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Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents[edit]There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolors, paintings, etchings, and various others.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:Cobh Panorama at Dusk.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2023 at 08:16:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
- Info created, uploaded, and nominated by Podstawko Podstawko ●talk 08:16, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Neutral. Abstaining from support as the author.
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/Places/Other#United_Kingdom
- 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)
- 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 Thanks for the explanation. Beautiful motif, photographed very well in beautiful light. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:43, 5 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)
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)
File:20181204 Warming stripes (global, WMO, 1850-2018) - Climate Lab Book (Ed Hawkins).png[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
- 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)
- 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 trends to non-scientists. The progression of Hawkins' 2018 graphic from blue (cool) to red (warm) portrays Earth's average annual temperatures since 1850. — RCraig09 (talk) 18:41, 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)
Wikispecies has an entry on: File:20181204 Warming stripes (global, WMO, 1850-2018) - Climate Lab Book (Ed Hawkins).png. |
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)
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)
File:Cesenatico - Canal port - Fishing house (Trabucco) 20230815.jpg[edit]
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)
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)
- 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)
- Support This is perfect now! ★ 16:19, 4 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)
- Comment I prefer the version above. ★ 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)
File:Small backwater. Kozachij island in the Dnipro river. Ukraine.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2023 at 15:12:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Ukraine
- Info created by Ввласенко - uploaded by Ввласенко - nominated by Ввласенко -- Ввласенко (talk) 15:12, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Peaceful, valuable, well-composed and well executed - probably as good a picture of this motif as could be taken, but not extraordinary to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:21, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. The photograph is technically good, but there's nothing special about it to make it featured. Podstawko ●talk 20:39, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose per Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 22:52, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Real Monasterio de San Juan de la Peña, Huesca, España, 2023-01-05, DD 48-50 HDR.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2023 at 21:30:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Spain
- Info Apse of the higher church in the Royal Monastery of San Juan de la Peña, Huesca, Aragon, Spain. It was one of the most important monasteries in Aragon in the Middle Ages. Its two-level church is partially carved in the stone of the great cliff that overhangs the foundation. San Juan de la Peña means "Saint John of the Cliff". The lower church includes some mozarabic architectural surviving elements, although most of the parts of the monastery (including the impressive cloister, under the great rock) are Romanesque. After the fire of 1675, a new monastery was built. The old monastery (built in 920) was declared a National Monument on 13 July 1889, and the new monastery in 1923. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 21:30, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:30, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 00:34, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support Interesting volumes -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:57, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --imehling (talk) 07:04, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 09:17, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Neutral It's beautiful and there's wow but the framing on the sides and the bottom are very tight, with the side columns even cut off, which is a shame. - Benh (talk) 13:55, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:28, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support Ermell (talk) 18:29, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Weak support I'm torn between a passion for history and art and recognizing that Benh is right about the lower and side crop. In the end the first one wins.--Terragio67 (talk) 18:48, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Good picture indeed but unfortunately too tight for FP, sorry. --Selbymay (talk) 18:57, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Weak support like Terragio67. Still very impressive. 20 years ago when 24mm was the widest lens most photographers could afford we would have called this excellent. --Aristeas (talk) 20:14, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
Weak opposeExcellent image, but unfortunate crop. --Tagooty (talk) 08:46, 4 November 2023 (UTC)- Support --Effco (talk) 10:58, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Will upload a new version this night with an improved crop. I'd also like to stress that this place is a jewel of Romanesque in the world. Poco a poco (talk) 10:14, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Done I've uploaded a new version with more image on left, right and bottom. Also readjusted the vertical perspective correction on the left. I could offer a bit more of crop on the right, but there is a metal structure spoiling the image, so I'd rather leave it like this. @Tagooty and Selbymay: Better now? Poco a poco (talk) 20:53, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support ★ 17:02, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support the current version per Tagooty. I'd still like wider crops left and right, but this version has a restful composition that works much better for me than the original, and I love the motif and lighting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:32, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:42, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Panoramica do Pico das Agulhas Negras.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2023 at 18:07:36 (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 - nominated by ★ -- ★ 18:07, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ★ 18:07, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 18:24, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment There is a dust spot in the upper left corner. --imehling (talk) 18:34, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Neutral. Good job with panorama stitching. I looked up other pictures of this mountain, and I believe your take does not give justice to how imposing that mountain is. Podstawko ●talk 21:28, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Dust spot toward the upper left, just above the big cloud. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:50, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination Renominating after dust spot removal. ★ 18:21, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Flussregenpfeifer im flachen Wasser 01.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2023 at 17:30:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes#Genus_:_Charadrius
- Info created by Stephan Sprinz - uploaded by Stephan Sprinz - nominated by Stephan Sprinz -- Stephan Sprinz (talk) 17:30, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Stephan Sprinz (talk) 17:30, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support funny --Harlock81 (talk) 18:01, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 18:22, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Ivar (talk) 19:08, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support Nice composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:45, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:08, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support. What a beautiful little creature. Podstawko ●talk 21:52, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 00:34, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support Very nice light and water reflection -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:49, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --GRDN711 (talk) 02:40, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support Cute --imehling (talk) 07:05, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:58, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support —Bruce1eetalk 08:53, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 11:05, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support hits two birds with one stone - Benh (talk) 13:52, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:23, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support ǃǃ --Terragio67 (talk) 18:40, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 20:12, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:37, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support Impressive reflection --Tagooty (talk) 08:47, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:12, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Schnobby (talk) 15:56, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Virtual-Pano (talk) 00:54, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:42, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Lake Chuzenji panorama 2018-7-15.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2023 at 12:07:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Japan
- Info created by Stormraiser - uploaded by Stormraiser - nominated by Stormraiser -- Stormraiser (talk) 12:07, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Stormraiser (talk) 12:07, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. Beautiful location and nice large dimensions of the panorama, but the blown whites in the clouds are ruining the picture. Podstawko ●talk 15:12, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose White balance is off in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:48, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Whites... --SHB2000 (talk) 00:01, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Catoctin Mountain and farm MD1.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2023 at 00:39:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Agriculture#United States
- Info Farm in sunlight on a cloudy day at the foot of Catoctin Mountain, between Emmitsburg and Thurmont, Maryland. The farther mountain has snow on it. Camp David is at the summit of that mountain. Created by Acroterion - uploaded by Acroterion - nominated by Acroterion -- Acroterion (talk) 00:39, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Acroterion (talk) 00:39, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Big dust spot toward the upper left. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:59, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Fixed, thanks. Acroterion (talk) 03:15, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Neutral. I very much like the light here, the thumbnail catches attention that's for sure; also, the photo meets "informative" requirement, but there are a few flaws: the whites are blown on the house, and there's a roll problem: all vertical lines are leaning to the left (not only the leftmost structure, but also the house). Podstawko ●talk 10:16, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- I'll look at the lean tonight and see whether the highlighted house side can be recovered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acroterion (talk • contribs) 12:25, 2 November 2023 (UTC) (UTC)
- I've knocked down the exposure to recover the house siding texture and adjusted tilt. The hay barn and all of the telephone poles lean. Overall it's a little less contrasty. Acroterion (talk) 01:16, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- I'll look at the lean tonight and see whether the highlighted house side can be recovered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acroterion (talk • contribs) 12:25, 2 November 2023 (UTC) (UTC)
- Support Thank you for the changes. Good for me now; the stark light/shadow contrast and the telephoto compression make this an impressive photo. --Aristeas (talk) 20:05, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I like very much the photograph, and the whites had to be fixed, but now there is a texture that there was not before. Also the buildings in the foreground did lose sharpness. I don't know if the result will change much, but maybe you may try to repeat the processing from the begin. --Harlock81 (talk) 09:42, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- I'll see what I can do, the balances between NR/blur and sharpening/artifacts are narrow and treating it like an HDR images loses much of its impact. Acroterion (talk) 12:29, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- I've tried a different workflow and uploaded a new version. Acroterion (talk) 00:55, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- I'll see what I can do, the balances between NR/blur and sharpening/artifacts are narrow and treating it like an HDR images loses much of its impact. Acroterion (talk) 12:29, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Nice, painterly photo that has various positive aspects, but no wow to me. I think I needed to see this view in different light with some special clouds for FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:35, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support Very dramatic lighting. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:45, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support There are still issues with this photo, e.g. the two white spots in the woods which add distraction instead of information (and thus should be removed), but the light does the photo for me, and the image is much better after the suggested changes. BTW the second silo from the left looks like the space shuttle tank with a booster rocket attached! Podstawko ●talk 07:10, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Lissabon - Praca do Comercio - Arcades.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2023 at 17:35:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Portugal
- Info all by Imehling -- imehling (talk) 17:35, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- imehling (talk) 17:35, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:20, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support ★ 16:17, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 18:02, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 18:27, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 20:13, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:03, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:22, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Milseburg (talk) 18:17, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 18:52, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support Effective composition. I would have welcomed a bit more detail resolution/microcontrast, but it’s OK. --Aristeas (talk) 20:07, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:40, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:11, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:42, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Durga Puja in Dinhata 3.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2023 at 16:29:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Statues indoors
- Info created by Mr. Rasel Hasan - uploaded by Mr. Rasel Hasan - nominated by Mr. Rasel Hasan -- Mr. Rasel Hasan (talk) 16:29, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Mr. Rasel Hasan (talk) 16:29, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Fixed the gallery since this is sculpture, not a painting. 'Statues indoors' is where the previous Durga FP is. --Cart (talk) 18:30, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose I like the subject, but all of the crops look too cramped to me, and the sharpness is not exemplary. (By the way, I'm assuming there's no COM:DW copyright issue?) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:57, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. The crop is too tight as mentioned above, but also the perspective is quite random -- the picture was taken from an angle, no attempt to straighten even in post processing. Podstawko ●talk 15:17, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Not even a QI. --SHB2000 (talk) 00:00, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Lioness Collar Sitting Luangwa Jul23 A7C 06324.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2023 at 16:18:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Felidae_(Felids)
- Info Lioness with radio-collar resting in South Luangwa National Park, Zambia. Created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 16:18, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Tagooty (talk) 16:18, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support ★ 17:29, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose We have many fine lion FPs. This does not compare. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:33, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support This is still a fine lion FP. --SHB2000 (talk) 00:00, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support per SHB2000. Good, sharp lioness head. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:29, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:10, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:14, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:42, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Citizen SLD-100NR calculator.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2023 at 13:51:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects#Machines
- Info created by LoMit - uploaded by LoMit - nominated by LoMit -- LoMit talk 13:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- LoMit talk 13:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support. =) --Brateevsky {talk} 15:13, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support - Mr. Rasel Hasan (talk) 16:45, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
Support ★ 17:29, 1 November 2023 (UTC)- Per Basile. ★ 14:03, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose No wow, sorry. The quality is acceptable as QI, but the resolution is small (only 1,636 × 2,466 pixels without the frame, from a camera that records 6,000 x 4,000 pixels). Considering that all FP are future POTY candidates, I would like the label to be awarded to images that are a little more special than just "brand new product, simple shot" -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:49, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Are we evaluating the sensor of camera or the picture itself? This picture is sharp, the subject is well lighted. And there are other FPs which present "ordinary product", for example: 1 2 --LoMit talk 10:50, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Almost all modern equipment allows you to take high-resolution photos. If a picture is small, there should be mitigating reasons. Crop necessary due to long-distance for example.
- Our guidelines state: "A bad picture of a very difficult subject is better than a good picture of an ordinary subject". And here it is an average picture of an ordinary subject, in my view.
- The two examples you give were highly controversial (7-3 and 11-4) and I think both were more interesting with natural shadows, more original products, special angles of view -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:41, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose per Basile. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:04, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Irrelevant motif to me. --Palauenc05 (talk) 12:29, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Maly Tkhach, Adygea, Поляны рядом с горой Асбестная, Адыгея.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2023 at 11:50:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Russia#Southern Federal District
- Info Afonka River Valley. Republic of Adygea, Western Caucasus. All by -- Argenberg (talk) 11:50, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Argenberg (talk) 11:50, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support. --Brateevsky {talk} 17:11, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 18:29, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --imehling (talk) 07:06, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 20:17, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 00:01, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose I've looked at this picture a bunch of times, and it's certainly got good compositional elements, but where's the wow? I'm not seeing that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:31, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- For me, the ‘wow’ effect comes from a combination of cloud pattern in the sky, somewhat bizarre Triassic outcrop formations on the right and the general remoteness of the place. And also, to a lesser degree, from spring freshness (melting snow, fresh grass, condensed humidity), and the fact that it is a UNESCO recognized site. --Argenberg (talk) 16:32, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Not exceptional --Tagooty (talk) 08:50, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:13, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:42, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Muscovy duck head at golden hour in Don Det Laos.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2023 at 00:33:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus : Cairina
- Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:33, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:33, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Question Does this duck have a disease on its face? --Wilfredor (talk) 00:43, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Answer No (this is not a tumor or something alike. The red growth around the beak is a natural caruncle) -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:58, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support ★ 02:07, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:00, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 10:52, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Ivar (talk) 11:06, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:46, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:21, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 08:51, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support Really very good. --Aristeas (talk) 10:56, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support I am assuming it is wild... Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:35, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 14:17, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:41, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 18:30, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --imehling (talk) 07:07, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:20, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:09, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:42, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Ring-billed gull (16241).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2023 at 23:04:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes#Genus_:_Larus
- Info A ring-billed gull (Larus delawarensis) in non-breeding plumage doing some preening/splashing. all by — Rhododendrites talk | 23:04, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 23:04, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Nice composition and good quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:48, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support ★ 02:08, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment The head could be a bit sharper. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:01, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support sharpness is fine for me. -- Ivar (talk) 11:07, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:53, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:21, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:52, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 13:59, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --imehling (talk) 07:09, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:17, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support The water drops from the wings emphasise the action. --Tagooty (talk) 08:52, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:08, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:42, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Eastern wood pewee (71095).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2023 at 22:57:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Tyrannidae_(Tyrant_Flycatchers)
- Info Eastern wood pewee (Contopus virens), a small flycatcher species - all by — Rhododendrites talk | 22:57, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 22:57, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Cute, and good sharpness considering the bird's size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:02, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support ★ 09:22, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support - Mr. Rasel Hasan (talk) 11:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 20:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:22, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:43, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:42, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 19:58, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 11:14, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:15, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:08, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:42, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Schloss Philippsruhe (Westseite).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2023 at 15:55:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Germany
- Info Philippsruhe castle in Hanau-Kesselstadt, west facade, seen from the park. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 15:55, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Milseburg (talk) 15:55, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. The roof is not straight. Podstawko ●talk 17:02, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
Oppose no reason for a vanishing point on the (far far) right in my view here.- Benh (talk) 20:56, 31 October 2023 (UTC)- Comment This photo has many advantages – good colours, beautiful sky, the light emphasizes the three-dimensional parts of the façade, etc. I assume this image has been stitched from at least two shots. @Milseburg: Could you check the projection? I would not mind that the view is not totally symmetrical, but some of the horizontal lines seem a tiny little bit bent at the right, so maybe a small change to the projection could mitigate the objections. --Aristeas (talk) 11:06, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Thanks for the criticism. I uploaded a new version with a horizontal roof and a slightly changed alignment. --Milseburg (talk) 17:12, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support Thank you! In my eyes a very pretty and impressive photo and much better than all the others I have reviewed in Oct 2022 for WLM. Any remaining asymmetries etc. can easily be explained by small asymmetries in the castle itself; it’s old ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 20:09, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:06, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --imehling (talk) 14:11, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support A nice FP. ★ 21:54, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 23:56, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose This is a very good, valuable QI/VI to me. It's a very nice Schloss, but the trees on the right don't help it and there just isn't anything else very interesting in the photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:39, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:45, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose. After the alignment changes I'm still opposing. The problem is not really in perspective correction in pp, but in where you were standing -- you were not centered on the building, i.e. were not positioned exactly opposite the door. This skews the perspective and can be seen in the columns, the clock tower, etc. Podstawko ●talk 07:15, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:035 Uganda kobs mating at Queen Elizabeth National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2023 at 10:21:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Bovidae (Bovids)
- Info created by Giles Laurent - uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:21, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 10:21, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 15:55, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 16:00, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 16:52, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Nice adult material. - Benh (talk) 20:58, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
Delete Pure pornography, no educational value.Just kidding! Support Good action photo, well composed. I don't think sharp individual hairs are needed for an action picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:47, 31 October 2023 (UTC)- Support Excellent! They're not really shy, to offer such a great view point. Or too busy to care the photographer? :-) Basile Morin (talk) 00:43, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support ★ 02:10, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:53, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support. Very good! =) I choose it for POTD for 22 May, 2024. --Brateevsky {talk} 15:18, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support Rare action shot. --Tagooty (talk) 16:22, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support - Mr. Rasel Hasan (talk) 16:48, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:23, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 09:50, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:41, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 13:57, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support. Perfect. Podstawko ●talk 19:27, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:45, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Terragio67 (talk) 18:55, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:05, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:46, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Church of St. Anne, Shandon.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2023 at 06:40:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
- Info created, uploaded, and nominated by Podstawko -- Podstawko ●talk 06:40, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Neutral. I'm abstaining from voting as the author. What you see is the north side of Cork City, with the conspicuous St. Anne's Church, aka Shandon Bells, aka "Four Faced Liar" because each face of the clock shows a different hour. The image was taken last Saturday (Oct. 28, 2023) morning, and is selected out of over a hundred frames I shot from before sunrise till 9am or so. The clouds had been building up in the background for a long while before taking the shape I found balanced enough. The decision for centered composition is deliberate here, and I carefully picked the vantage spot and positioned the camera with "pixel precision" using a geared head. There is no post-processing cropping. CPL filter was used to make clouds more pronounced. Curves, local adjustments, and cleanup of unwanted spots close to edges was done in post-processing. Most of my shots in this series were at ISO100, but I quickly switched to ISO800 (kudoz to Canon's Fv mode which rocks!) when I saw the Ryanair airplane approaching the Cork Airport, to freeze it. I think it plays well with the clouds. It had already started to rain when I took this picture, and then it poured... all my equipment was soaking by the time I found shelter.
- Strong support - ABAL1412🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺 (talk ☭) 07:21, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Comment very nice mood, but quality seems not up to FP standards in terms of sharpness and noise. Tomer T (talk) 09:48, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Excess noise. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:13, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- @W.carter and Podstawko: Glad we got everything sorted out. And I'm giving this image my Support. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:14, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Info Text, comments and votes below this line may be related to the mistakenly created 'Alt'. Please cast (or move) your votes above it. --Cart (talk) 16:34, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Tomer T's and SHB2000's make sense in the Wikimedia informative context. The grainy "look" may be pleasing aesthetically but is not adding merit. I have now denoised the picture, and brightened (just a tad as not to lose the mood) -- please check it out.
- Oppose Underexposed, boring centered composition and weird colours. I think this image just hasn't the potential for FP, no matter how many fixes you'll add on top. - Benh (talk) 20:55, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Mr. Rasel Hasan (talk) 11:37, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Are you offering this verion as an 'Alternative' on your nomination? If so, you have to make this part a proper sub-section to your nomination, Look at how other noms with 'Alts' are made. This has to be done for voting clarity as well as for the FPCBot to be able to later close the nom correctly. If the version is just an example image, you can only show it as a link. Please fix this. Thank you, --Cart (talk) 12:37, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Underexposed & per Benh. The plane is too big to be just overlooked but too small to make the composition. — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:53, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Thanks Cart, I have now marked the image as "Alternative version", I hope this fixes the problem, but please let me know if anything else needs to be corrected.
- Comment @W.carter and Podstawko: I don't think this should be an alternative version, should it? It's not a separate file, but a new version uploaded over the original file. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 16:08, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Ah! Thanks —Percival Kestreltail, you are perfectly correct. I didn't dig that deep. I just saw the two images and assumed they were two different files, my bad. A new version uploaded on top of the original nomination, is not regarded as an alterative. I'll restore this to a normal nomination. Podstawko is fairly new here and doesn't know all our procedural quirks. The option for an "Alt" is only for separate files, not versions uploaded on the same file page. I'm also 'pinging' @Mr. Rasel Hasan and Draceane: and Benh, who's votes happened to fall on the invalid 'Alt' to see if their votes still stand. (every time something is altered on a nom or image, previous voters should be informed.) --Cart (talk) 16:34, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks @Kestreltail and @W.carter, looks like I totally messed up that Alt thing. Indeed I'm new here. I'll be more careful the next time I propose an alternative version. Podstawko ●talk 20:11, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Ah! Thanks —Percival Kestreltail, you are perfectly correct. I didn't dig that deep. I just saw the two images and assumed they were two different files, my bad. A new version uploaded on top of the original nomination, is not regarded as an alterative. I'll restore this to a normal nomination. Podstawko is fairly new here and doesn't know all our procedural quirks. The option for an "Alt" is only for separate files, not versions uploaded on the same file page. I'm also 'pinging' @Mr. Rasel Hasan and Draceane: and Benh, who's votes happened to fall on the invalid 'Alt' to see if their votes still stand. (every time something is altered on a nom or image, previous voters should be informed.) --Cart (talk) 16:34, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Écomusée d’Alsace 12 - Hansi.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2023 at 06:50:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Bovidae (Bovids)
- Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 06:50, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Llez (talk) 06:50, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support - ABAL1412🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺 (talk ☭) 07:19, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Harsh shadows; taxidermy-vibes due the light & surroundings. —kallerna (talk) 08:02, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
File:Interior of the library at Amantaka luxury Resort & Hotel in Luang Prabang Laos.jpg, featured[edit]
Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2023 at 01:32:12 (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) 01:32, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:32, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Surprising how symmetrical the composition looks despite being different on the two sides. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:36, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support - ABAL1412🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺 (talk ☭) 07:16, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support. Well executed! Weird tiny spots in various places of the wooden shelves (e.g. top right corner of the image) bother me, but otherwise I like the attention to detail here. Good interior picture. The 11-24 is not really rectilinear, nice job processing to keep all lines straight. Podstawko ●talk 12:48, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, Podstawko for your comment. Hot pixels removed. Please could you sign your review to make it valid? Best regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:37, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 09:26, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 09:43, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 10:25, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:48, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support good architectural photo - Benh (talk) 20:59, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 22:36, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Basile's top shot as usual. ★ 02:12, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support - Rasel Hasan
- Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:49, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support Excellent photo. Also a nice library (of course it could contain more books … ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 19:10, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support Very good! -- Radomianin (talk) 20:58, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:23, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:04, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:46, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:46, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Che Guevara - Guerrillero Heroico by Alberto Korda.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 8 Nov 2023 at 22:39:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
- Info created by Alberto Korda - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:39, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:39, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:49, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Source is not present --Wilfredor (talk) 02:12, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Should be Minerva Auctions. Does the link not work for you? It works for me, but sometimes there's country blocks and such. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:30, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support ☭☭☭ - ABAL1412🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺 (talk ☭) 07:13, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 08:55, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Ezarateesteban 11:42, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 12:50, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 13:56, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support ★ 14:47, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 22:36, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:19, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 10:29, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Mile (talk) 19:53, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support Apt reproduction of an iconic photograph. --Aristeas (talk) 10:37, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Felino Volador (talk) 14:40, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support, and Wilfredor’s rationale is not valid. RodRabelo7 (talk) 14:54, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:46, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Crater Lake October 2019 011.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 8 Nov 2023 at 03:38:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United States
- Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:38, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:38, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Neutral -- definitely meets the "informative" requirement, but it needs to be re-taken with more deliberate composition. Also, the whites are overexposed and dazzling (there is advice on this in "Formal things" section at the top of the page). Podstawko ●talk 08:00, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Works for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:52, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support - ABAL1412🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺 (talk ☭) 07:11, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Good quality but a quite random scene and ordinary mountain shot. Not outstanding. --Milseburg (talk) 15:46, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Milseburg + the rocks are underexposed IMO. (After reviewing 3rd photo as UE, I had to check my monitor's brightness settings, but they should be fine.) — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:57, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support I wonder why this photo gets so harsh reviews. It’s a very contrasty scene, yes, and the rocks are black and the snow is white and shines in the sun – neither one is surprising. On the contrary, it’s the contrast of black rocks with snow which makes the wow of this photo for me. --Aristeas (talk) 11:09, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support according to Aristeas' apt review. -- Radomianin (talk) 14:15, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose The contrast is appealing, but the scene is not exceptional to me. --Tagooty (talk) 15:03, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Zicht op de Piz S-chalambert vanuit Val Sinestra 19-09-2023. (d.j.b) 01 02.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2023 at 05:31:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/Switzerland#Grisons (Graubünden)
- Info Night falls around the Piz S-chalambert (View from Val Sinestra at ~6.06 pm). A fairly simple photo, but I like the evening light.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:31, 29 October 2023 (UTC) - Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:31, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose I don't like the very dark hills in the foreground. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:05, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Very noisy sky with color banding.--Ermell (talk) 21:37, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
Oppose The clouds look solid, which is undoubtedly another way to say what Ermell stated above.-- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:09, 29 October 2023 (UTC)- Done. Noise and banding correction. Thank you for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:56, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Charlesjsharp. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 14:03, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Support Looking at this version with fresh eyes, I like it and it's an FP to me.The very dark hills frame the mountain, just like you intended. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:54, 31 October 2023 (UTC)- Oppose WB off. —kallerna (talk) 06:40, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for your response. Question for you: what does WB off mean?--Famberhorst (talk) 18:23, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- See Commons:Photography terms#White balance. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:53, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for the link.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:37, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Hi Famberhorst, surely you have more ideal conditions in your Raw file to adjust the white balance afterwards. I took the liberty of doing this in the JPG for comparison. If you prefer this result, please feel free to use the edited file. Best, -- Radomianin (talk) 21:50, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Image edited Dear reviewers @Famberhorst, Charlesjsharp, Ermell, Ikan Kekek, Sebring12Hrs, Kallerna, and ABAL1412: I have adjusted the white balance of the image in agreement with the author. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 07:55, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment The grey-green colour banding is still faintly visible. But what bothers me most are the diminishing details on the right side. --Ermell (talk) 09:13, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- It was almost invisible in the last version, but it's more visible in the new version. I have to cross out my supporting vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:50, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I've just been trying to further reduce the mentioned faint color banding. I reached the limits of JPG processing, the results were not satisfactory. Probably the best solution would be to re-process the raw file. Sorry about that. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 22:02, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Re-editing Dear reviewers @Famberhorst, Charlesjsharp, Ermell, Ikan Kekek, Sebring12Hrs, Kallerna, and ABAL1412: , this morning I removed as much of the banding in the sky as I could by using the second last version for a rework. Apologies for pinging again. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 09:58, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment It's better again, but they are faintly visible and I'm uncertain this is one of the greatest photos on the site. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:14, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Weak support - ABAL1412🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺 (talk ☭) 07:03, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support I like the composition of the image combined with the favorable lighting of the mountain. In my opinion, the previous removal of the banding as well as the white balance improved the image. -- Radomianin (talk) 07:55, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose The editing is not bad but the whole picture looks a bit unreal. The visible noise reduction and the associated lack of sharpness bothers me the most. Sorry.--Ermell (talk) 18:20, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Charles Henry Turner at Sumner High School, St. Louis, Mo. Aug. 9, 1921.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2023 at 22:58:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
- Info created by The Crisis - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:58, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:58, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Good portrait of an important person I regret to say I didn't know about. The texture, including on his face, looks rough at full size, but the original full size was only 15 x 10 cm, full page on my big monitor is larger than that, and it looks good at that size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:44, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Aye. Grain is a thing in this era of photo; if the negatives exist you can sometimes do better, but negatives were often not very carefully preserved. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:47, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- The bottom should be cropped. Yann (talk) 16:36, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Archive images should not be cropped. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:06, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Indeed they shouldn't! That's the style they used. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:10, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Yann, Charlesjsharp, and Ikan Kekek: There are cases you can tell it was meant to be cropped. Crop marks drawn on it; being able to point to a publication that's cropped etc. Or something like File:Anna Oscàr in Don Giovanni at Kungliga Operan 1914 - SMV - NO026 - Restoration.jpg where there's clearly a background created which we can see the edges of. But this is not one of those. Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:24, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Indeed they shouldn't! That's the style they used. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:10, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support - ABAL1412🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺 (talk ☭) 07:00, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 22:21, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 11:12, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Effco (talk) 11:03, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:46, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Silhuetas no Forte de Santo Antônio da Barra (cropped).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2023 at 17:25:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Brazil
- Info Silhouettes at the Fort of Santo Antônio da Barra, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil. It was constructed to guard the entrance to the Bay of All Saints, during the time of the Portuguese Empire. Created and initially uploaded by Railson Nascimento - cropped and nominated by ★ -- ★ 17:25, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support This mood just wowed me. -- ★ 17:25, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support - ABAL1412🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺 (talk ☭) 18:06, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I have a preference for the original. Would you be willing to offer it as an alt? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:45, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- The original has some stitching errors. ★ 00:39, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- I hadn't noticed or checked for those, but compositionally, it breathes more. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:23, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose I simply find the composition of this cropped image very disappointing compared to the original. It's in-your-face and doesn't breathe. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:55, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 19:27, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support--Princess 🍵 Rosalina 14711 00:06, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I was going to support, but looking at the original I'm not sure what's going on. The photo is less than the maximum resolution of the camera, so I don't assume they'd be stitching errors (though it's possible, of course). That makes me wonder what other kinds of manipulations might have caused those effects... — Rhododendrites talk | 13:25, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, but the cropped version hasn’t stitching erros and the resolution is totally acceptable for FP. ★ 13:32, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 16:26, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 06:40, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Going forth and back on this one, I think it’s original enough to deserve a star. (The uncropped version would be much more balanced, of course, but the problems are too obvious.) --Aristeas (talk) 10:24, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I feel like the stitching errors should have been dealt with in the full composition. I don't understand why this crop deserves a star, but obviously, a strong consensus disagrees with me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:35, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- The consensus seems to realize that the crop also harmonizes with the diagonal composition. ★ 11:20, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- You're the only one to mention this, so you seem to be putting words in people's mouths. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:10, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- I said "seems", so it's just a perception. ★ 16:21, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- You're the only one to mention this, so you seem to be putting words in people's mouths. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:10, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I feel like the stitching errors should have been dealt with in the full composition. I don't understand why this crop deserves a star, but obviously, a strong consensus disagrees with me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:35, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Laitche (talk) 04:18, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:12, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:46, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Roza-Hutor-001.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2023 at 08:55:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Transport#Aerial_lifts_(Cableways)
- Info created by Alexander Novikov - uploaded by Alexander Novikov - nominated by Alexander Novikov -- Alexander Novikov (talk) 08:55, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Alexander Novikov (talk) 08:55, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support - ABAL1412🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺 (talk ☭) 09:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose I would prefer the view without the gondola. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:38, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Yes, and the cables and pole. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:51, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- But it isn't the subject of the picture ? :). --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 14:01, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- I react to the photo as a whole, not only whatever subset of the composition someone might define as the subject. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:56, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Yes, and the cables and pole. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:51, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --RodRabelo7 (talk) 16:37, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Hazy landscape and motion blur -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:15, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Weak support Some technical problems but this is one of the current noms I was drawn to. — Rhododendrites talk | 13:07, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 23:03, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Average composition, hazy background. —kallerna (talk) 06:41, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 12:01, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support some technical imperfections, but the subject is well captured. The gondola (and the cables and the poles) is the hero of the image. :) UnpetitproleX (Talk) 14:04, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support ★ 23:22, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Per others. --Tagooty (talk) 08:55, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:47, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Llantwit Major Beach, Oct 2023 06.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2023 at 05:19:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United Kingdom#Wales
- Info Pebble beach at Llantwit Major, Vale of Glamorgan, Wales. The sun makes a rare break through the clouds on a day of typically changeable British weather, illuminating the ever-eroding Blue Lias cliff with its distinctive layers of limestone and shale. Created, uploaded and nominated by BigDom -- BigDom (talk) 05:19, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- BigDom (talk) 05:19, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support - ABAL1412🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺 (talk ☭) 09:25, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 20:16, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Very good. My one question is whether the red from the sunlight on the man at the top of the cliff is a problem or whether it's considered a normal part of photography. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:54, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Done Good spot. Have had a go at fixing those pixels. Cheers, BigDom (talk) 04:12, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- That's an improvement to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:25, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Maybe the man (above) can be cloned.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:39, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Question Why? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:11, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:40, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support The man is okay inmy eyes. --Milseburg (talk) 21:02, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support--Princess 🍵 Rosalina 10018 00:06, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Good informative value, and sun is a capricious visitor on British Isles indeed (I too need to hunt for it here...). I'm opposing because the composition really bothers me here, with horizon very straight but awkwardly neither at 1/2 or 1/3, perceived heaviness at the bottom due to too much space taken by pebbles (was that deliberate?), the warning sign which spoils the otherwise peaceful content. Somehow this picture won't stand out for me, maybe it is idiosyncratic looking at how many support votes the image received... Podstawko ●talk 08:53, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Podstawko Thanks for the detailed review, just replying since you asked a question and will address a couple of your other points (which are very fair) at the same time. The horizon, fair enough, I was aiming for 1/2 but looking again in Camera Raw it is about 50 pixels off halfway. I could happily lose 100px of pebbles at the bottom to get it more precise. The pebbles were deliberate because I liked their texture, but of course deliberate doesn't mean it was objectively a good idea! As for the warning sign, well, it was there and there's not much I could do about it, but actually I quite like it for its educational value and the way it adds some tension to the scene. Cheers, BigDom (talk) 10:06, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Neutral IMO too much foreground. The sign is disturbing - but not a problem. Sharpness could be better too. --XRay 💬 16:28, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Average composition, no wow. —kallerna (talk) 06:44, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
Alternative version[edit]
- Info @ABAL1412, Terragio67, Ikan Kekek, Famberhorst, Agnes Monkelbaan, Milseburg, Rosalina474418, Podstawko, and XRay: The original is doing OK votes-wise but I've taken on board the last couple of comments about the foreground and present here a 2:1 crop with much less of the pebble beach visible. It also has the advantage of placing the horizon on the 1/3 line now. Just pinging you all for feedback as much as anything as I always welcome constructive comments. Cheers, BigDom (talk) 17:09, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Definitely better. I would still get rid of the warning sign (philosophical question: how far should we interfere?), but this new version is definitely something I'd support. Podstawko ●talk 17:31, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support yes, this 2nd version, IMO it's ok and better... --Terragio67 (talk) 18:49, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 18:54, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support--Princess 🍵 Rosalina 14148 23:40, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Ook deze.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:42, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 06:38, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Average composition, no wow. —kallerna (talk) 06:44, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support this one, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:59, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose I also struggle to find wow here, sorry Poco a poco (talk) 08:30, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:59, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose I prefer the first version. There the foreground is good and interesting. Here sky takes to much attention. --Milseburg (talk) 15:43, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- You are one of my favorite photographers, but here it's a matter of point of view, Stephen Hawkings would have said “Remember to look up at the stars and not down at your feet”. Terragio67 (talk) 21:28, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support ★ 02:06, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:20, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support the alternative. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:25, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 14:05, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:47, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Riomaggiore From Ferry Cinque Terre Italy Sep23 A7C 07414.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2023 at 04:28:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Italy
- Info Riomaggiore is one of the 5 villages of the Cinque Terre National Park on the NW coast of Italy. The village is nestled at the mount of a steep valley surrounded by a mountain range that plunges 2,000–2,500 ft (610–760 m) into the sea. Photo taken from the approaching ferry on a choppy sea in late evening. There are no FPs of this UNESCO World Heritage Site. Created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 04:28, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Tagooty (talk) 04:28, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support - ABAL1412🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺 (talk ☭) 09:24, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --imehling (talk) 10:25, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 20:13, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 00:05, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:40, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:37, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Milseburg (talk) 21:03, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 21:49, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Beautiful scene, but parts of the picture, especially on the left side, are not sharp enough, in my opinion, and some of the vegetation looks disorderly to me. I can imagine a greater representation of this place. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:14, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- I indeed concur with Ikan Kekek here, nice view but lighting or detail are not exceptional and I agree that sharpness on the left is not good. Therefore Oppose, sorry Tagooty Poco a poco (talk) 14:51, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Very nice capture. I love the subject and the colors. I actually thought this was taken with a much longer focal length, and had to prove myself wrong by looking at EXIF data. Podstawko ●talk 08:52, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 16:29, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 06:37, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Dull light. —kallerna (talk) 06:45, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:47, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Museo de Historia Natural, Londres, Inglaterra, 2022-11-25, DD 50-52 HDR.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2023 at 15:01:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#United Kingdom
- Info Blue whale skeleton at the Central Hall of the Natural History Museum, London, England. 'Hope', nickname of the blue whale skeleton, is 25.2 metres (83 ft) long and is suspended from the ceiling since July 14th 2017. Blue whales are the largest creature ever to have lived in the Earth. In the 1800s there was an estimated amount of 250,000 blue whales across the world's oceans. After decades of commercial hunting the species was to the brink of extinction, with only around 400 surviving in 1966. That year the world took action in London and decided to legally protect blue whales from commercial hunting. Since then the population of blue whales has steadily grown to its current level of around 20,000. Created & uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 15:01, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Tomer T (talk) 15:01, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful light, nice architecture, stained glass windows and composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:21, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 15:56, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Cool pic :), thank you, Tomer T! Poco a poco (talk) 16:01, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --BigDom (talk) 16:28, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support ★ 16:45, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support but the file description is scarce. -- Ivar (talk) 16:56, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:05, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Wow.--Ermell (talk) 17:12, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Jakubhal 17:40, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 20:54, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 21:27, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support —- Bayoustarwatch (talk) 02:20, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Remarkable clarity and perspective. --Tagooty (talk) 04:35, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 05:40, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support - ABAL1412🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺 (talk ☭) 09:23, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 11:12, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Wow. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 13:36, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:24, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 15:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --RodRabelo7 (talk) 16:37, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support ǃ --Terragio67 (talk) 20:12, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 00:06, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:41, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- Impressive!! Je-str (talk) 18:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 19:29, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Impressive, but the ghosts are disturbing. --Milseburg (talk) 21:06, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Yeah. I wish this view could be captured without people, or at least without blurs and with people that help the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:16, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Well done with long exposure here. Also the composition is very deliberate, but you did make mistakes (what is that 2-pixel wide blue line next to the right edge?? Why the nose touches the bottom edge? Disturbing. Also, more light on the skeleton! Even in post-processing. Still, support for the hard work you put into this, good overall effect, and the informative value. Podstawko ●talk 08:53, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for your feedback, Podstawko. I checked the imagen and cannot identify the problems you mention, could you add a note for both of them? I didn't see any blue line and there is some space left between the tip of the lowest bone and the bottom crop. Regarding the exposure of the skeleton and after so many favorable votes, I'd rather leave it like this. Poco a poco (talk) 09:50, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Ah, I know now what you mean, Podstawko, that's a window Poco a poco (talk) 10:56, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Gone Poco a poco (talk) 14:16, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 13:02, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 16:29, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 23:03, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support - Mr. Rasel Hasan (talk) 11:48, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support I reviewed this at QIC, and asked that the original file's exposure be adjusted, recognizing how hard that is to do well without blowing out the windows or introducing noise. Poco a poco has done an exemplary job. I like the people and blurs, they give the image life. Acroterion (talk) 12:38, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support. (Add description in Russian) --Brateevsky {talk} 11:03, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:47, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
File:Conrad Las Vegas at Resorts World February 2023 HDR.jpg[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2023 at 07:06:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#United States
- Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:06, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:06, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support 60s style curved furniture -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:17, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Just furniture in bedroom... Nothing for FP -- Karelj (talk) 16:28, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support Excellent example of an interior; technically and compositionally perfect. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:59, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 21:23, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Too dull; cropped lamp shouldn't be necessary. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:30, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I was going to comment on that crop. I would like to see the whole lamp on the right. Is that possible? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:44, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- I was flying relatively light and didn't have room to bring my gigantic 14-24mm. This was the widest I could go. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:13, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose I totally understand, but ultimately, I find that that crop bugs me too much to find this more than a good QI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:56, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose This is a photo of hotel room use in unassessment Wikipedia Article -- Nothing for Featured picture —- Bayoustarwatch (talk) 01:14, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Bayoustarwatch: Note that use on Wikimedia projects is not a criterion here on Commons FPC. On English Wikipedia FPC, there is the notion of "encyclopedic value" i.e. the image must be used in a meaningful way on at least one article (Wikipedia:Featured picture criteria), but even there the quality or assessment status of the article the image is used on is not a criterion. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:28, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support What Basile said. --SHB2000 (talk) 03:24, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Not special. --Tagooty (talk) 04:37, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support - ABAL1412🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺 (talk ☭) 09:22, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support These hotel interiors are not my cup of tea, but the more I regard this as a very good photo of it – getting a satisfying composition from such interiors is far more difficult than one may think. --Aristeas (talk) 11:15, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support ★ 14:40, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry - appreciate the effeort but agree with Tagooty and Karelj - --GRDN711 (talk) 16:28, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
- Oppose Missing wow. --Milseburg (talk) 21:09, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 23:03, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
- Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 04:09, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- Comment Crop above to start opposite diagonal, some contrast is mising, colors to much dull. Otherwise fine compo. --Mile (talk) 19:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support Interior pictures with this quality are quite rare. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 23:01, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 11:59, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 05:42, 5 November 2023 (UTC)
Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]
Tue 31 Oct → Sun 05 Nov Wed 01 Nov → Mon 06 Nov Thu 02 Nov → Tue 07 Nov Fri 03 Nov → Wed 08 Nov Sat 04 Nov → Thu 09 Nov Sun 05 Nov → Fri 10 Nov
Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)[edit]
Fri 27 Oct → Sun 05 Nov Sat 28 Oct → Mon 06 Nov Sun 29 Oct → Tue 07 Nov Mon 30 Oct → Wed 08 Nov Tue 31 Oct → Thu 09 Nov Wed 01 Nov → Fri 10 Nov Thu 02 Nov → Sat 11 Nov Fri 03 Nov → Sun 12 Nov Sat 04 Nov → Mon 13 Nov Sun 05 Nov → Tue 14 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 shots, 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.