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, 2024 and current month. For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Formal things editNominating editGuidelines for nominators editPlease 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Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents editThere are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolors, paintings, etchings, and various others.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 editOn 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 editPlease nominate videos, sounds, music, etc. at Commons:Featured media candidates. Set nominations editIf 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 editAdding a new nomination editIf 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 editEditors 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 editOver 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 editGeneral rules edit
Featuring and delisting rules editA 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 editPlease 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:North African Thekla's lark (Galerida theklae carolinae) Gabes.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 19 Apr 2024 at 08:47:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Alaudidae (Larks)
- Info The subspecies that lives on the edge of the Sahara desert. No FPs of the species. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:47, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:47, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Snow Canyon.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 19 Apr 2024 at 01:33:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United_States#Utah
- Info: Snow Canyon; second nomination. Nearly passed the first time; redeveloped to improve fidelity. All by-- The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:33, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:33, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Campamento de ganado de la tribu Mundari, Terekeka, Sudán del Sur, 2024-01-30, DD 50.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 18 Apr 2024 at 20:14:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family_:_Bovidae_(Bovids)
- Info Mundari man giving a massage to a Ankole-Watusi cow in the cattle camp, Terekeka, South Sudan. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 20:14, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:14, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Question Did you do any selective denoising on the boy's skin? Or is his skin very very smooth? --Wilfredor (talk) 20:18, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support This one has exactly the combination of beautiful light and interesting subject that elevates it above the other nomination for me. Top work. Cmao20 (talk) 00:40, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Golden Gate Bridge, San Francisco 13.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 18 Apr 2024 at 18:42:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Golden_Gate_Bridge,_San_Francisco
- Info created by Mike Peel - uploaded by Mike Peel - nominated by Mike Peel -- Mike Peel (talk) 18:42, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Mike Peel (talk) 18:42, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Cannot compete with existing FPs. Best without people. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:12, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Interesting, I was looking at the existing FPs and was surprised that they lacked a human connection, which I think this photo would add. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I concur with Charles Poco a poco (talk) 20:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per the idea of a 'human connection', I think when you phrase it like that this is quite nice and there's room for it in the gallery. Cmao20 (talk) 00:43, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Mathieu Burgaudeau during time trial training of Itzulia Basque Country race - stage 1.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 18 Apr 2024 at 17:32:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports
- Info created by Shougissime - uploaded by Shougissime - nominated by Shougissime -- Shougissime (talk) 17:32, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Shougissime (talk) 17:34, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --PierreSelim (talk) 20:05, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support I'm not sure I've seen enough cycling photos to say how extraordinary this is, but I like it very much anyway. Superb image quality. Cmao20 (talk) 00:42, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Elderly man attended by emergency services in Omoide-Yokocho.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 18 Apr 2024 at 17:13:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People#People at work
- Info It's not a QI, but it's a lucky street photography shot done in bad light (near sunset in a crowded alley), and "A bad picture of a very difficult subject is better than a good picture of an ordinary subject", so I figure it's worth a try; created by Grendelkhan - uploaded by Grendelkhan - nominated by Grendelkhan -- grendel|khan 17:13, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- grendel|khan 17:13, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I think possibly Personality rights' problems, unless the man consented to publish this photo. Also, a scenery like this (someone picked up by emergency doctors and taken to hospital) is not at all uncommon, especially in big cities. --A.Savin 19:30, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The red board is the first problem. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:14, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Nomination denied. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines because only two active nominations per user are allowed. |
File:Igreja de Nosso Senhor do Bonfim Salvador Corredor Lateral Esquerdo Azulejos 2021-7125.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 18 Apr 2024 at 12:26:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Walls
- Info Azulejos of lateral corridor, Church of Nosso Senhor do Bonfim, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil. Created and uploaded by Prburley - nominated by ★ -- ★ 12:26, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ★ 12:26, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support It could be sharper in some places but the resolution is high and the artwork is really beautiful. Cmao20 (talk) 13:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Schlosspark Linderhof - Gartenvase 01.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 18 Apr 2024 at 11:40:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Ceramics
- Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 11:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Llez (talk) 11:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:10, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 15:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I miss wow here, a good shot, nothing extraordinary Poco a poco (talk) 20:19, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Not special enough, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:29, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Flamants à Thyna (Sfax).jpg edit
Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2024 at 07:15:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Phoenicopteridae (Flamingos)
- Info created by El Golli Mohamed - uploaded by El Golli Mohamed - nominated by TOUMOU -- TOUMOU (talk) 07:15, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- TOUMOU (talk) 07:15, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support A bit dark/underexposed but good nevertheless. Cmao20 (talk) 02:24, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 03:44, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support —Bruce1eetalk 07:22, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 13:01, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:12, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Seems a tad too dark for me but is otherwise excellent.--Ermell (talk) 15:53, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Yes it is a bit dark and needs better processing to make it less 'faded'. Nice PoV from water level, but I would ask photographer to crop the blurred bottom. May not be tilted in reality, but a very small rotation would help. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:49, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Works for me overall but I'd add some brightness Poco a poco (talk) 20:22, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support yes from me under condition of some adjustments (exposure, contrast, white balance), I would also ask photographer to crop the blurred bottom and a little from the left to center the subject Chepry (talk) 08:12, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Dolderbahn Bhe 1-2 1 Waldhaus Dolder - Bergstation Dolderbahn.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2024 at 23:07:54 (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 23:07, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- —Bruce1eetalk 23:07, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cool. Very different from David's usual trains but I really like the subject. Good composition. Cmao20 (talk) 02:23, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 03:45, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 13:02, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support despite the centred composition. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:51, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --A.Savin 19:35, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:26, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Fairweather-Pano1.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2024 at 22:34:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United_States#Alaska
- Info created by LucasBrown - uploaded by LucasBrown - nominated by LucasBrown -- LucasBrown (talk) 22:34, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- LucasBrown (talk) 22:34, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- The current version of this image is not the one I uploaded — User:Ponderosapine210 brightened it. Should this be acknowledged in the "info" line? If so, how? - LucasBrown (talk) 22:42, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- It depends on whether or not you like the change. If you do, no acknowledgment needed. If you don’t, you can revert it to the previous version. Personally I don’t really approve of making changes to other people’s images without asking them, unless the change is really obvious and uncontroversial. Cmao20 (talk) 23:39, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- I have no objections to the change. - LucasBrown (talk) 23:41, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- It depends on whether or not you like the change. If you do, no acknowledgment needed. If you don’t, you can revert it to the previous version. Personally I don’t really approve of making changes to other people’s images without asking them, unless the change is really obvious and uncontroversial. Cmao20 (talk) 23:39, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I like it very much and think it could be FP but the horizon seems to dip in the middle and rise again towards the edges. It might benefit from stitching a bit more carefully. Cmao20 (talk) 02:22, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Probably related but created by is really David W. Brown. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:55, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: agree that this needs to be restitched. Needs denoising as well. Assuming the original files have been preserved, this definitely has a potential of being a FP with skilful post-processing, despite coming from a very old DSLR. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:29, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Garden snail crossing the sidewalk.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2024 at 22:18:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals#Class_:_Gastropoda
- Info A garden snail crossing the pavement after a rainy night; created by Grendelkhan - uploaded by Grendelkhan - nominated by Grendelkhan -- grendel|khan 22:18, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- grendel|khan 22:18, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support I like this. I find the big blue object in the background a bit distracting but the quality is really good and I generally like the composition. Cmao20 (talk) 02:18, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Thank you! It's a recycling bin; this was a lucky find in the morning before people had taken their bins back inside. grendel|khan 16:18, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 13:02, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Not an extraordinary picture for me. Sorry--Ermell (talk) 15:55, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I'd propose a crop as annotated as alternative --Llez (talk) 15:57, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Thank you; that's proposed below. Good idea! grendel|khan 16:38, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
Alternative cropped version edit
- Comment Cropped as suggested by @Llez.
- Info As above, created by Grendelkhan - uploaded by Grendelkhan - nominated by Grendelkhan -- grendel|khan 16:16, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- grendel|khan 22:18, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 05:12, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Elizabeth II Lying-in-State - 02.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2024 at 21:51:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#2020-now
- Info A slice of history, and an end of an era. Note that ordinary mourners were prohibited from photographing this event unless they had special permission. We are very lucky that a Commons user managed to secure such permission and released the images under a Creative Commons license, since it is very unlikely that any media organisations will follow suit. created by KTC - uploaded by KTC - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 21:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 21:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The lying-in-state guard includes members of the Royal Company of Archers in the foreground as well as the Coldstream Guards. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you Charles. I will add these notes to the image page. They definitely improve the nomination. Cmao20 (talk) 16:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 13:39, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Buger Brücke Neubau Schalung-20240218-RM-102143.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2024 at 20:26:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Others
- Info Orthophoto of the formwork for the concrete mould on a new bridge across the river in Bamberg. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 20:26, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Ermell (talk) 20:26, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cool abstract Cmao20 (talk) 02:17, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 13:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 15:53, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 17:55, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Bolshoy Tkhach, Adygea, Western Caucasus, Большой Тхач, скалы на вершине, Адыгея.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2024 at 19:58:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Russia#Southern Federal District
- Info There are a few good ones from this photo series but I think this is my favourite. An imposing and atmospheric landscape of rocky outcrops surrounded by low cloud in the Adyghe Republic, a very underrepresented part of the world at FPC. created by Argenberg - uploaded by Argenberg - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 19:58, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 19:58, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 13:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Thanks, Cmao20, for nominating this file. Let’s see if it gets enough support. --Argenberg (talk) 13:37, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Impressive scenery. – Aristeas (talk) 17:55, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:14, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I'm sorry, the composition doesn't work for me. Lighting and level of detail not extraordinary either IMHO. Poco a poco (talk) 20:25, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Dull light, shadowy sides at the left, unspectacular clouds hiding the view, and something special is missing in the center in my opinion. Sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:37, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Parque Nacional da Serra da Capivara (32500309346).jpg edit
Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2024 at 15:10:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Others
- Info Close-up view of the Pedra Furada (Portuguese for Drilled or Pierced Stone), a natural arch at the Serra da Capivara National Park, Piauí, Brazil. Created by Ministério da Cultura - uploaded by Sturm - nominated by ★ -- ★ 15:10, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ★ 15:10, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Interesting sight but IMO not a great composition. Image quality is fine but the big out of focus bits of plant in the foreground are annoying and I don't really get a good idea of the majesty of the view through the arch. No English caption or geotagging. Cmao20 (talk) 15:47, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination ★ 12:26, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
File:CN 312 004 Ilseng - Hamar.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2024 at 14:51:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles
- Info created & uploaded by David Gubler – nominated by Ivar (talk) 14:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Ivar (talk) 14:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice light, clouds, and ploughed furrows in the fields. Cmao20 (talk) 15:44, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support agree Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:58, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support nice subtle colours & light Terragio67 (talk) 16:44, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Ermell (talk) 19:00, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral Nice composition and good light. But: Minor CAs (lights of the train), a little bit noisy and sharpness could be better. --XRay 💬 19:04, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice late afternoon shadows. —Bruce1eetalk 23:01, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 13:05, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 15:52, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20. – Aristeas (talk) 17:54, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:23, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Light, appealing composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:45, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Santa Maria in Trastevere church in Rome (12).jpg edit
Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2024 at 11:31:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Italy
- Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 11:31, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 11:31, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support I've seen higher resolution ceilings but it's very pretty and excellent sharpness. Cmao20 (talk) 13:10, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 19:06, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 03:47, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:42, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 13:05, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 15:52, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Riad Salih (talk) 17:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support An outstanding ceiling. – Aristeas (talk) 17:53, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:33, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 4:46, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Ermell (talk) 05:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Santa Maria in Trastevere church in Rome (13).jpg edit
Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2024 at 11:29:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Italy
- Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 11:29, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 11:29, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support How beautiful. Cmao20 (talk) 13:09, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I miss the symmetry. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:59, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 19:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 03:47, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 13:06, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 15:51, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 17:53, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:34, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 4:49, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Ermell (talk) 06:01, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:L'asfodelo mediterraneo.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2024 at 05:11:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family_:_Asphodelaceae
- Info: branched asphodel blooming in Sicily; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:11, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:11, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose due to lack of focus/sharpness. Wolverine XI 16:55, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 15:51, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Camellia × williamsii 'Jury's Yellow'. 25-03-2024 (d.j.b.).jpg edit
Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2024 at 04:22:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Theaceae
- Info Flower buds of a Camellia × williamsii 'Jury's Yellow'. Focus stack of 16 photos.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 04:22, 8 April 2024 (UTC) - Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 04:22, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:16, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:37, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:35, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:27, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 16:28, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 13:06, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 15:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 17:52, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Argenberg (talk) 22:44, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Salle des Cariatides in Paris-Louvre.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 17 Apr 2024 at 00:58:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Statues_indoors
- Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 00:58, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:16, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:35, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:25, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The left side is noticeably less sharp than the right side, hopefully not a decentered lens? --Julesvernex2 (talk) 12:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- I noticed this in all the photos I took, I don't know the reason. But I still consider it to be sharp enough for FP. Wilfredor (talk) 12:59, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- I know of two ways to test the lens for decentering: the quick but somewhat prone to false positives method ([https://photographylife.com/good-bad-copy-of-lens), and the precise but time consuming method ([https://blog.kasson.com/lens-screening-testing/). That's a very nice lens, I would send it in for repair if it is indeed decentered. Julesvernex2 (talk) 13:36, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- If all your photos taken with the same camera, but with different lenses show (more or less) the same drop of sharpness in one direction, the reason could also be that the sensor and the mount are not correctly aligned (they should be perfectly parallel but often they are not). Then the camera would need to be calibrated (not the lenses). – Aristeas (talk) 17:51, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- I know of two ways to test the lens for decentering: the quick but somewhat prone to false positives method ([https://photographylife.com/good-bad-copy-of-lens), and the precise but time consuming method ([https://blog.kasson.com/lens-screening-testing/). That's a very nice lens, I would send it in for repair if it is indeed decentered. Julesvernex2 (talk) 13:36, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- I noticed this in all the photos I took, I don't know the reason. But I still consider it to be sharp enough for FP. Wilfredor (talk) 12:59, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Still very good and beautiful. – Aristeas (talk) 17:51, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --RodRabelo7 (talk) 18:10, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 21:00, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
File:At Paraty 2023 263.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 16 Apr 2024 at 21:49:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Photo techniques/Styles and Techniques#Minimalism
- Info created and uploaded by Mike Peel - nominated by ★ -- ★ 21:49, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Fresh vibes… -- ★ 21:49, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support as photographer, thanks @ArionStar: for nominating it! Have added a description and tweaked the composition. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:29, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Question Is this minimalism? Slightly tilted. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:31, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, a lonely umbrella on a beach. ★ 14:41, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- New version uploaded that hopefully fixes the tilt. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 16:11, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral Good photo, but not enough wow. Wolverine XI 16:52, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Tunisian tortoise (Testudo graeca nabeulensis) male Cap Bon.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 16 Apr 2024 at 20:19:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family : Testudinidae (Tortoises)
- Info This tortoise is classified as Vulnerable on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. One FP from 2009. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:19, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:19, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support V cute, v sharp, great depth of field Cmao20 (talk) 00:37, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 06:57, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose This composition is not compelling. Wolverine XI 16:49, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:33, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 23:18, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Meligethes aeneus Magnolia stacked-20240331-RM-102118.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 16 Apr 2024 at 20:35:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Magnoliaceae
- InfoCommon pollen beetles(Meligethes aeneus) on a magnolia blossom. The size of the beetles is about 2mm. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 20:35, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Ermell (talk) 20:35, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:36, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:32, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Superb. – Aristeas (talk) 17:47, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:30, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 23:15, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Statua della Libertà - San Marino - GT 01 - 2024 03 14.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 16 Apr 2024 at 17:54:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Statues outdoors
- Info The Statue of Liberty of San Marino is a gift received from a German noblewoman, Ms Otilia Heyroth Wagener. She commissioned one of the most esteemed sculptors on the international scene, Stefano Galletti, and gave the order to create the work using the precious Italian Carrara marble as raw material. On 30 September 1876, a few months after the sculptor was commissioned, the Statue of Liberty was solemnly inaugurated in front of the Palazzo Pubblico and gave its name to the square below: Piazza della Libertà (Liberty place). The San Marino government, in response to a gesture as noble as it was welcome, granted the Duchess her noble title as Duchess of Acquaviva, one of the nine castles of the Republic of San Marino. The statue represents freedom as a warrior woman who proudly advances towards the future, with her right hand stretched forward, while holding the flag in her left hand. A crown has been sculpted around the head like a city wall from which the three towers rise, a symbol of San Marino over the centuries. All by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 17:54, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 17:54, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Amazing image quality but I feel like I want to see more of the plinth Cmao20 (talk) 20:01, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- I had thought about being able to photograph the base as well, but unfortunately there is not enough space for a complete shot, without creating distortions due to the disproportion of the work. In other words, if we measure the cubic dimensions of the base, the central part and the statue, there are percentage ratios equal to 80%, 10%, 10%. What does it mean? To lose attention on the most important and beauty part: The statue and its significative details. Thanks anyway for your right observation, I am going to create a (little bit) longer version. Terragio67 (talk) 20:21, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Both are OK for me. --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:29, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Both are good, the other one looks slightly better to me --LexKurochkin (talk) 07:02, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
Alternative longer version edit
- Comment In this alternative version, I left the complete stitch of twelve images (3 cols - 4 rows). They have contrast and tone slightly stronger.
- Info Read above, please. All by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 21:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:26, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support For me this is the better and more satisfying version. Cmao20 (talk) 00:36, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Both are very good, this one looks slightly better to me --LexKurochkin (talk) 07:00, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 23:14, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:39, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:31, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support this one. IMHO the image IMHO fits much better into our Statues outdoors gallery than in the ‘exteriors’ gallery; I have taken the liberty to change the gallery link. It’s not nessary to repeat the gallery link in the ‘Alternative’ section; I have removed that second link. – Aristeas (talk) 13:53, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the gallery modification and advice. Terragio67 (talk) 17:58, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Muang Udon Thani Museum by Don Ramey Logan.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 16 Apr 2024 at 16:37:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Thailand
- Info created& - uploaded by Don - nominated by WPPilot -- Don (talk) 16:37, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Don (talk) 16:37, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:58, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Needs perspective correction. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:23, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- In what regard? Should I reduce the bottom? I have a alt, will upload now.--Don (talk) 23:41, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- The trees above the water need to be vertical and the reflections in the water all need to be aligned vertically with them. I tried to correct using Photoshop CS6 but it doesn't sort it. I am guessing the distortion is too much. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:01, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- In what regard? Should I reduce the bottom? I have a alt, will upload now.--Don (talk) 23:41, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
File:The Asian Paradise Flycatcher.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 16 Apr 2024 at 03:51:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Unsorted
- Info created by and uploaded by Prasan Shrestha - nominated by Krish Dulal -- Krish Dulal (talk) 03:51, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Krish Dulal (talk) 03:51, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 05:58, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Chepry (talk) 06:50, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 07:59, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support would be worth trying less aggressive processing settings. And a 4 x 2 crop? Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:51, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- For the crop, it's a good idea. We should try it. Riad Salih (talk) 17:31, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 13:37, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:31, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Shagil Kannur (talk) 16:09, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support-- Riad Salih (talk) 17:31, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:06, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Question As described, is this not a Blyth's paradise flycatcher (Terpsiphone affinis) and should be categorized as such? --GRDN711 (talk) 02:49, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @GRDN711 this is Terpsiphone paradisi and I think its categorized properly. -- Nirmal Dulal (talk) 13:16, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @GRDN711 this is Terpsiphone paradisi and I think its categorized properly. -- Nirmal Dulal (talk) 13:16, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Thank you, Nirmal. Looked into this further and accept your comment. Good image. --GRDN711 (talk) 13:27, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 07:04, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:30, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:59, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Black Kite (Milvus migrans)- Juvenile.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 16 Apr 2024 at 03:47:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes#Genus_:_Milvus
- Info created and uploaded by Mildeep - nominated by Krish Dulal -- Krish Dulal (talk) 03:47, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Krish Dulal (talk) 03:47, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 05:58, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Ermell (talk) 07:59, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great!
Exceptional quality--LexKurochkin (talk) 12:06, 7 April 2024 (UTC) - Weak support Great composition and overall fine for this resolution but IMO noisy and oversharpened. Cmao20 (talk) 13:37, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Well, on the second thought after thorough check I agree, it has visible artefacts of oversharpening near high contrast borders, but nevertheless it is great photo IMO --LexKurochkin (talk) 13:42, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:35, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Excessive noise due to oversharpening (see the enormous noise between the tail and the tree) --Wilfredor (talk) 22:42, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Yes, NR has not worked well. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:30, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Indeed, overprocessed Poco a poco (talk) 20:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Indian Roller, Kolkata.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 15 Apr 2024 at 06:08:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Order : Coraciiformes (Kingfishers, Bee-eaters, Rollers, Motmots, and Todies)
- Info created by Anjan Kumar Kundu - uploaded by Anjan Kumar Kundu - nominated by Bodhisattwa -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 06:08, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 06:08, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Wow --Shagil Kannur (talk) 07:19, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support That's just – impressive of all things. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:23, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I agree but the quality is just not there. It's either upscaled or unsharp (or both), sorry. Poco a poco (talk) 08:07, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- I believe that perfect sharpness is not the most important factor of breathtaking photo that deserves to be FP in every other way Chepry (talk) 12:58, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Karelj (talk) 09:54, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Almost there, but very tricky to get in focus. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:00, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 10:23, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 12:36, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Chepry (talk) 12:58, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral I don't know if it's something we should approve for use in this section because it adds details that didn't exist in the original photo, but I tried Topaz Photo AI and it did a miracle on this photo. I am not a seller nor do I have anything to do with that company. --Wilfredor (talk) 13:12, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry but I'm pretty sure this isn't just unsharp, it's upscaled - the haloes and moiré around the edges of the bird are almost always characteristic of upscaling - and I don't think that's a practice we should encourage at FP. Cmao20 (talk) 15:52, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- I have asked the author. At the very least, it should be mentioned. Yann (talk) 11:42, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral I'm conflicted, but I will not oppose. Wolverine XI 18:16, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose Sorry, but per Charlesjsharp. --LexKurochkin (talk) 20:34, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Charles.--Ermell (talk) 21:16, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Cmao20 – the upscaling is easily visible. – Aristeas (talk) 17:45, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Henrysz (talk) 20:15, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Poor pixel-level quality. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:58, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Kayak-MarChiquita-Bsas-feb2024.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 14 Apr 2024 at 23:50:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water transport#Boats
- Info all by me-- Ezarateesteban 23:50, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Ezarateesteban 23:50, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Technically OK, but nothing outstanding or eye-catching. Wolverine XI 18:17, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Bungle Bungle Range Purnululu National Park, Carpark.png edit
Voting period ends on 14 Apr 2024 at 23:09:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Australia#Western Australia
- Info created and uploaded by Maclearite - nominated by SHB2000 --SHB2000 (talk) 23:09, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support I realise this may not be the finest photo that one could take, but I consider it great given how far remote and inaccessible this place is, even for remote Western Australia standards. --SHB2000 (talk) 23:09, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Beautiful, unusual scenery, but largely unsharp/oversharpened and just not good enough quality for FP. Could be a good VIC nom, depending on its competition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:03, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support mainly per Ikan. It's fascinating and one of the most interesting photos on the FP page right now both in terms of the landscape and the composition - square crop works rly well - but image quality is not great and resolution isn't that high, looks oversharpened to compensate for lack of detail. Cmao20 (talk) 15:48, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Good idea but technically poor, IMO. I would also like to see more of the sky. Wolverine XI 18:23, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Knysna (ZA), Knysna River, Marina -- 2024 -- 2308.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 14 Apr 2024 at 10:39:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water_transport#Boats
- Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 10:39, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Info The photo does not show any particular lighting situation. The special feature is the simplicity. The boat is the main motif of a simple landscape. -- XRay 💬 10:39, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- XRay 💬 10:39, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support I could see this in an art gallery. Cmao20 (talk) 14:17, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Question: any way to fix the blown highlights? --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:49, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Not easy to see. I made minor improvements at the lights. Thank you. --XRay 💬 06:09, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:44, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20, and the lighting is good to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:01, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Nothing special here. A big part of boring "field" of algae and a very common boat. Thevlight has nothing special too. Good QI, but not FP to me. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 10:08, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I have to concur, sorry, Poco a poco (talk) 18:14, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry XRay, but for me there is too much "simplicity" in this image. --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:38, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose No wow. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:58, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Cape Town (ZA), Sea Point, Nachtansicht -- 2024 -- 1867-70 - 2.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 14 Apr 2024 at 10:35:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Photo_techniques/Styles_and_Techniques#Intentional_camera_movement_(ICM)
- Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 10:35, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Info Once again a creative picture. This picture combines several techniques. On the one hand it was created from two photos (multiple exposure) and on the other hand the ICM technique was used. Both photos were taken separately, each with horizontal and vertical movement. When they were put together, they were positioned appropriately again. -- XRay 💬 10:35, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- XRay 💬 10:35, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support No logical reasoning, but I like the idea and execution. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:34, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Charles. Just a cool piece of artwork. Cmao20 (talk) 14:13, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice idea but it could also be anywhere else.--Ermell (talk) 17:23, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support: strangely mesmerising. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:47, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per others above --Terragio67 (talk) 19:28, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support That's pretty cool. --SHB2000 (talk) 21:55, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 01:04, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:45, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 07:49, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:10, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I don't see what everybody else does. It's a weird idea but not in a good way. Wolverine XI 18:27, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Photography has various forms of expression. Photographic art comes with many different facets. Honestly, I understand if someone can't do anything with this type of photo, but I find your comment disrespectful. --XRay 💬 05:53, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- That was never my intention. I've always been referred to as weird, but I never considered it disrespectful. Because our upbringings are different, I might not view something as disrespectful as you do. Wolverine XI 08:20, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Photography has various forms of expression. Photographic art comes with many different facets. Honestly, I understand if someone can't do anything with this type of photo, but I find your comment disrespectful. --XRay 💬 05:53, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:27, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry, it doesn't work for me. This kind of picture should work for objects in mouvement, but not for buildings. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 10:11, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per others opponents. -- Karelj (talk) 10:40, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Abstract. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:57, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Rickshaw-Driver-Haridwar AB.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 14 Apr 2024 at 09:45:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
- Info created by Chepry - uploaded by Chepry - nominated by Chepry -- Chepry (talk) 09:45, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Chepry (talk) 09:45, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Not the best sharpness, but an impressive scene, esp. the facial expressions. --Palauenc05 (talk) 12:35, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Palauenc05 Cmao20 (talk) 16:31, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support yes, per Palauenc05 Terragio67 (talk) 21:16, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 01:04, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great photo, because unlike so many other photos that please the viewer with a pretty view or satisfying form (not that there's anything wrong with that!), this one touches the heart and makes the viewer think about the men's labor and lives. And it also has a good form. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:59, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Nice photo, but the bottom is missing.--Shagil Kannur (talk) 07:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 10:24, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 14:36, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Kerala Natanam Dance of Kerala.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 14 Apr 2024 at 07:03:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
- Info Kerala Natanam is one of the classical dance forms of Indian state Kerala. All by Shagil Kannur -- Shagil Kannur (talk) 07:03, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Shagil Kannur (talk) 07:03, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment They should have done this beautiful woman a favour and smoothed out her facial skin a little. The eyes are too soft for my taste. You should be able to recognise the pupils.--Ermell (talk) 08:42, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, indeed. The details were added to the description. Shagil Kannur (talk) 08:54, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The crop is too tight, and the image could be technically better. Wolverine XI 18:29, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Focus was given to the facial expression of the artist. That's why tightly cropped.-Shagil Kannur (talk) 16:07, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Kathakali of Kerala at Nishagandhi dance festival 2024 (135).jpg edit
Voting period ends on 13 Apr 2024 at 08:26:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
- Info Kathakali is a traditional form of classical Indian dance, and one of the most complex forms of Indian theatre.All by Shagil Kannur -- Shagil Kannur (talk) 08:26, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Shagil Kannur (talk) 08:26, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Good quality and interesting, but dark makeup and clothes on a dark background is unfortunate. Yann (talk) 11:14, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Normally this art form is being performed in dark background. Kindly watch some videos and reconsider your vote. Shagil Kannur (talk) 12:39, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Interesting Cmao20 (talk) 14:25, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 16:47, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Fascinating. I can just about imagine how long the person needs to get ready like that. --Ermell (talk) 17:24, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:01, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Classic(al). – Aristeas (talk) 07:05, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 09:50, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support I miss cropped bottom, but still it is very nice Chepry (talk) 10:14, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose Apart from the face, nothing is sharp. --Palauenc05 (talk) 12:40, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Palauenc05. --SHB2000 (talk) 21:57, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Bergtocht in de omgeving van bergdorp S-charl 17-09-2019. (actm.) 01.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 13 Apr 2024 at 04:30:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Liquid
- Info Mountain tour in the vicinity of the mountain village of S-charl. Clemgia is a tributary of the mountain river Inn and here resembles a swirling body of water.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:30, 4 April 2024 (UTC) - Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:30, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:12, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose Sorry, v good quality as usual and nice light but I miss an outstanding compositional idea. Cmao20 (talk) 14:24, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Moderate Support: The motion of the currents is enough of a compositional idea for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:51, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 16:47, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Good job but the subject lacks wow in my eyes, Poco a poco (talk) 20:01, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I think this would be better suited for Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Liquid since it shows the free flow of streaming water exceptionally well. While we have plenty of FPs from Grisons (Graubünden), there is no photo of such natural streaming water in the phenomena gallery. --Cart (talk) 21:21, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your suggestion. Should I customize the gallery?--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:44, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Als je dat leuk vindt. Jij bepaalt waar je de wilt nomineren. Ik denk dat het misschien beter in die galerij past. --Cart (talk) 06:07, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for explaining. I have adjusted the gallery.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:44, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 00:12, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support per Ikan. – Aristeas (talk) 07:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Poco a poco. -- Karelj (talk) 16:17, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Ikan --Terragio67 (talk) 21:25, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:06, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Support good composition. --XRay 💬 06:38, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Arc de Triomphe de l'Étoile at night.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2024 at 21:35:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#France
- Info All by. -- Wilfredor (talk) 21:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry. Nice blue hour shot but the uncorrected perspective distortion is obvious even in thumbnail size. Cmao20 (talk) 21:54, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I did this intentionally. If I were to correct the vertical lines, it would result in a completely unrealistic form because the element is very close. This is the best practice to follow in these situations. Thank you for your critique. Wilfredor (talk) 22:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- I understand that, but the leaning Eiffel Tower in the background just looks too weird for me. Cmao20 (talk) 22:49, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- If I "correct" the vertical, there will be a huge bulge at the top of the triumphal arch, I'm going to raise an alt so you can see it yourself Wilfredor (talk) 23:04, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- I understand that, but the leaning Eiffel Tower in the background just looks too weird for me. Cmao20 (talk) 22:49, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- The arch itself is fine to me, but I don't like the things leaning in the background on both sides. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:17, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
Alt edit
- Info @Cmao20: Observe the totally deformed upper part --Wilfredor (talk) 23:13, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support I know you don’t intend me to support this version, but it is obviously better to my mind. Perspective correction is a trade-off, but this is an improvement and looks much more satisfying. Cmao20 (talk) 23:37, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- I find this version horrible but I respect your comment, I'm curious to know what others think Wilfredor (talk) 23:46, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- I like this better, but I won't support it if the photographer hates it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:18, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- No, you can support, its just my opinion Wilfredor (talk) 01:20, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support OK. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:48, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I prefer this version too (with PC). But I don't like the works at the bottom, but you have nothing to do with it. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 07:30, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support A very interesting comparison – very helpful when one wants to discuss advantages and disadvantages of perspective correction. Call me crazy but I prefer the version with PC. ;–) In the end this tells much about our visual habits. – Aristeas (talk) 08:36, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 12:37, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:05, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
OpposeSorry, but too much distortion for FP. Yann (talk) 11:44, 7 April 2024 (UTC)- @Yann: Please take another look Wilfredor (talk) 18:58, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Wilfredor: : to compensate for the distortion, the entire image should be stretched vertically; I played around with it, and it looks much better. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:09, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the recommendation, I managed to solve the perspective problem Wilfredor (talk) 18:57, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Right, better. I removed my oppose vote. Yann (talk) 19:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the recommendation, I managed to solve the perspective problem Wilfredor (talk) 18:57, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 03:16, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 14:35, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose For me, the top corner is uncomfortably close to the top edge of the frame. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:56, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Vanuatu-humans-of-vanuatu-11.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2024 at 21:27:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Mixed & Groups
- Info created by Graham Crumb, uploaded by Russavia, nominated by Yann
- Support Very good portrait. Very few FPs of mother and children. No FP of Vanuatu. -- Yann (talk) 21:27, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Nice characterful sharp portrait. But I could do with more space at the bottom, their heads seem too low in the frame for me. Cmao20 (talk) 21:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Nice, but I'd prefer if the child were also in focus. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:19, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great first FP of Vanuatu. --SHB2000 (talk) 03:23, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Charming picture but unfortunately the child's face is blurred and the layout is not perfect.--Ermell (talk) 07:53, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Since I highly doubt that the author does it and it is a photo external to the commons, I decided to apply a sharpening filter on the girl's face. anybody can rollback me if its not well Wilfredor (talk) 12:33, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- It looks very unnatural to me and produced a checked pattern somewhat like newspaper pictures. I would absolutely oppose this version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:52, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Not bad, but AI unfortunately still produces these idiosyncratic patterns.--Ermell (talk) 17:28, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- I've reverted it because I don't think I like it either and would probably strike my support for it, sorry Wilfredor. AI is not quite there yet with this. Cmao20 (talk) 14:54, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Not bad, but AI unfortunately still produces these idiosyncratic patterns.--Ermell (talk) 17:28, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- It looks very unnatural to me and produced a checked pattern somewhat like newspaper pictures. I would absolutely oppose this version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:52, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Since I highly doubt that the author does it and it is a photo external to the commons, I decided to apply a sharpening filter on the girl's face. anybody can rollback me if its not well Wilfredor (talk) 12:33, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:50, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 08:55, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 10:55, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
File:The great egret (Ardea alba).jpg edit
Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2024 at 09:36:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Ardea
- Info created by Mildeep - uploaded by Mildeep - nominated by Nabin K. Sapkota -- Nabin K. Sapkota (talk) 09:36, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Nabin K. Sapkota (talk) 09:36, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:25, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:39, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose We already have 16+ FPs of this species. I don't think this is high enough technical quality/composition for another. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:10, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Karelj (talk) 13:19, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Fully take Charles's point but I think the composition of this one with the wings extended is nice enough to make it a bit different Cmao20 (talk) 15:51, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:23, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 19:54, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Halo on the neck? Noise on the upper neck and head. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:36, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20 – yes, this one is different. – Aristeas (talk) 08:29, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 11:29, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support I think, it does not matter how many FPs we already have. If a photo is interesting and technically of fine quality (with some exceptions for historically valuable ones), it should be FP. This photo is interesting and definitely has educational and encyclopedic value. --LexKurochkin (talk) 14:55, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Chepry (talk) 10:18, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Ermell (talk) 17:27, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:52, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:35, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Son of farmer in dust bowl area, Cimarron County, Oklahoma, 8b38282.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2024 at 09:33:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1930-1939
- Info created by Arthur Rothstein, restored by AgnosticPreachersKid and Yann, uploaded and nominated by Yann
- Support Another moving picture of the Dust Bowl. We don't have FP of children from that period yet. -- Yann (talk) 09:33, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Moving but very low quality. Grainy and Overprocessed compared to the original that is showing much more nuances in the shades -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:34, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Basile Morin: I uploaded a new version which should address at least part of your concerns: denoised, more light... Please tell me what do you think. Yann (talk) 10:18, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the notification. Still overprocessed in my view. Just a different processing, but the same kind of modification, with excessive contrasts. The shades in gray scale are not original. More worryingly, this format is not faithful to the author's choice. While the original photograph was almost a square, here it is a rectangle. And when the author decided to grant a large space below the feet, as well as an infinity sky (giving the impression that the child is small in the environment), here the current crop seems to be altering this management of the space. There was also an eye-catching object at the left, like a dark shadow, that has been totally suppressed, for whatever reason I can't support -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:25, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Honestly, there is less contrast here than in the original, not more. Yann (talk) 12:26, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Very honestly, the dark grays in the original are black, and the light grays white. Which means that the contrasts have increased. Moreover, the derivative seems upscaled, as part of the resolution -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:23, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Well, the dark grays are... dark grays, and the light grays are... light grays, which means a decreased contrast. And there is nothing upscaled. Yann (talk) 13:56, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- When superimposing the original TIFF and this derivative JPG on Photoshop, the derivative version appears bigger in size. Which is weird, since the source indicated on the page is unique, with a specific resolution. At least it's not clear where the larger resolution comes from, if it exists. Concerning the shades, I mean there's a difference between the original and this version. The original nuances appear richer and more subtle to me. Best regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:13, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- I uploaded the original JPEG below: no crop and no contrast adjustment. IMO the version above is better, but we will see... Yann (talk) 14:40, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Basile. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:55, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral The alternative version is better IMO, and it keeps more historical value as it is. --LexKurochkin (talk) 18:49, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose alt version is better Chepry (talk) 10:20, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Alternative edit
- Info Original: no crop and no contrast adjustment. Yann (talk) 14:39, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Although there's some natural vignetting, this version is more authentic in my view, true to the author's capture. Perhaps a FP -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:14, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Basile. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:55, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 16:58, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 18:41, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Chepry (talk) 10:20, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Argenberg (talk) 22:02, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 08:54, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 10:56, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Terragio67 (talk) 21:09, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Lismore Lighthouse seen from a boat 4.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2024 at 04:58:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#United_Kingdom
- Info Nominating based on feedback at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Lismore Lighthouse seen from a boat 5.jpg. created by Grendelkhan - uploaded by Grendelkhan - nominated by Grendelkhan -- grendel|khan 04:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- grendel|khan 04:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
NeutralThe composition is better but the sky is quite dull and overall although this is a solid QI I'm not sure it's outstanding enough for FP. If you had this composition but with the sky from the other image, now we'd be talking. Cmao20 (talk) 15:52, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support after reading Aristeas's well-phrased comment. Cmao20 (talk) 16:34, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 19:54, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 11:28, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Not that flashy as many other lighthouse scenes, but after living a while with it I really like the pure white shapes of the buildings before the inhospital landscape and the delicate shades of the sky. – Aristeas (talk) 06:57, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 15:34, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Aristeas --LexKurochkin (talk) 12:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Marmora Dam1.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2024 at 00:39:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Canada
- Info: Marmora Dam in Ontario. While normally an unattractive concrete structure, it is illuminated by warm light and flanked by the autumn colours, creating a surprisingly harmonious composition. All by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:39, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:39, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support I think the reason you are getting less interest in this one is because so much of the subject is in shadow. But personally I like the composition, per nomination. The autumn colours are subtle but nice, and there are gentle leading lines along the waterline and in the water that lead the eye from the shadowed areas to the part of the structure that's lit. Not the most obvious FP but IMO pretty good. Cmao20 (talk) 15:50, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 19:55, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20 and my comments on your other nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:39, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment There is a weird construction of the railung (see note). Composed of different, not fitting parts by photoshop? Besides that, the right upper part is not very sharp. --Llez (talk) 05:40, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- It's a white warning sign mounted to the railing. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:55, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Most of it is in the shade and the right side is overexposed. No wow for me. Sorry.Ermell (talk) 08:15, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Ermell Poco a poco (talk) 10:39, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose as Ermell above Chepry (talk) 10:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Ermell -- Karelj (talk) 10:36, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:12, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:064 Mountain gorilla climbing a tree at Bwindi Impenetrable Forest National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 11 Apr 2024 at 23:24:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Hominidae (Great_Apes)
- Info created by Giles Laurent - uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 23:24, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 23:24, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Some problems with branches in the foreground but taking into account that it is a photo in its natural environment, it is formidable --Wilfredor (talk) 01:28, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Wilfredor, and also because gorillas are unfortunately so rare, but despite the drawbacks, this is a just plain good photo with a great view of the gorilla. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:14, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- These gorillas are habituated so after a long hike it is very easy to get close. Unfortunately, you only have one hour with them and the light is often poor. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:24, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Wilfredor and Ikan Kekek. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:32, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The lack of detail in the head and the foreground leaves. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:22, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see any lack of detail on the head considering it is shot from a long distance (600mm zoom) at ISO 4000 because it is a dark forest. Also Bwindi Impenetrable Forest is dense with vegetation so some leafs in the foreground are inevitable, especially from a long distance. I actually think the leafs give a nice sense of depth and give accurate representation of the forest density. Having this picture of the full body of a wild mountain gorilla of a certain age in such dense environment is actually quite lucky in my opinion. Giles Laurent (talk) 09:36, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- You were very unlucky to have to take the photo from so far away. Usually you will be taken very close to the group you have been allocated. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- We were able to go closer to the group a bit later but as it is a dense forest, you would not be able to see the whole body from closer as it would always be partially hidden behind dense vegetation. Giles Laurent (talk) 11:47, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- You were very unlucky to have to take the photo from so far away. Usually you will be taken very close to the group you have been allocated. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see any lack of detail on the head considering it is shot from a long distance (600mm zoom) at ISO 4000 because it is a dark forest. Also Bwindi Impenetrable Forest is dense with vegetation so some leafs in the foreground are inevitable, especially from a long distance. I actually think the leafs give a nice sense of depth and give accurate representation of the forest density. Having this picture of the full body of a wild mountain gorilla of a certain age in such dense environment is actually quite lucky in my opinion. Giles Laurent (talk) 09:36, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Although it is clearly a rare shot of a gorilla in its natural habitat, I don't like the lighting, especially on the face. It looks bright and whitish like a camera flash. For me, no wow, I'm sorry. --Till (talk) 11:29, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- No flash was used and I would never use that on any animal. The light was coming from a natural opening in the forest. The brightness on the face is natural as it comes from the reflection of the light due to wet or oily skin of the face in comparison with the fur that is dark. Giles Laurent (talk) 11:42, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- No offense, I didn't say a flash was used. But the lighting looks a bit like that to me, i.e. a bright white light seemingly coming from the direction of the camera. Of course it is natural lighting; I just don't think the photo is FP. Till (talk) 16:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- No flash was used and I would never use that on any animal. The light was coming from a natural opening in the forest. The brightness on the face is natural as it comes from the reflection of the light due to wet or oily skin of the face in comparison with the fur that is dark. Giles Laurent (talk) 11:42, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Distracting blurry "blobs", especially those in front of the gorilla, hiding part of the body.
Moreover, I agree with Till about the light.Sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:38, 3 April 2024 (UTC) updated comment (new version uploaded) -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:25, 5 April 2024 (UTC) - Weak support The big blurry bits of vegetation are unfortunately a little bit distracting but personally I think the detail on the face is fine and I like the composition overall. I get the reasons for oppose and they make sense but I think it's still a good photo. Cmao20 (talk) 15:44, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 19:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Definitely a difficult picture to take, respect, but the light on the face looks too unnatural. Sorry.Ermell (talk) 08:10, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Unfortunately, pictures that were taken under difficult conditions or rarely depict animals are often not adequately honoured. In this case, however, I stand by my opinion because the photo is simply not as perfect as it should be for FP. --Ermell (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support per Cmao20. – Aristeas (talk) 08:20, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Cute, but those leaves spoil it unfortunately. I'll try my luck later with some Bwindi shots, too Poco a poco (talk) 10:40, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- won't we all! Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:11, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Info New version uploaded with highlights edited (press cmd+R on mac or ctrl+F5 on windows with image open to force refresh). What do you think now Till, Basile Morin and Ermell ? --Giles Laurent (talk) 11:10, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Ping everyone who's voted when you make substantial changes. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:18, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if I like that you darkened the photo, but I won't change my vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:19, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Ping everyone who's voted when you make substantial changes. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:18, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
Alternative edit
- Info Here's an alternative version that shows off the mountain gorilla more prominently, and whose crop reduces considerably the number of foreground elements. Pinging all the previous voters as suggested: Wilfredor, Ikan Kekek, SHB2000, Charlesjsharp, Till, Basile Morin, Cmao20, ★, Ermell, Aristeas and Poco a poco. Thank you in advance for the new review and wishing a nice sunday to everyone. --Giles Laurent (talk) 23:53, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support both versions -- Giles Laurent (talk) 23:53, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support This composition may be better. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:50, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 08:54, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Biased, but I much prefer this youngster in a tree in the same forest or relaxing on the ground (or making a face?). Even though they are not FP quality, I also prefer this and that one. Over to you, Poco a poco for the Bwindi shoot out... Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:10, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your review. Even though some are not bad, I personally think that all the pictures you linked are either of way lower quality (no fur sharpness) or of less interesting composition (no bokeh, etc.). Also they are all of very young individuals so they are not the same subject and they are also much smaller and much easier to photograph in a dense environment. -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:45, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Ikan. – Aristeas (talk) 10:55, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 13:43, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:58, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:35, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Campamento de ganado de la tribu Mundari, Terekeka, Sudán del Sur, 2024-01-27, DD 04.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 11 Apr 2024 at 08:29:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family_:_Bovidae_(Bovids)
- Info Watusi cow and a boy within the smoke of burning cow dung in a cattle camp of the Mundari tribe, Terekeka, South Sudan. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 08:29, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 08:29, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Unsure about this one. I think that because there's so much smoke there just isn't a lot to see in the composition, and the light is IMO a bit pale and dull. Cmao20 (talk) 14:01, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Well, what I can say is that the picture shows pretty good the scene I experienced. At the end of the day my eyes were red...Poco a poco (talk) 15:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Sounds miserable, and I applaud you for braving these conditions to get us these shots! I think the difference for me is that this one is hazy but has great light. In this shot I'm missing that wonderful golden light and it means the haze detracts from rather than adds to the composition for me. Cmao20 (talk) 17:30, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support I’m not sure why there are no supporting votes for this image. I think it’s great. It has some cinematic quality to it. Objects are placed harmoniously across the frame making up the composition. There is a sense of movement and stopped motion concurrently, freeze alongside some spontaneity. Smoke and dust add mystery to the scene, distilling objects into curves and shapes. A horned animal and a young human together in obscurity. The only weak point for me on closer inspection is the industrial bag with modern inscriptions, but otherwise it is good, I would say, captivating. --Argenberg (talk) 23:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Special mood. Interesting interplay of lighted dust / mist, and silhouettes. But tight crop at the bottom, as part of the composition. The two dark and sharp horns are striking enough, and the front view is appealing -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:13, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 21:19, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose per Cmao. --SHB2000 (talk) 21:58, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 00:52, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:The Pinnacle, Grampians National Park Sunrise.jpg edit
Voting period ends on 11 Apr 2024 at 08:24:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Australia#Victoria
- Info created and uploaded by Joshua Tagicakibau - nominated by SHB2000 --SHB2000 (talk) 08:24, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 08:24, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support It could be a lot sharper but the mood is magical Cmao20 (talk) 13:47, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 13:50, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Too bad about the great atmosphere. Poor quality, out of focus. Everything has to be right for "excellent". Sorry Je-str (talk) 14:44, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:35, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:48, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Ivar (talk) 09:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:35, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:55, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 23:57, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
File:Werkspoorkathedraal 2017.jpg, featured edit
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Apr 2024 at 21:22:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry#The Netherlands
- Info created by Choinowski - uploaded by Choinowski - nominated by Choinowski -- Choinowski (talk) 21:22, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Choinowski (talk) 21:22, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment That's pretty interesting. I don't know the building, but I'm guessing someone will complain that this needs perspective correction, but I think it's rather more of an abstract silhouette. I'll live with it longer before making a decision, but I'm glad you brought this photo to our attention. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:07, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your feedback. The image features parts of the interior of The Werkspoorkathedraal (see dutch wiki). As you can see it's an image made by and uploaded by me with the intention to see how this Featured Picture process works. I am well aware that this is a more abstract picture and I already learned it has some flaws with perspective :). Choinowski (talk) 16:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support I think the bottom crop could be better - it would be better if those windows were not partially cropped - but overall I like this quite a lot. Per Ikan, good abstract work and while the perspective is converging, it’s IMO okay for a picture where the overall artistic impression is what matters. Cmao20 (talk) 15:21, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:06, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Ikan and Cmao20. – Aristeas (talk) 15:31, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support per my remarks above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:37, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 19:59, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 04:28, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 11:22, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:56, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
Timetable (day 5 after nomination) edit
Fri 05 Apr → Wed 10 Apr Sat 06 Apr → Thu 11 Apr Sun 07 Apr → Fri 12 Apr Mon 08 Apr → Sat 13 Apr Tue 09 Apr → Sun 14 Apr Wed 10 Apr → Mon 15 Apr
Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting) edit
Mon 01 Apr → Wed 10 Apr Tue 02 Apr → Thu 11 Apr Wed 03 Apr → Fri 12 Apr Thu 04 Apr → Sat 13 Apr Fri 05 Apr → Sun 14 Apr Sat 06 Apr → Mon 15 Apr Sun 07 Apr → Tue 16 Apr Mon 08 Apr → Wed 17 Apr Tue 09 Apr → Thu 18 Apr Wed 10 Apr → Fri 19 Apr
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/April 2024), 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/April 2024.
- 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/April 2024), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.