --Virtual-Pano (talk) 00:43, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Virtual-Pano:
Done (or at least, I hope I found all of them), thank you! Poco a poco (talk) 07:31, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Virtual-Pano:
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)
- 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)
Support well balanced exposure and thanks for the explanation. Another lesson learned - Don't take exif data at face value — Preceding unsigned comment added by Virtual-Pano (talk • contribs) --Virtual-Pano (talk) 21:43, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- Please @Virtual-Pano sign your vote to make it valid -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:02, 6 November 2023 (UTC) -- 5 days left to fix it -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:24, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Thanks for the explanation. Beautiful motif, photographed very well in beautiful light. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:43, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
Support --ArildV (talk) 11:21, 5 November 2023 (UTC) Great image
but please remove dust spots- @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)
- 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)
- @ArildV: Sorry, indeed, I forgot to upload the image and I couldn't see anything in Lr :) Poco a poco (talk) 13:39, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Poco a poco thank you!--ArildV (talk) 16:20, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- 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)
Support --XRay 💬 12:37, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 15:36, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 15:54, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support ★ 15:54, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 16:25, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Blue hour, composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:02, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Very tranquil. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:09, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:36, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 12:06, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Neutral The monument itself is quite alright, but a little too blurry and blown. But there is too much uninteresting sky. A vertical crop perhaps would work. --Fernando (talk) 19:39, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
Support --Llez (talk) 09:08, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
Support --Milseburg (talk) 14:41, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Ermell (talk) 16:28, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:34, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Edifício na Rua do Comércio nº 11 - Santa Leopoldina - 20220813162529.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2023 at 18:33:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Brazil
Info Rua do Comércio, 11, Santa Leopoldina, Espírito Santo, Brazil. Created and uploaded by Donatas Dabravolskas - nominated by ★ -- ★ 18:33, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- ★ 18:33, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --RodRabelo7 (talk) 20:03, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Not an FP to me with blown highlights that make the electric cables look snapped. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:23, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support The motif works for me. The light is intense, but I suppose it more or less matches what the photographer saw while there. — Rhododendrites talk | 12:59, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 15:36, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 15:55, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose What is special about this street? --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:35, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- The colorful colonial buildings, of course. ★ 17:47, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Why does the street look so dead, though? --SHB2000 (talk) 20:37, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Not so dead at all: there's a motorcyclist and a man standing at the end of the street. ★ 20:49, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Exciting lighting, OK if the sky is blown near the sun. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:10, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Alu (talk) 09:29, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Atmospheric, has a painterly touch. --Aristeas (talk) 10:35, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose I do not see here anything special for FP nomination. -- Karelj (talk) 18:58, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 20:05, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support as per King of Hearts. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:42, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Jay.Jarosz (talk) 05:42, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 00:34, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Museo Guggenheim -- 2021 -- Bilbao, Euskadi, España.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2023 at 12:33:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Spain
Info all by me -- Alu (talk) 12:33, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Alu (talk) 12:33, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment Interesting, but I'm not sure what the ruling would be at COM:Deletion requests on the sculpture in front. Is it de minimis? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:26, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment The same question applies to the building itself – it is certainly artistic, so if it was located e.g. in France this photo would problematic/illegal. But luckily, if I understand our article right, Spain has proper freedom of panorama, so the photo should be OK. --Aristeas (talk) 11:12, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment No issue for me here, the sculpture is De minimis and the Freedom of Panorama works for building and 3D artwork in Spain. --PierreSelim (talk) 22:07, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- You're an admin here, so thanks for clarifying.
Support. Good composition, and I like how the people look kind of like ants in the context of the grand scale of these structures. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:18, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment Thanks! I have already put the template FoP Spain. -- Alu (talk) 09:24, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment Technically speaking, I'm not an admin anymore, but I've been for 10 years. --PierreSelim (talk) 07:15, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment I see. I was relying on your user page for that information. But anyway, you presumably have the experience to understand the application of de minimis in Spain. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:38, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- You're an admin here, so thanks for clarifying.
Support Sharp, good composition. Some red areas like the arch are very saturated, but other photos show that these are really very bright reds and the rendering works well in the context. --Aristeas (talk) 10:33, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 12:07, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Uninspiring framing. I know the building well, and there's no wow factor. Cluttered bottom, sorry but it looks like a simple vacation picture. --Fernando (talk) 19:42, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment Thanks for your comment. Normally the usual photographs that represent this museum are of its northeast face, which would be the bow of the ship it simulates. However, I love this less common view, from the stern, forming a whole with the bridge that, like the other view, also fits into the golden ratio. And also, as Ikan said above, you can see the great dimension of the construction compared to the people. -- Alu (talk) 00:07, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Could possibly be improved by 1/2 to 2/3 EV exposure boost. --Argenberg (talk) 12:07, 8 November 2023 (UTC).
Support ★ 19:34, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 05:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
File:20181204 Warming stripes (global, WMO, 1850-2018) - Climate Lab Book (Ed Hawkins).svg[edit]
Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2023 at 10:41:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Computer-generated#Other
- Proposed blurb: Warming stripes are data visualization graphics that use a series of coloured stripes chronologically ordered to visually portray temperature trends. Climate scientist Ed Hawkins designed the warming stripes in a minimalist style, using colour alone to avoid technical distractions and intuitively convey global warming to non-scientists. In this early Hawkins graphic from 2018, stripes progress from blue (cool years) to red (warm years) to portray Earth's average annual temperatures since 1850. — RCraig09 (talk) 18:41, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Info Warming stripes (sometimes referred to as climate stripes) are data visualization graphics that use a series of coloured stripes chronologically ordered to visually portray long-term temperature trends. Warming stripes reflect a "minimalist" style, conceived to use colour alone to avoid technical distractions to intuitively convey global warming trends to non-scientists. This data visualisation has had a notable, high impact on the world (see its article). Simple, but extremely effective. Voted as featured picture on english WP on 17 January 2021. Created by Ed Hawkins, climate scientist at University of Reading - image uploaded by RCraig09 - nominated by Effco -- Effco (talk) 10:41, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Effco (talk) 10:41, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 11:18, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Very notable information graphic on an important subject, global warming. (Disclosure: I wrote most of the English-language Wikipedia article). RCraig09 (talk) 15:42, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Support per RCraig09. We have now reached a point where most people are digitally addicted. Hawkins understood this, so to send a message that things are getting worse for the planet, he needed to send a digital message: There is so much work behind those colored stripes that this picture can be considered art. --Terragio67 (talk) 15:56, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Question Wow? ★ 17:01, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment The gallery doesn't seem appropriate - shouldn't it be Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Computer-generated? BigDom (talk) 17:31, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- I don't know what "the gallery" is, but being computer-generated did not prevent its being "Today's Featured Picture" (POTD) on English Wikipedia's main page (archive). RCraig09 (talk) 18:25, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Gallery is fixed. BigDom is quite correct. The gallaries are simply a way of sorting and displaying our FPs. Being 'computer-generated' is not in any way diminishing this image's value or importance, it is simply the way we identify images that are made that way (as opposed to photographs or paintings/drawings made by hand). Not sure why a blurb is mentioned, such things are not relevant here at FPC, that will only be considered if it gets promoted and becomes a POTD on Commons. --Cart (talk) 19:18, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- I don't know what "the gallery" is, but being computer-generated did not prevent its being "Today's Featured Picture" (POTD) on English Wikipedia's main page (archive). RCraig09 (talk) 18:25, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Kritzolina (talk) 19:55, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --RodRabelo7 (talk) 21:07, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Support what Cart aptly calls a scary wow. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:18, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Weak support PNG image. --SHB2000 (talk) 22:52, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Only stripes without an explanation, right?--Ermell (talk) 23:08, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Support "Only stripes" means I can vote for this, thanks for reminding me. (No photo with sharpness or contrast to conider, just colors and compo.) It is extremely difficult to design graphic images to convey a complex and important message in a way that transcends language barriers, that can be adapted into many forms of contexts, and that you remember from just one quick glance. This is graphic design at its best. --Cart (talk) 23:31, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:42, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose. Many people are talking about this image, but IMHO it does not help understand global warming. The "minimalist" style actually removes a lot of important information (what are the axes? what is the range of values? what is the difference between the red and the blue?), and this image is confusing without a long caption. The image may show the skill and ingenuity of the researcher, but sounds to me art for art's sake, and for global warming visualization I much prefer the famous XKCD global warming strip. Podstawko ●talk 07:02, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment Yeah, it isn't nearly as meaningful as a temperature graph to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:44, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- If the image makes you ask all those questions, it has worked as a symbol for global warming. It has made you aware and wanting to know more. It's like when you see a radiation symbol, it doesn't tell you exactly what kind of radiation, from what material it comes, how strong it is or how much of it you can take before you get sick or die, but you get the message that something is wrong. --Cart (talk) 09:18, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- XKCD is of course always great (link to let people know what image we are talking about), but how would you use that image on a campaign button, a logo, a header or a bus? It works as information, not as graphic design. --Cart (talk) 09:57, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, that's the point: it purposely omits (technical) information as it's meant for non-scientists. The explanation is in the blurb, above. RCraig09 (talk) 15:59, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:49, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support — Rhododendrites talk | 13:06, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Felino Volador (talk) 16:32, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Stephan Sprinz (talk) 08:09, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:29, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 12:07, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose The image carries strong message and has a lot of "wow". But as it's the only reason for the nomination, I'm not convinced to vote for it as one of the FP. It should be SVG, at least. — Draceane talkcontrib. 20:10, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
- Help requested. Can an editor in the nomination process please substitute the SVG file for the PNG file, and move this discussion accordingly? I've changed the w:Warming stripes article accordingly. Thanks. RCraig09 (talk) 00:32, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Done Thanks for your constructive request, RCraig09: Renaming and redirecting of the current nomination page completed. Pinging all reviewers seems necessary at this point @Effco, Yann, Terragio67, ArionEstar, W.carter, BigDom, Kritzolina, RodRabelo7, SHB2000, Ermell, VulcanSphere, Podstawko, Ikan Kekek, MZaplotnik, Rhododendrites, Felino Volador, Stephan Sprinz, Aristeas, Harlock81, and Draceane: Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 07:19, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- My vote doesn't change. I agree that the SVG version is more useful Kritzolina (talk) 08:07, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, Radomianin! SVG is clearly better here. --Aristeas (talk) 08:59, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- Fine by me, Thanks for fixing this Radomianin. --Cart (talk) 09:15, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- Idem for me, thank you. --Harlock81 (talk) 12:15, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
- SVG it's ok. --Terragio67 (talk) 19:58, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- +1. MZaplotnik(talk) 05:51, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
- I'm still not wowed. Sorry. ★ 12:03, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
- +1. MZaplotnik(talk) 05:51, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
- SVG it's ok. --Terragio67 (talk) 19:58, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- Idem for me, thank you. --Harlock81 (talk) 12:15, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Cristo Redentor - Rio de Janeiro - 20230321172914.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2023 at 06:32:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Brazil
Info created and uploaded by Donatas Dabravolskas, nominated by me. RodRabelo7 (talk) 06:32, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- RodRabelo7 (talk) 06:32, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Neutral Kind of nom that would be easier to support than most boring ones over here, but it's a tad overdone. It's of course noisy but that's a tradeoff for having a drone that can be flown over many places. And I believe a more gentle processing would have made it acceptable for here - Benh (talk) 10:08, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Neutral Tilted Christ. ★ 17:02, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Brights are too bright and darks are too dark for this to be an FP, even if the uncorrected perspective is judged to be acceptable (and I think it won't be). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:28, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Weak support Absolutely not my cup of tea (melodramatic, overprocessed, etc.). But in the eyes of most people this is probably a great image and much more interesting than any photo I have ever taken (or will take); certainly it would be a hot POTY candidate. The noise is excusable or at least explainable (see Behn’s comment), and the leaning verticals are IMHO not that bad here because we are clearly looking down. So while I wish very much the photo would have been processed with more restraint and taste, I cannot withhold at least a weak support. --Aristeas (talk) 10:27, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Very noisy. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 10:46, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Cesenatico - Canal port - Fishing house (Trabucco) 20230815.jpg[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2023 at 22:43:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Settlements#Italy
Info Fishing house machines called Trabucco, are popular on the Italian coast of the Adriatic Sea. As a rule, they were the places where retired fishermen enjoyed the last years of their lives. Created, uploaded, and nominated by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 22:43, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 22:43, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment The crop on the right is unfortunate. Do you have a version showing the net + house? --Tagooty (talk) 08:43, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your interest, I understand your point of view. Yes, I have other versions but, unfortunately, on the right there is only an uninteresting platform (it looks more like a work tool shed than a house). I will upload a second version where there are no disturbing objects on the right and where the network and support structures on the left are fully depicted. Terragio67 (talk) 11:52, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Checking carefully, I found an even more interesting one, which depicts both structures. I'll work, for a 2nd version, on that last one... Thanks again. Terragio67 (talk) 12:04, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment Nice building and light. My favorite is this version, but it needs more space at the left -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:35, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Alternative wider version[edit]
Info Fishing house machines called Trabucco, are popular on the Italian coast of the Adriatic Sea. As a rule, they were the places where retired fishermens enjoyed the last years of their lives. Created, second version uploaded, and nominated by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 14:30, 04 November 2023 (UTC)
Done @Tagooty: According to the above conversation, I uploaded a new version. Kind regards. --Terragio67 (talk) 14:30, 04 November 2023 (UTC)
Comment The left end is much better. The house on the right clutters the image and does not add value. I would crop it out, similar to the original nomination. --Tagooty (talk) 16:55, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree with you, I'm currently extracting a new file from the RAW (but I'll keep this picture on Commons...). I strongly believe ArionStar will appreciate the third and last version too. Terragio67 (talk) 18:04, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Support This is perfect now! ★ 16:19, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Nice building and light. My favorite is the first version, but it needs more space at the left. This composition works too in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:35, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
Alternative cropped version[edit]
Info Fishing house machines called Trabucco, are popular on the Italian coast of the Adriatic Sea. As a rule, they were the places where retired fishermen enjoyed the last years of their lives. Created, third version uploaded, and nominated by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 14:30, 04 November 2023 (UTC)
Done @ArionStar: , @Tagooty: Hello, as stated above, I've uploaded a new version. --Terragio67 (talk) 20:30, 04 November 2023 (UTC)
Support ★ 00:22, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Thanks for the edits. This shows the fishing nets in warm evening light. Incidentally, these nets resemble the Chinese fishing nets in Kerala, India. --Tagooty (talk) 02:44, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for your suggestions and support. Certainly, when I took the first photo, I focused more on the house than on the structure as a whole. The latter is a modern and comfortable home that has a hobby fishing net for the joy of a free fish meal. I can say that it is one of the local tourist attractions. Some small entrepreneurs have also created exclusive fish restaurants, especially in the middle and lower Adriatic Sea, where these structures, on the other hand, are completely made of wood. They should look similar to the fishing machine in your beautiful photo. I hope to be able to photograph and share them with everyone as soon as possible. --Terragio67 (talk) 04:39, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 09:07, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:47, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support The best of the three. --Yann (talk) 11:06, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support +1 -- Radomianin (talk) 12:18, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --XRay 💬 12:40, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:21, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:38, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:43, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:17, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:47, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 15:32, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Fernando (talk) 19:43, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 09:06, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Support Nice building and light. My favorite is the first version, but it needs more space at the left -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:35, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, I was also surprised by the quality of the first photo, taken at ISO 500. In fact, my support remained there, just to remind me that I wasn't good enough at taking more shots (or different shots) in similar conditions because I had very little time to take advantage of the last rays of the sun, which illuminated directly and indirectly through the glare of the sea. However, I had a lesson learned to reflect on next time. Finally, thanks for your impressions about it. --Terragio67 (talk) 13:10, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Support(⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 09:53, 9 November 2023 (UTC)Anna.Massini(⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 09:53, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]
Wed 08 Nov → Mon 13 Nov 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
Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)[edit]
Sat 04 Nov → Mon 13 Nov 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
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.
- 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)
(for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
{{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|gallery=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}} - 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 === - Save your edit.
- 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.
- 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]
- 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) - 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 === - 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.
- If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
- Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
- Edit the picture's description as follows:
- 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).
- 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).
- Remove the "Commons quality assessment" claim (d:Property:P6731) "Wikimedia Commons featured picture" from the picture's Structured data.
- 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.
- 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]
- 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=--~~~~}} - 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 === - Save your edit.
- 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.