Commons:Featured picture candidates
Other featured candidates:
Featured picture candidates Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures. Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024 and current month. For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Formal thingsNominatingGuidelines for nominatorsPlease 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 documentsThere 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." PhotographsOn 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 audioPlease nominate videos, sounds, music, etc. at Commons:Featured media candidates. Set nominationsIf 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 usersAdding a new nominationIf 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. VotingEditors 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 candidatesOver 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 policyGeneral rules
Featuring and delisting rulesA 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. 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 politePlease 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
|
Table of contents
Featured picture candidates
Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2024 at 08:28:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Space exploration#Telescopes
- Info created and uploaded by Christopher Michel, nominated by Yann
- Support High educational value and resolution, FP on English WP. -- Yann (talk) 08:28, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2024 at 08:22:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1950-1959
- Info created by Associated Press, uploaded by Lemonreader, nominated by Yann
- Support Iconic picture, FP on English WP. -- Yann (talk) 08:22, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:04, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2024 at 07:01:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Moldova
- Info Interior of the Ciuflea monastery, Chișinău, Moldova. The Moldovan Orthodox monastery was financed by Anastasie Ciufli (1801 - 1870) to respect the last will of his brother Teodor Ciufli (1796 - 1854) and is dedicated to Saint Theodore of Amasea. The two brothers were Aromanian merchants who emigrated from Macedonia. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 07:01, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 07:01, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2024 at 04:00:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family_:_Sciuridae (Squirrels)
- Info created by VJAnderson - uploaded by VJAnderson - nominated by Emdosis -- Emdosis (talk) 04:00, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Emdosis (talk) 04:00, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2024 at 13:16:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family_:_Nymphalidae_(Brush-footed_Butterflies)
- Info Monarch butterfly (Danaus plexippus) caterpillar eating some milkweed. all by — Rhododendrites talk | 13:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 13:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 16:24, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Ermell (talk) 18:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Supportǃ Terragio67 (talk) 19:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support looks great. Nice color balance, well exposed and sharp. What kind of plant? --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 02:09, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! It's some kind of milkweed -- these caterpillars eat milkweed exclusively -- but I don't know the species. — Rhododendrites talk | 02:16, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2024 at 04:41:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Pinaceae
- Info Schaopedobbe (Sheep Pond). Scots pine (Pinus sylvestris) in a flowering heathland bathed in mild afternoon light. The use of a polarizing filter makes the green colors and the color of the heather appear fuller.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 04:41, 5 September 2024 (UTC) - Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 04:41, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment This tree was special, but that one??... not broken :-) Additionally, the shadow is oriented in our direction, meaning the sun is coming from in front, resulting in contrejour and unappealing light -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:01, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 11:29, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per above, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:12, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2024 at 02:20:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Laos
- Info The warm frames on the wall create an interesting impact with the light through the rectangular door, in my opinion. Created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:20, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:20, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The photo is technically good but I don't see anything special to make it FP El Golli Mohamed 16:47, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- 💡Lights? -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support The light is very good. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 08:59, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2024 at 13:03:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Germany
- Info Ceiling painting in the nave of the UNESCO World Heritage Pilgrimage Church “Die Wies”, Steingaden, Bavaria, Germany; created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 13:03, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Llez (talk) 13:03, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:37, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment What is this gray embedding of the ceiling painting for? --Msb (talk) 21:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Info You are right, black is a better background for there is more contrast. I changed it. --Llez (talk) 05:03, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Much better now. Msb (talk) 16:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Info You are right, black is a better background for there is more contrast. I changed it. --Llez (talk) 05:03, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:04, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 16:52, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Ermell (talk) 05:24, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support A baroque heaven. – Aristeas (talk) 08:46, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2024 at 10:21:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera
- Info created by Jerzy Strzelecki - uploaded by Jerzy Strzelecki - nominated by Jerzystrzelecki -- Jerzystrzelecki (talk) 10:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Jerzystrzelecki (talk) 10:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose - Excellent at thumbnail size, but out of focus and noisy at full size. If we don't have a VI of this species, that may be the best route. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:01, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Interesting insect, however, low quality (I added a other version in the page description but not in FP level ever) --Wilfredor (talk) 22:43, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: poor quality level -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC) | Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed. |
Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2024 at 22:43:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Nyctanassa
- Info A juvenile yellow-crowned night heron at the Plumb Beach saltmarsh. Panorama (it stood still, so it seemed like a good opportunity to include context without sacrificing detail). all by — Rhododendrites talk | 22:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendrites talk | 22:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very good with DOF and some creativity with pano and same focal. Bird is sharp. --Mile (talk) 13:44, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Mile --Terragio67 (talk) 20:08, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Good photo of the bird in its habitat; I like the harmonious blue/yellow/brownish colours. – Aristeas (talk) 08:45, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2024 at 18:55:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Strigidae (True Owls)
- Info An Eurasian eagle-owl in captivity. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:55, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice shot even though the harsh background. --Terragio67 (talk) 20:06, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:04, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 11:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:19, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry, but I think the standard for captive animals is higher than this -- view from above on grass, with the bird's expression pointed down from the camera. (i.e. better if down at its level, or with a more interesting expression relative to the camera). — Rhododendrites talk | 13:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:47, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2024 at 13:33:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
- Info created by El Golli Mohamed - uploaded by El Golli Mohamed - nominated by El Golli Mohamed -- El Golli Mohamed (talk) 13:33, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- El Golli Mohamed (talk) 13:33, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:52, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support nice distribution with the bird on the right.--Famberhorst (talk) 12:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Famberhorst --Terragio67 (talk) 20:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 22:33, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Zzzs (talk) 23:03, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:05, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:17, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:47, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support The shadows are a bit unfortunate, but the high definition on the feathers, the soft background and the bird’s expressive posture/look make up for that. – Aristeas (talk) 08:43, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2024 at 13:00:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family : Curculionidae (Snout Beetles/Weevils)
- Info created by Gilles San Martin - uploaded by Iifar - nominated by Shizhao -- shizhao (talk) 13:00, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- shizhao (talk) 13:00, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Strange beetle, impressive quality. Alvesgaspar (talk) 19:00, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nasty animal --Wilfredor (talk) 21:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:54, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 12:07, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 12:26, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 21:59, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:47, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Alvesgaspar. – Aristeas (talk) 08:41, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2024 at 12:01:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Brazil
- Info The image shows a street in an informal settlement in Serra da Cantareira, São Paulo. More than just a photograph, it's a window into a reality that is often overlooked. Despite the challenging conditions, with makeshift houses and narrow streets, the photo also captures everyday scenes like children playing, neighbors chatting, and clothes drying in the sun. This image encourages us to observe and understand these realities. All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 12:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment To make a great photo of an ordinary subject, you need to bring something special inside. Special light, special sky, special composition, or special something. Extraordinary subjects are easier to capture, but also rarer in everyday life -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:12, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Pic is likable, but as Basile Morin said. Try with + Light (not Exposure). We can recover to support. --Mile (talk) 13:41, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, Mile are very kind, I have applied the change you requested. Wilfredor (talk) 22:51, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, in my opinion it's not a problem of processing but of light at the beginning -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:09, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Good documentation image but midday sun (13:28 according to the exif) coming from left side (according to the orientation of the shadows), creating a dull light. This is not something you can change afterwards. My eyes are caught by the wastes and litter in the water, and look for something more exciting to compensate. Unfortunately the houses are not colorful (like in Manarola for example), and seem quite ordinary with the uniform red of their standard bricks. Slightly blurry foreground (perhaps fixable with AI tools). I think Commons has many photos of this kind, featuring banal architecture and taken in the middle of the day. Perhaps at sunrise, sunset, golden hour, blue hour, or under a special sky, a stormy weather for example, or colorful clouds, the subject would appear more special -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:09, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support I am fine with it. Its slum, aka mess, Manarola is Lux city. Midday sometime help to avoid shadow, unless godlen hours with sun behind. Foreground is not so sharp but if you cut it some info would be lost, like chanel and drying on balcony. --Mile (talk) 09:41, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Basile Morin. -- Karelj (talk) 10:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support For finding a composition that works in a chaotic urban landscape worth capturing. — Rhododendrites talk | 14:51, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Mile, Rhododendrites, your observations are acute and shareable. Thank you Wilfredor for your commitmentː Support Terragio67 (talk) 18:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, Terraglo67, although the photo does not show the reality of extreme poverty, nor the dangers associated with being in this environment, such as the insecurity faced by visitors and residents, taking this photo was not easy. The insecurity in these places is high, and I have already experienced being threatened with a gun in a favela. On this occasion, thank God, it didn’t happen, but it was a quick shot: I saw the place, had a few minutes, took the photo, and left calmly. Unlike photographing a tourist destination or a European landscape, this image carries a complex background full of social, economic, and personal factors that make it much more than just a simple capture. Wilfredor (talk) 22:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Mile, Rhododendrites, your observations are acute and shareable. Thank you Wilfredor for your commitmentː Support Terragio67 (talk) 18:56, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Agree with Basile’s statements, but the subject (a slum) relativizes our criticism; e.g., waste and litter in the water (which are normally a deficit) are an integral part of this photo. And Rhododendrites is right that the composition makes the photo special. – Aristeas (talk) 08:40, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2024 at 09:41:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Serbia
- Info Temple of Saint Sava, Belgrade. My shot, from 2021. If you click on group above, we had similar night shot, just day is missing. --Mile (talk) 09:41, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Mile (talk) 09:41, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:13, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:56, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 12:08, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support The new version is better with the statue having a brighter and more normalized appearance. --Terragio67 (talk) 20:00, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:05, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 16:13, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2024 at 08:19:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Moldova
- Info Interior of the Căpriana monastery, Căpriana, Moldova. The Eastern Orthodoxy monastery, one of the oldest in the country, was founded in 1429. Note: we have no FPs from this country at all. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 08:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 08:19, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Come to Brazil! 🇧🇷 ★ 11:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--shizhao (talk) 13:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Crystal clear sharp, well done ! --Wilfredor (talk) 23:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:21, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:00, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support A very lavish interior, but beautifully captured symmetrically.--Famberhorst (talk) 12:12, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:57, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:06, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Famberhorst. – Aristeas (talk) 08:34, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2024 at 20:05:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Italy
- Collapsed ruinously in 1521, due to an explosion, it was restored between the nineteenth and twentieth centuries by the architect Luca Beltrami. He was responsible for the imposing mass of the Filarete Tower of the (Sforza Castle) in Milan, dedicated to the King of Italy Umberto I and solemnly inaugurated on 24 September 1905. Difficult both to frame and focus due to its enormous size, I decided to create a vertical panorama of three photographs. Info All by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 20:05, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 20:05, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:48, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Good luck with WLM, i see Italy started early. Is that date correct, shoted last year ? More important, you could put some Vibrance, colors are a bit dull. --Mile (talk) 08:27, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you Mile, you are very kind. I applied some vibrance, but I'm not sure if you've seen the latest version. In that case I (probably) may have applied too little vibrance... Terragio67 (talk) 11:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:24, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 12:15, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:56, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Mile (talk) 13:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:06, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:39, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 08:26, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2024 at 19:05:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water_transport#Sailboats
- Typical sailboats in the canal port of Cesenatico, Emilia-Romagna, Italy. Info All by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 19:05, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 19:05, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - Great composition and lighting, but I see some haloing/oversharpening on the tower. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:47, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- The halo disappeared when I reduced sharpen and saturation (from raw). In my opinion now the image is less artificial and still beautiful, thanks for the advice. Terragio67 (talk) 07:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Info New version uploaded. --Terragio67 (talk) 07:32, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Looks good now! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:03, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:07, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:36, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support For me, the composition with the boats and their eye-catching sails is convincing. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:51, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Radomianin; good use of telephoto compression. – Aristeas (talk) 08:24, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2024 at 15:41:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Agriculture#Germany
- Info created by User:Plozessor - uploaded by User:Plozessor - nominated by Plozessor -- Plozessor (talk) 15:41, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:38, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose This empty wall doesn't impress me, sorry. Front view of a standard gate. Cut off tree at the left. Nothing extraordinary in the roofs in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per above, and perspective seems awkward. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 21:55, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2024 at 13:52:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#France
- Info created by Gzen92 - uploaded by y - nominated by Gzen92 -- Gzen92 (talk) 13:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Gzen92 (talk) 13:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Three times the cars were present and no more sea for the reflection. Gzen92 (talk) 13:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2024 at 12:52:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Historical#1940-1949
- Info created by Fotoafdrukken Koninklijke Luchtmacht / Photo Prints, Royal Netherlands Air Force - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Crisco 1492 -- — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 15:08, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Very old and extremely boring. Even waiting hours in traffic is more entertaining/interesting than this, and don't get me started about the quality. Wolverine XI 17:07, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Question I don’t think the second part of the above comment is appropriate. But maybe we can read its first part as a hint that the image would look rather lonely in the “Air transport” gallery. @Yann: and all others: Wouldn’t this image fit better into the “Historical” gallery? We have some similar photo there, e.g. this one. If you agree, we should change the gallery link above to Commons:Featured_pictures/Historical#1940-1949. Best, – Aristeas (talk) 15:18, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Whatever is standard for older aviation images. I don't mind history, given that this was taken in '42. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:34, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Changed. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:08, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, Chris! And sorry for not pinging you as the nominator – I wanted to ping you and Yann (because of a recent discussion about the “Historical” galleries), but somehow made a mistake and forgot your name. – Aristeas (talk) 10:40, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- No worries! I check my watchlist pretty frequently – I remember the days before pings were a thing, and old habits die hard. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:09, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Wilfredor (talk) 03:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Sharp and representative photo of the Mosquito against a beautiful background of clouds and picturesque landscape. – Aristeas (talk) 10:40, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:36, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 16:29, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2024 at 06:13:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Camelidae (Camelids)
- Info created and uploaded by MAGNET-foto - nominated by ★ -- ★ 06:13, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ★ 06:13, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Though I feel that a slightly tighter crop would benefit this image. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:54, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The crop is very bad, and the quality is...not so good. Wolverine XI 17:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support The crop is good, the quality enough. -- -donald- (talk) 10:11, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:30, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 18:11, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:15, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support but per Chris Woodrich.--Famberhorst (talk) 12:19, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support. --Gnosis (talk) 17:56, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:39, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice posture and expression. – Aristeas (talk) 08:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2024 at 04:22:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water_transport#Ships
- Info Cruise ship FM217 Croisi Europe Strasbourg f, MS Victor Hugo. Location Groote Brekken. Princess Margriet Canal.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:22, 2 September 2024 (UTC) - Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:22, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 18:10, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry, I'm not seeing the FP potential here. The colours are washed out from the harsh daytime light and there is a lot of noise where the shadows have been raised. The composition doesn't work for me either with the centred subject and abundance of foreground. BigDom (talk) 08:00, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Could you try to rework it? It seems like the blue/cyan is missing... -- Terragio67 20:16, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Terragio67: Done. New version. Thanks for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:36, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
OpposeWeak oppose Unexceptional light and sky, sorry. Standard industrial boat. Boring background and foreground with too much flat water and dull sky. Also I agree with BigDom about thewashed out colors-- Basile Morin (talk) 03:23, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- @El Golli Mohamed: @Llez: New version.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:35, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Improved, but my considerations about the framing and ordinary subject remain. Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:47, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Improved, better colors. El Golli Mohamed (talk) 16:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
NeutralThe image is good now. Unfortunately, noise came out in the shadowed parts of the ship and in the sky. I'm sorry, but I think this (fixable?) issue is objectively too evident at the moment. --Terragio67 (talk) 16:38, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- @Terragio67: Done. Noise reduction in the shadow parts. Thanks for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:05, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- I like this picture. IMHO it is now acceptable even if there is still a
veryslight noise.
Weak * Support Terragio67 (talk) 18:47, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- I like this picture. IMHO it is now acceptable even if there is still a
- @Terragio67: Done. Noise reduction in the shadow parts. Thanks for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:05, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2024 at 22:29:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Other#Russia, Category:Featured pictures of Nizhny Novgorod Oblast
- Info created by premier.gov.ru - uploaded and nominated by MasterRus21thCentury --MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 19:35, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Info Verkhnyaya Vereya is one of the main symbols of the terrible heat of 2010 in Russia - the day before Vladimir Putin's arrival, the village seemed to have disappeared from the face of the Earth: 337 houses out of 341 burned down. But immediately after the visit of the Russian Prime Minister, a decision was made to restore the village, and that same year he visited it two more times - on September 15 and November 1. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MasterRus21thCentury (talk • contribs)
- Oppose Tilted and nothing special, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:46, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Basile. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 07:21, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment interesting to learn that Vladimir also knows how to rebuild villages. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 07:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Basile I don't understand the file name, info and categories related to Putin. He is not in the photo.--ArildV (talk) 08:20, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per all above. Several wrong categories. "Putin visited and all is fine"? LOL --A.Savin 10:18, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- @A.Savin А что тогда - придётся переименовывать файлы или лучше снять с номинации? MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 11:19, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2024 at 18:40:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Printed#Book illustrations in color
- Info created by James Gillray - uploaded restored and nominated by Crisco 1492 -- — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:40, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Info King Brobdingnag and Gulliver, an 1803 illustration for Gulliver's Travels. James Gillray drew on George III and Napolean Bonaparte for this literary illustration.
- Support -- — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:40, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support After having scrutinized this tiny subject with my long lens, I confirm the level of detail is quite compelling for a 221-year-old document -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:02, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support a very nice jobǃ --Terragio67 (talk) 20:48, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 09:41, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--shizhao (talk) 13:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 18:10, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 12:23, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:38, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 08:16, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
File:Litoměřice Sv Štěpán.jpg (delist)
Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2024 at 17:24:51
- Info The picture was certainly once a good, outstanding photo in the 2000s, but times change and this is especially true for this photo. Today it wouldn't even be a QI. The resolution is low and yet the image appears blurred. There are various image blurs and image errors and it is also tilted. What annoys me the most is the cropping of the houses at the bottom of the picture - to me it looks arbitrary. (Original nomination)
- Delist -- Fonzoyo (talk) 17:24, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delist - Excellent for the age, but I don't think it meets current standards. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:42, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep It would not be promoted today, but for 2008, sixteen years ago, it is a very standard quality. As the procedure for delisting is manual and long, I can't imagine nominating all the FPs promoted at this period for the reason they are not so good in 2024's. If you sharpen this picture with Topaz AI for example, it would be fine. Acceptable composition and light in my opinion.
- Look at the archives, the picture that was promoted just after this one by chronological order, is File:Lunar Crepuscular Rays 2.jpg, which is much worse, so... good luck to find them all :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:24, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Unless there’s a better photo with similar features, I would agree to delist it. However, the factor of time also plays a role. Unless we had a time machine to see how the place looked back then, I don’t think anyone can reasonably delist photos like this. --Wilfredor (talk) 03:38, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Light and composition are fine. The technical quality … well, is solid for the time of its creation. Digital photography – and especially digital cameras and lenses which are in the reach of Commons users – has come a long way since the 2000s. I don’t think we should replace our FPs repeatedly like a snake sheds its skin; let’s sort out the worst which were not great even in their time, and keep the rest which can thus serve also as a vivid history of respectable digital photography. – Aristeas (talk) 13:42, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep As an author of image firstly. But also there exist very great number ot Wikipedia pages, on them this image is presented for long time without any problems. -- Karelj 09:05, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delist Even back then, some reviewers cited technical deficiencies that are even more serious today. --Msb (talk) 17:04, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Aristeas and Basile. --SHB2000 (talk) 22:34, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2024 at 16:09:33 (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) 16:09, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 16:09, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 17:50, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:43, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Zzzs (talk) 18:47, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 01:06, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very high resolution -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:48, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Excellent sharpness, but the pose is unexceptional and the gallery has many more interesting FPs. --Tagooty (talk) 03:15, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:00, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support If you look carefully, you'll notice a leopard laying in wait not too far from where this antelope is. Wolverine XI 17:16, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--shizhao (talk) 13:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:28, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 18:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support but too bad about the left front leg.--Famberhorst (talk) 12:26, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 22:35, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:08, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 10:44, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:36, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2024 at 13:49:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1970-1979
- Info created by Unknown - initially uploaded by Joalpe - restored by Wilfredor - nominated by ★ -- ★ 13:49, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support In memory of the greatest TV entertainer in Brazil, Silvio Santos, who recently died in August. -- ★ 13:49, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Thank you, Wilfredor and ArionStar. Silvio Santos's Wikipedia entry in Portuguese was the most viewed article during the last two weeks of August and may rank very high among the most viewed articles of 2024. I’m thrilled to see so many people collaborating on improving and disseminating this image! Thank you. --Joalpe (talk) 13:56, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Merci mon cher / Obrigado meu Wilfredor (talk) 03:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I would support the JPEG version: File:Tony Tornado e Sílvio Santos restored.jpg. Yann (talk) 14:20, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
JPEG version
- Info JPEG version added. ★ 14:50, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 16:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:43, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support I don't usually vote for my photos but this is not my authorship, I just did a restoration --Wilfredor (talk) 03:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:57, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--shizhao (talk) 13:03, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 15:43, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:08, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice photo with good posture and facial expression, solid restoration. – Aristeas (talk) 10:43, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Silvio Santos was known for his charismatic smile. ★ 11:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:37, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2024 at 05:23:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#South Korea
- Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:23, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:23, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Splendid pic. Wolverine XI 08:29, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 13:38, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:53, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 18:03, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Looks like a lovely place for a walk. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:53, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:56, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 12:27, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 22:35, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:09, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice juxtaposition of the open architecture at the left with the greened façade at the right. – Aristeas (talk) 10:42, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2024 at 04:37:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)
- Info created by Anitava Roy - uploaded by Anitava Roy - nominated by Atudu -- Atudu (talk) 04:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Atudu (talk) 04:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 06:59, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry man, but neither the composition nor the quality impress me. Wolverine XI 08:31, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- What's wrong about the quality? --A.Savin 10:23, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Nothing, this is the best image I've ever seen. Like there's no image that will top this. I'm very much impressed with the image quality. Wolverine XI 17:21, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Many thanks for this extremely enlightening response. --A.Savin 09:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Nothing, this is the best image I've ever seen. Like there's no image that will top this. I'm very much impressed with the image quality. Wolverine XI 17:21, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- What's wrong about the quality? --A.Savin 10:23, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 10:11, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)- Oppose Vulcan struck out his vote after reading others' observation Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 01:47, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very nice composition, part of grass was helpfull - like golden spiral curve. Colors combine. --Mile (talk) 16:04, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Support-- Giles Laurent (talk) 16:13, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Struck vote until clarified -- Giles Laurent (talk) 00:36, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 16:25, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Quality is fine, the delicate balanced composition is great, as said in the QIC page a good FP candidate. Poco a poco (talk) 16:48, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Support--Zzzs (talk) 18:43, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Strong oppose I thought its technical quality is good since it is a QI. Now that its been revealed to have been digitally manipulated to deceive viewers, this should definitely not be a featured picture. Maybe its QI should also be revoked. --Zzzs (talk) 22:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
SupportStunning! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:45, 1 September 2024 (UTC)Support-- Radomianin (talk) 19:13, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose in line with the ongoing discussion about undocumented manipulation. Support removed and opposition vote placed. -- Radomianin (talk) 05:14, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Outstanding composition. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:04, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
SupportAgree. -- -donald- (talk) 07:39, 2 September 2024 (UTC)- Oppose Per others. -- -donald- (talk) 06:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
SupportAgree with Mile -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:47, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Fake background? Undeclared -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Support Striking composition--Tagooty (talk) 03:18, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose In view of the opinions of several experts and the absence of a response by the uploader/nominator, I have changed my support to oppose. --Tagooty (talk) 03:33, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:54, 2 September 2024 (UTC)Support --A.Savin 10:23, 2 September 2024 (UTC)- Oppose per others --A.Savin 00:16, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 18:47, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Support Excellent quality, outstanding composition. – Aristeas (talk) 15:29, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Agree with the discussion below that the background apparently has been replaced. We could allow the cut-out, but in any case such a substantial edit must (i) be explained and (ii) done in the best possible way – right now there are some rough edges and (at the bottom) some strange pixels which may be remnants of the original background. – Aristeas (talk) 07:40, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 12:29, 4 September 2024 (UTC)- Question Is this a cut-out background @Anitava Roy and Atudu: and doesn't this camera have a maximum resolution of 5184 × 3456 pixels? Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
supportUpdating per discussion below. Not opposing, but holding off on supporting until we can get the facts straight. — Rhododendrites talk | 03:38, 6 September 2024 (UTC) Almost perfect enough to be skeptical, but the quality of the uploader's work looks consistent with regard to this kind of composition. — Rhododendrites talk | 14:57, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Have you zoomed right in and examined the edges Rhododendrites? Doesn't look right to me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm. The flat speckling makes it look like this might be some sort of backdrop/cardstock placed behind the insect? — Rhododendrites talk | 15:49, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- As the uploader/nominator have not replied, could some experienced eyes have a very close look please @Poco a poco, Basile Morin, Llez, Giles Laurent, Crisco 1492, Tagooty, Frank Schulenburg, and XRay: Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- It does look like a cut-out. There is a slight halo (a darker blue/green) on the bottom of the butterfly, and no noise on the background. Well spotted! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:01, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Also, part of the wing is floating in green. Definite cut out. Struck my support - still great, but the cutout should be noted (and is a bit rough). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:02, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose This nomination should be withdrawn as it has misled voters. @Ermell, A.Savin, JukoFF, VulcanSphere, PetarM, Agnes Monkelbaan, Aristeas, Famberhorst, Rhododendrites, -donald-, and Zzzs: Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - @Charlesjsharp: , so you have asked the uploader to respond at 21:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC) and started rallying everyone at 15:49, 5 September 2024 (UTC) ans asked for withdrawal of nomination at 20:54, 5 September 2024, citing that they have not responded, which is less than 24 hours time for them. Isn't it too much to expect from volunteers from global south countries to respond then and there? I hope you understand that, people can have their own real life problems to deal with and not everyone might be in a super privileged position to respond in volunteer capacity on an emergency basis as and when asked. Personally, I don't have any issues if the FP nomination is rejected on technical grounds and if everyone changes the vote from support to reject but rallying and targeting without giving ample time to respond and not assuming good faith towards the editors, who have been contributing to Wikimedia sites in a significant way, can very well be demotivating to many people. Unlike you, I am not pinging anyone, who voted here, without any kind of expectation for them to change their votes or their minds, but I simply hope that everyone can at least assume good faith towards the uploader and provide him sufficient time to respond. -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 08:26, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment currently i am offline, from PC, but can people put some note where are problems, maybe we can solve them, and pic is still very good. I think we had many artificial bacground by now, even size biger than camera can make. erasing nomination because of that... ?! Only stuff here is to put templetate photoedited - artificial background.Some tolerance with quick-triggered acts, author maybe not online each day. --Mile (talk) 10:58, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2024 at 20:10:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Family_:_Cirrhitidae_(Hawkfishes)
- Info Arc-eye hawkfish (Paracirrhites arcatus), Zanzibar, Tanzania. The specific name arcatus means “arched”, an allusion which Cuvier did not explain but it may refer to the horseshoe shaped mark behind the eye. It is found in shallow waters in the tropical Indo-Pacific on reefs, resting on coral heads much of the time. It's solitary and preys mostly on shrimps, small fishes, crabs, and other crustaceans. Note: no FPs of this species and only 2 of the whole family Cirrhitidae. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 20:10, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:10, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 22:12, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Question Is the light-coloured stripe on the back a reflection or a line on the fish?--Ermell (talk) 10:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Ermell: No reflection, the stripe is characteristic to this species. I don't use flash and, of course, there is no window between the fish and the camera. You can also check other images of this species (like this one). Poco a poco (talk) 11:08, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 16:25, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Zzzs (talk) 18:37, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 19:46, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support High level of detail, good focus -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:45, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Eye-catching arc-eye! The white line is also eye-catching once explained. --Tagooty (talk) 03:20, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Basile and Tagooty. – Aristeas (talk) 15:29, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:33, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2024 at 19:54:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/Russia#Far Eastern Federal District
- Info The aurora borealis in Chukotka / Created by Ted.ns - uploaded by Ted.ns - nominated by JukoFF -- JukoFF (talk) 19:54, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- JukoFF (talk) 19:54, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 16:20, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:45, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Zzzs (talk) 21:31, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 21:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 01:06, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Small resolution. Only 2,300 × 1,535 pixels. And blown highlights -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:38, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral Unfortunately a small image for the enormous potential of this camera, probably not the full version --Wilfredor (talk) 03:36, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per above, a pity. --A.Savin 10:27, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 22:36, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2024 at 10:55:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Austria#Tyrol
- Info Informative and high resolution view of the Tribulaun-Group in the Stubai Alps. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 10:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Milseburg (talk) 10:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Sharp image with good depth of field. Interesting to see the peak in the foreground has trees and presumably grasses, and the peak behind is bare. Great glacial striations on the central peak in the background too. --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 15:16, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The sharpness is good in the top part, but could be better in the lower part --Llez (talk) 16:19, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Is the suggestion to crop the lower part? I really don't think it is that unsharp. Milseburg (talk) 13:11, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Splendid view, clear and educative. – Aristeas (talk) 15:28, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Aristeas (nice view). – Terragio67 (talk) 20:25, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 21:42, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2024 at 20:44:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements
- Info All by me. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:44, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:44, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I don't see at first what is extraordinary here. The apse looks indeed renovated recently so that the historical value is probably limited. Lighting or detail are not compensating that, either. --Poco a poco (talk) 07:31, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Moral support for the Kiril's potential. ★ 18:36, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2024 at 15:04:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Order_:_Rodentia_(Rodents)
- Info There is no gallery for the family Dasyproctidae.
- Info created, uploaded and nominated by Chuck Homler -- Needsmoreritalin (talk) 15:04, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Yes, I know its a PNG. I have pledged to upload future images as .JPG -- Needsmoreritalin (talk) 15:04, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Please upload the jpg version, This is better rendered by mediawiki than png --Wilfredor (talk) 20:01, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Great sharpness (I'm in fact counting the days to get a R5 Mark II) in spite of high ISO, but tricky lighting (the subject is underexposed). Why do you add "All right reserved" to your EXIF if you publish with CC BY-SA 4.0? that looks contradictory --Poco a poco (talk) 07:26, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The photographer may change his mind and release the picture any time later. For us, the Commons license is what finally counts, not the EXIF info. --A.Savin 08:36, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, when I got the Camera I set t he EXIF data like that. But when I upload to Wikipedia I have to release the rights. It remains in the EXIF, but its Creative Commons Share Alike With Attribution now. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 14:01, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, by the way, congrats on getting the R5 Mk II. I hope it brings you much joy! Needsmoreritalin (talk) 17:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your feedback and to Alex for the coherent explanation. It will still take time until the camera is in my hands but thank you! :) Poco a poco (talk) 18:55, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose One of those rare photos that looks better when viewed at full resolution with some very nice detail. But overall the lighting situation is just far too distracting; the subject is in deep shadow and the eye is drawn to the bright patches in the background. BigDom (talk) 06:46, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Would the image benefit from a tighter crop? The subject was under tree cover and you can see there was a gap in the canopy leading to that bright spot above and to the right of the subject. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 14:39, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Very detailed at full resolution but at first sight unappealing light (animal and background) -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comments from you and BigDom led me to upload an alternative, if this addresses your concerns, please let me know. If not, I can withdraw nomination. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 04:14, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Alternative
- Info Re-cropped (back to 2:3) and made adjustments in Photoshop to bring shadows up by 5 and highlights down by 5, with a neutral density gradient in the upper right to address concerns about the bright spot.
- Comment Now the crop is tight at the right in my opinion. And still not sure about the light -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:40, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the update. Last version (at 18:10) is better in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:08, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Let me know if this helps. If not, I can always withdraw nomination. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 00:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- I would suggest not to withdraw and wait for other feedbacks. I'm between neutral and weak support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the update. Last version (at 18:10) is better in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:08, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Right crop to tight. Add few pixles. But light is much better and supportable. --Mile (talk) 17:42, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Updated, thanks! Needsmoreritalin (talk) 00:45, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support They dont vote, hard to open it, too big. --Mile (talk) 07:53, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 13:27, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Works for me. – Aristeas (talk) 15:25, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral Better IMO but I still think backlighting is not ideal for this kind of shot. BigDom (talk) 15:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 03:44, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 20:53, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2024 at 16:04:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Exteriors#Landscapes
- Info created by Paul Cézanne / Google Art Project, uploaded by Ekenaes, nominated by Yann
- Info The Sainte-Victoire Mountain seen from the Bibémus quarry, by Paul Cézanne.
- Support Notable painting, good reproduction, high resolution. -- Yann (talk) 16:04, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Faithful reproduction -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:38, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Good reproduction of one of the iconic Montagne Sainte-Victoire paintings. – Aristeas (talk) 15:36, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 22:09, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:36, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:55, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 16:14, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:48, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Terragio67 (talk) 20:37, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:58, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2024 at 21:39:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family_:_Leporidae_(Hares_and_rabbits)
- Info African savanna hare in the Serengeti National Park. Created by Giles Laurent - uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 21:39, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 21:39, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 17:42, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
OpposeSharpness is very good, as usual, but the lighting is very difficult. The crop also feels too tight and the angle (looking down) not favourable Poco a poco (talk) 07:22, 31 August 2024 (UTC)- Thank you for your review. I just uploaded a new version with a different crop and different lighting (shadows lifted), press CMD+R on Mac or Ctrl+F5 with image open to see the new version. Giles Laurent (talk) 19:11, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, an improvement, I move to Neutral, thank you. Poco a poco (talk) 19:41, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support The sharpness of the eyes makes it the FP for me.--Ermell (talk) 15:34, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 19:52, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Zzzs (talk) 04:57, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Good enough for me. Wolverine XI 08:36, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:55, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 16:13, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral Nice view but blown highlights due to harsh light, or unsuitable camera settings -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:52, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 03:44, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2024 at 09:48:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water transport#Ships
- Info created & uploaded by Chuck Homler - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:48, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:48, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for the Nomination. --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 15:00, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great pastel coloring; appealing composition due to the precise juxtaposition of the ships, the reflection, and the interesting cloudy sky. Clearly a Wow as I saw it this morning on RPQI. With 3.25 MP's a bit small, but the great composition prevails, imho. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:39, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'll take a look at my files. I should have a larger version of this image. --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 15:00, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much, that would be great :) Radomianin (talk) 15:18, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'll take a look at my files. I should have a larger version of this image. --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 15:00, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 16:58, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Very nice, but I'd rather wait for a file with more resolution, it's too small. Poco a poco (talk) 18:50, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
-
- Support Now Poco a poco (talk) 07:09, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Question I hate to ask this - but I think I botched it the last time I tried. If I upload another version of this image, how do I post it into the nomination? The last time I uploaded an image, it replaced the image nominated. I just want to follow the proper procedure. I have a 4488 x 2988 pixel version I can upload. Sadly, I cannot locate the original .PSD file or the Raw file. --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 02:13, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Thanks for the question, Needsmoreritalin. If the new image is significantly different from the existing one, then a new version should be uploaded and placed with the headline template
====Alternative====
below the first image and all comments of this nomination. For example:[[File:New version.jpg|480x320px]]
. However, if it is only slightly different and represents a qualitative improvement, you can update the existing photo with a new upload. It is a pity that the original raw is not available. -- Radomianin (talk) 05:40, 30 August 2024 (UTC)- Thanks for the help! Luckily I have some old external HDDs and found the original raw file! The image may be a little different because I have new sharpening / denoise tools and the crop might not be exactly the same. It should be close. Worse case I can revert. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 22:45, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Needsmoreritalin: Wonderful, many thanks for your efforts! A huge gain for the level of detail in this great photo :) -- Radomianin (talk) 01:45, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks you too. If it weren't for your comment I wouldn't have gone looking for the file. And I found some other images I haven't seen in years that may help improve some other articles too. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 02:55, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Needsmoreritalin: Wonderful, many thanks for your efforts! A huge gain for the level of detail in this great photo :) -- Radomianin (talk) 01:45, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the help! Luckily I have some old external HDDs and found the original raw file! The image may be a little different because I have new sharpening / denoise tools and the crop might not be exactly the same. It should be close. Worse case I can revert. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 22:45, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Thanks for the question, Needsmoreritalin. If the new image is significantly different from the existing one, then a new version should be uploaded and placed with the headline template
- Support El Golli Mohamed 17:43, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support One of quite rare cases that a naval ship photo has wow. --A.Savin 20:11, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Excellent light and eye-catching mirror image -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:49, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support--ArildV (talk) 06:08, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Mile (talk) 10:06, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:19, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Radomianin; great arrangement, light, and pastel colours. – Aristeas (talk) 15:34, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 22:08, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:35, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:55, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 16:11, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 16:13, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 04:47, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2024 at 04:40:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#India
- Info Three narrow river valleys in the Indian Himalayas, the Stod-Doda (left), Tsarap (bottom right) and Zanskar (centre top), meet in the surprisingly broad Padum valley. This view of Padum from the southwest is ~15 km (9.3 mi) south-north and ~6 km (3.7 mi) east-west. Buildings are interspersed with newly-sown fields. Elevation 3,670 m (12,040 ft). Created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 04:40, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Tagooty (talk) 04:40, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Large image, but avergade quality. Sharpness and processing could be better for FP --George Chernilevsky talk 07:37, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment How come? Both is good for me. --A.Savin 20:15, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Feeling of space. Agree with A.Savin the sharpness and processing are okay -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:46, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- @A.Savin and Basile Morin: Thanks for the comments and support. @George Chernilevsky: The image covers an area of about 15 km x 6 km. In this large area, even doors and windows of size 1-2 metres are clear and distinct. Would appreciate if you could indicate where you see deficiencies. Tagooty (talk) 03:46, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose A nice view but the compo doesn't work for me. It would have been good to find a way to stress the perspective here, not sure. The bottom right crop feels random. Poco a poco (talk) 07:15, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Poco a poco: The crop was dictated by the location -- an accessible hill without obstructions. --Tagooty (talk) 07:40, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 15:31, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 14:27, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 20:53, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Poco a poco. -- Karelj (talk) 09:20, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the reviews. --Tagooty (talk) 10:33, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2024 at 22:47:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Morocco
- Info created by Mounir Neddi - uploaded by Mounir Neddi - nominated by Mounir Neddi -- Mounir Neddi (talk) 22:47, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Mounir Neddi (talk) 22:47, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Weird dark and light blue hue in the background -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:27, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, it is a mountainous area, the lighting varies from one slope to another. @Basile Morin Mounir Neddi (talk) 11:11, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hazy background, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:29, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 17:40, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Harsh light with midday sun, relatively low resolution (only 3,264 × 2,448 pixels) for a landscape, and per my comment above. The upper right corner is very white, and the turquoise hue in the center seems like fluorescent. The large area with strong shadow is not very appealing, and some houses have blow highlights. I would recommend to try again this picture another time of the day, because the relief is interesting and the result could be completely different at sunset or sunrise -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:29, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Agree with Basile Poco a poco (talk) 07:17, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Basile Morin. BigDom (talk) 06:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2024 at 23:37:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Reliefs
- Info Photography and uploaded by -- Wilfredor (talk) 23:37, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 14:31, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Big WOW. --MZaplotnik(talk) 14:26, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:02, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support - Having done a few photos of reliefs, I'm going to go on a limb and say that this is gorgeous. That you got it in a museum context, rather than outdoors, is incredible. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:49, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks Wilfredor (talk) 17:58, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support Big WOW.2 Much sugoi. Emdosis (talk) 04:33, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2024 at 22:44:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Muscicapidae (Old World Flycatchers)
- Info No FPs for this species. Created by El Golli Mohamed - uploaded by El Golli Mohamed - nominated by El Golli Mohamed -- El Golli Mohamed (talk) 22:44, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- El Golli Mohamed (talk) 22:44, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support The jpg file seems to be too small, perhaps it is a reduced quality version? --Wilfredor (talk) 23:03, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. It's a crop because it was nominated as VI and they ask always for a narrow crop for birds. You can see also the wider crop version. El Golli Mohamed (talk) 13:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- I know it's cut, I'm not talking about the cut, I'm talking more about the quality with which you exported the JPG from Lightroom, it seems that it's too small, it wasn't made at 100% Wilfredor (talk) 15:32, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. It's a crop because it was nominated as VI and they ask always for a narrow crop for birds. You can see also the wider crop version. El Golli Mohamed (talk) 13:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support You must have been really close! Even at f/8 there is a pretty shallow depth of field. Good fucus on the face and eye. The rock the bird is perched on slowly fades into the beautiful bokeh of the background. --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 00:26, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. Yes I was really close. El Golli Mohamed (talk) 13:54, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Body not very sharp, routine posture. Large number of FPs in the Gallery, this one does not measure up. --Tagooty (talk) 05:27, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, it's not true, there are no FPs for this species in the Gallery and for the sharpness I was very close so even at f/8 I can't have also the body very sharp, I was focusing in the head and the eye. I don't understand your opposition El Golli Mohamed (talk) 13:52, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Unlike VI, each species does not need to have an FP. An FP is supposed to be one of the finest images in Commons. I look for something exceptional -- colours, posture, action, lighting, composition, etc along with high technical quality. I compare it to others in the FP gallery where it will be placed if promoted. See eg this image of a similar posture, f/8, etc -- much better sharpness throughout. Tagooty (talk) 14:39, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Not all birds live in tropical areas and therefore haven't beautiful colors, so they do not deserve to have FPs. El Golli Mohamed (talk) 19:41, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Unlike VI, each species does not need to have an FP. An FP is supposed to be one of the finest images in Commons. I look for something exceptional -- colours, posture, action, lighting, composition, etc along with high technical quality. I compare it to others in the FP gallery where it will be placed if promoted. See eg this image of a similar posture, f/8, etc -- much better sharpness throughout. Tagooty (talk) 14:39, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, it's not true, there are no FPs for this species in the Gallery and for the sharpness I was very close so even at f/8 I can't have also the body very sharp, I was focusing in the head and the eye. I don't understand your opposition El Golli Mohamed (talk) 13:52, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:28, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I agree with Tagooty this bird is not the prettiest I've seen and detail is just ok. Even if we have no FPs of this bird and that's a relevant information of the nomination, it cannot be a reason of weight to make it FP. I have documented hundreds of species underwater and I find many of them not worthy for FP because they don't have any interesting features. Poco a poco (talk) 15:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your sincere and competent assessment on reaction to my vote above. Poco a poco (talk) 19:27, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- @El Golli Mohamed, you need to stop revenge voting. Just because someone doesn't agree with one of your images becoming a featured picture does not mean you should revenge vote. They are only criticising the photograph, not the photographer. No one should expect all of their photos to become featured pictures. The community loves your photos, but some don't meet a certain standard. It's not worth being blocked for and losing a significant contributor of FPCs on Commons. This behaviour is unacceptable, and I strongly recommend you stop. Zzzs (talk) 00:11, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- +1 Too many revenge votes with this user -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:06, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your sincere and competent assessment on reaction to my vote above. Poco a poco (talk) 19:27, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:19, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 12:44, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2024 at 13:39:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Canidae_(Canids)
- Info created by uploaded by and nominated by Chuck Homler -- Needsmoreritalin (talk) 13:18, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Needsmoreritalin (talk) 13:18, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Why PNG? I would support a JPEG version. Yann (talk) 13:56, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- I uploaded a lot of my images in the past as PNG. Someone recently inquired the same thing and I am uploading new images as JPG. I always use PNG (for myself) because they are lossless files. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 15:29, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- You can always upload 2 versions. Yann (talk) 17:04, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, but then it takes up even more space on the server. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 20:23, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- I can't upload a different format to the same original image. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 23:17, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- There is space issue on Wikimedia servers. You have to tick the button Ignore warnings. Yann (talk) 12:11, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- I never had anything come up to warn me about PNG. But I have started uploading JPG. If you look at my contributions, I started with JPG and I am going back to JPG. I understand the concerns and I have altered my behavior accordingly. But I uploaded this just before another FP nomination led to this issue being addressed. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 02:19, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- There is space issue on Wikimedia servers. You have to tick the button Ignore warnings. Yann (talk) 12:11, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- You can always upload 2 versions. Yann (talk) 17:04, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- I uploaded a lot of my images in the past as PNG. Someone recently inquired the same thing and I am uploading new images as JPG. I always use PNG (for myself) because they are lossless files. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 15:29, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 22:11, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Woow El Golli Mohamed 22:24, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Personally, I prefer PNGs over JPGs. --Zzzs (talk) 05:21, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- I do too, but they are much larger so I understand why Wikipedia / Wikimedia would rather have the compressed .JPG. But hey, at least I wasn't uploading .tif ;) Needsmoreritalin (talk) 02:21, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:26, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support PNG is more for backup or future editions, png is not used for correct representation on the web, the standard is jpg in most browsers and preferably sRGB --Wilfredor (talk) 15:33, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 16:56, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:48, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 21:48, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very pleasant light and appealing smooth bokeh with excellent contrast foreground / background. The angle of view is also successful. Great portrait of a wild animal -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:44, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:35, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:15, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I think this could be cropped for better framing. It's not bad, but I think it falls just shy of Featured Picture with its current composition. Maybe shave a little negative space off the left side and see if that looks better. --DarthCloakedGuy (talk) 08:08, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- This is actually an uncropped image. I felt I got it right in the camera. I have two other versions of this "pose" and then several more at 160mm to get the fox sitting (full body) and two when it lay down shot at 200mm. This was my favorite of the bunch. I felt the negative space helped as that was the direction the fox was facing. And I liked the portrait. It was a wonderful moment for me. The fox came out of the tree line and headed towards me, then sat in the middle of the road before laying down in the street. I just sat there with it for a few minutes until it left. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 02:23, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Basile. I would not crop it. – Aristeas (talk) 15:25, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Honestly the PNG is such a non-issue here. --SHB2000 (talk) 23:57, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:31, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support --BigDom (talk) 06:52, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:02, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support good focus. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 22:05, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2024 at 08:09:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/People#Groups
- Info created by the school of Pieter Brueghel the Elder, uploaded by The Herald, nominated by Yann
- Support -- Yann (talk) 08:09, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Remembers me the "Three blind mice" in the James Bond film Dr. No --Llez (talk) 12:20, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Sorry, but there is a problem with the file description and naming. The painting is not the one attributed to Pieter Bruegel the Elder, that is located at the en:Museo di Capodimonte, at Naples. It's instead the one in Paris. So, it should be attributed to Pieter Brueghel the Younger, even though the Google Art project says something different. Besides, on the Louvre Museum website, the attribution to Pieter Brueghel the Younger is presented just as an old one. I did just correct the article on en.wiki: en:The Blind Leading the Blind. --Harlock81 (talk) 12:45, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, but how do you know this is a copy by Brueghel the Younger? I guess the Louvre is an authoritative reference. Yann (talk) 13:34, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- For sure, this file does not reproduce the one painted by Pieter Bruegel the Elder. The Louvre says: "La parabole des aveugles, d'après Pieter I Brueghel", The Blind leading the Blind according to, not by, Pieter I Brueghel. Also, at the attribution: School of Pieter I Brueghel, etc. The museum does not say it was painted by Pieter Brueghel the Older. The attribution of the painting in the Google Art Project is wrong, and consequently here. So, description and naming are wrong, for sure. This file reproduce the painting to which this category refers: Category:Parable of the Blind by Pieter Brueghel the Younger. The attribution of the painting to Pieter Brueghel the Younger is presented as dated by the Louvre Museum. So, the name of the file and the name of the category should not refer to Pieter Brueghel the Younger, but to the School of Pieter Brueghel the Older. The author should be considered unknown. Finally, the oldest painting, attributed to Pieter Bruegel the Elder, is the one conserved in Naples. Consequently, this one is a copy, painted by some pupil of him. --Harlock81 (talk) 13:55, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, it is a copy of the painting from Capodimonte, but attributing it to Brueghel the Younger is certainly wrong. Yann (talk) 14:01, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, but I don't understand your point. This picture reproduce the same painting to which this category refers, or not? I'm not saying that Brueghel the Younger is the author. It could be a way to distinguish two artworks that are similar: the one once attributed to Brueghel the Younger (and conserved in Paris), and the one painted by Bruegel the Elder (and conserved in Naples). For now, this file is in the wrong category, it is attributed to the wrong painter, and its title is misleading. --Harlock81 (talk) 14:19, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Images in Category:Parable of the Blind by Pieter Brueghel the Younger are of so poor quality that it is difficult to say. Anyway the attribution there may also be wrong, and we need external references, not self-references from Commons. For all we know, it may be a copy by Bruegel the Elder himself. Yann (talk) 14:41, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks for your answer. The artwork hanging in the Louvre Museum, that is the one reproduced here, is the one once attributed to Brueghel the Younger (this does not imply that Brueghel the Younger actually painted it). This category refers to the artwork (once, in my opinion) attributed to Brueghel the Younger. It seems logical to me the conclusion that the category refers to the painting hanging in the Louvre Museum. Instead, you are not excluding that there is another artwork of Brueghel the Younger to which the category may refer. I'm quite sure that is not the case, but ok, let's go on. --Harlock81 (talk) 15:32, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- I updated the description, to match what the Louvre says. Yann (talk) 09:27, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Good reproduction. – Aristeas (talk) 15:24, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 19:52, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 21:38, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
{{weak oppose}}The reproduction is good, of course, but information given in the file page is incomplete and, to some extent, misleading: Brueghel the Older is stated as the author; the uploading date is stated as the "date" (of the painting). The file page of the other candidate artwork is an excellent example of how it could/should be, with the suitable differences. I checked also the gallery, and there are not description pages like this among the tens that I opened. I'm sorry for the objection. --Harlock81 (talk) 22:52, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Honestly, I don't understand what you want. I changed the credit and the description to match the Louvre description. I created a Wikidata item, and renamed the category. Yann (talk) 21:03, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for what you have done. Support --Harlock81 (talk) 21:53, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
File:Machu Picchu.png, featured
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2024 at 01:59:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1910-1919
- Info General view of Machu Picchu in 1912, taken shortly after major clearing efforts were completed during the Yale Peruvian Expedition led by Hiram Bingham III. It is one of the earliest documented views of the site. Created by Hiram Bingham III - uploaded and nominated by JustEMV -- JustEMV (talk) 01:59, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- JustEMV (talk) 01:59, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Obviously there are issues with photography from over 100 years ago that severely impact the image quality compared with modern technology. But this image documents something that cannot be appreciated any other way. --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 14:23, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support El Golli Mohamed 22:27, 28 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:19, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 16:55, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 21:47, 29 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:31, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support Documents what a relevation the discovery of Machu Picchu meant. – Aristeas (talk) 15:21, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 21:38, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry, but for me wow/documentary factor < quality. Wolverine XI 08:57, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 16:03, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
Timetable (day 5 after nomination)
Sun 01 Sep → Fri 06 Sep Mon 02 Sep → Sat 07 Sep Tue 03 Sep → Sun 08 Sep Wed 04 Sep → Mon 09 Sep Thu 05 Sep → Tue 10 Sep Fri 06 Sep → Wed 11 Sep
Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)
Wed 28 Aug → Fri 06 Sep Thu 29 Aug → Sat 07 Sep Fri 30 Aug → Sun 08 Sep Sat 31 Aug → Mon 09 Sep Sun 01 Sep → Tue 10 Sep Mon 02 Sep → Wed 11 Sep Tue 03 Sep → Thu 12 Sep Wed 04 Sep → Fri 13 Sep Thu 05 Sep → Sat 14 Sep Fri 06 Sep → Sun 15 Sep
Closing a featured picture promotion request
The bot
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
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/September 2024), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.
Closing a delisting request
- 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/September 2024.
- If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
- Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
- Edit the picture's description as follows:
- Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes).
- Remove the image from all categories beginning with "Featured [pictures]" (example: Featured night photography, Featured pictures from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, Featured pictures of Paris).
- Remove the "Commons quality assessment" claim (d:Property:P6731) "Wikimedia Commons featured picture" from the picture's Structured data.
- Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.
- If this is a Delist and Replace, the delisting and promotion must both be done manually. To do the promotion, follow the steps in the above section. Note that the assessment tag on the file page and the promotion tag on the nominator's talk page won't pick up the /replace subpage that these nominations use.
Manual archiving of a withdrawn nomination
- 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/September 2024), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.