Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/September 2016

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

File:2016.07.04.-26-Eilenburg-Ost--Distelfalter.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 17:04:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Colourful butterfly - Vanessa cardui.
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 03:59, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Acherontia-Kadavoor-2016-06-23-001.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2016 at 13:52:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Death's-head hawkmoth
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Better leave it, as it is. This specimen is better at full resolution. --Ivar (talk) 17:38, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment marked improvement IMO, I wanted to talk to you about this software, I see you did not wait me :) Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:15, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I agree that this change produced a marked improvement. I wish the caterpillar were a bit sharper still, but I think it's quite sharp and detailed enough to be both fascinating and of great educational/encyclopedic value. As others have said, it's amazing to look at, and the composition is pretty good, too. In this version, I definitely think this deserves a rotation on the front page. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:51, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 04:09, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera

File:Black Cliffs' Lake, Lagodekhi Protected Area, Georgia.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 14:11:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Glacier lake in the Caucasus mountains at the border of Georgia and Dagestan (Russia) 3000 m asl, it needs 3 days (by foot) to reach this beautiful lake from the closest settlement. For 6 months it is frozen.
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Jee 04:00, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

File:Black Cliffs' Lake, Lagodekhi Protected Area, Georgia 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 13:50:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

This is a glacier lake in the Caucasus mountains at the border of Georgia and Dagestan (Russia) 3000 m asl, it needs 3 days (by foot) to reach this beautiful lake from the closest settlement.
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment well, given the miniscule size of the camera's sensor (4mm diagonal), the f-stop as such is more than adequate. The lack of sharpness (at least when compared to more advanced photographic systems) is due to the sensor itself. This being said, the picture's still good enough imo --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:47, 23 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 18:55, 22 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Striking, especially that cloud shadow. Also the effort of getting these photos (reading the description) rivals this nom. w.carter-Talk 19:21, 22 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:47, 23 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lack of details. I also miss something special in this scenery. --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:09, 23 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support For me this image is very good. Perhaps we could look for lacks but we should not overdo. -- Spurzem (talk) 13:14, 23 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I think this image is beautiful, poetic and deserves a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:04, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Beautiful but too unsharp for a 6 MP image. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:47, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 04:07, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places
  • The count is incorrect. There are 7 supporting votes and the vote is to feature. This is the first time I've seen a numerical miscount by FPCBot. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:35, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • There was a space in the weak support vote which may fool the bot. Jee 04:07, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Junonia atlites-Kadavoor-2016-06-23-001.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2016 at 05:54:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Junonia atlites (Grey Pansy) mating pair
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 04:08, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera

File:Lyriothemis acigastra-Kadavoor-2016-06-26-001.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2016 at 23:20:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lyriothemis acigastra
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:58, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Odonata

File:Trachycephalus mesophaeus Albine.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2016 at 20:38:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Trachycephalus mesophaeus Albine
What's a false focus? and please add CA note to fix it --The Photographer (talk) 14:47, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The peak of the nose is sharp, not the head + eye. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 14:55, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
✓ Done Thanks for the notes, CA now is fixed --The Photographer (talk) 15:20, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I fixed the CA and now some areas look more sharpening, please, let me know if it is ok --The Photographer (talk) 15:20, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 03:56, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Globen metro station May 2016.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2016 at 07:55:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Globen metro
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 19:28, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Trifolium pratense - Keila.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 06:16:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Red clover
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 19:30, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants

File:Vitoria - Knitted graffiti 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2016 at 20:47:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Knitted graffiti in the Old Town of Vitoria-Gasteiz. Basque Country, Spain
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places#Spain
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Basotxerri -- Basotxerri (talk) 20:47, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basotxerri (talk) 20:47, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It was a bit unfortunate that you found such a rather poor example of yarn bombing, had the work itself been better this picture could have worked. As it is it looks like a rather sad example of this guerilla art form. For an FP on the subject I'd like something more substantial like this or this. I also think the angle should have been such that there was some space between the rest of the bollards, now they are more or less one clump. Sorry. --w.carter-Talk 21:44, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, more or less per W.carter. The composition is O.K. and probably good, but doesn't strike me as outstanding. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:07, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 00:42, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A QI perhaps but too ordinary for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 15:47, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Thanks for the review and your opinions. --Basotxerri (talk) 18:24, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Basotxerri (talk) 18:25, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 21:00, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Võilille seemnis.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2016 at 23:17:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Seeds of Taraxacum officinale
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 21:01, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Aeolian Islands at sunset.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 18:16:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aeolian Islands at sunset
  • O sorry, I thought it was a detail of a church ceiling (I joke Clin).--Jebulon (talk) 11:35, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose mostly per Daniel. It is rather noisy, there are practically no details at all on the sea, the sunset in itself is not extraordinary enough for an FP, the color especially around the islands is so posterized and saturated that at full size it almost looks like those psychedelic posters I had in my room during the 1960s, ok fond memories but not FP, sorry. --w.carter-Talk 21:48, 23 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Daniel & WC. INeverCry 22:23, 23 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Sorry, it's a nice sunset, but except for the colorful striations in the middle, the picture pretty much just sits there, and at full size, it gets worse to my eyes, as explained by others above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:45, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Lovely but the picture suffers from barrel distortion. I also wonder why it's that noisy at only ISO 100. --Code (talk) 05:50, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Code: Seems that the picture was taken underexposed and heavily processed: [1]. (Look at shadow, midtone and highlight params. Also contrast and exposure compensation. Not too sure which of the LR or PS triggers they refer to though). - Benh (talk) 07:12, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Well, that makes sense. Didn't see that it has AdobeRGB embedded as well. --Code (talk) 07:34, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Well, as it seems that the author isn't interested in any improvement of this picuture, I think I'll have to oppose. A pity. --Code (talk) 11:04, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Of course that was more or less what I expected. Why are you participating here if you don't care about the feedback others give you at all? I really don't get it. This project is not just about collecting awards. --Code (talk) 07:44, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Because someone has talked about awards? Do not go out nonsense, I do not care about your opinion. It's different. This way you do it is pedantic and boring.--LivioAndronico (talk) 14:24, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I was triying fix the noise, if it is not ok for you, please revert me LivioAndronico --The Photographer (talk) 03:59, 25 August 2016 (UTC) reverted --The Photographer (talk) 20:39, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Well, as it seems that the author isn't interested in any improvement of this picuture after of my comment I do not I received any feedback and btw, I agree with Code when he tell this project is not just about collecting awards and I found a lack of respect and maturity when LivioAndronico comment to Code I do not care about your opinion. It's different. Code deserves an apology --The Photographer (talk) 17:58, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • And here's The Photographer who talk without being questioned. If you want respect then begins to respect others' opinions! Do what no one has asked you is not a test of maturity but of intelligence! However, I close here because probably become a boring speech which you are used to but I do not.--LivioAndronico (talk) 20:08, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Code: I would think Livio is participating here because he feels his photos deserve FP status. He's been right about this 96 times, so he's doing pretty well. If he doesn't want to change his images according to suggestions, so what? That's his business. Your comment about collecting awards is offensive. 96 FPs means 96 images of Livio's that were judged to be impressive enough for FP status. He earned those 96 FPs through his skill and talent as a photographer, he wasn't awarded anything. INeverCry 21:08, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear INeverCry, a good photographer not make you automatically an polite person. This place is not an street photo exhibition where opinions do not matter, it's a community based on participating which is the base too of FP section. Definitely, reviews are essential and for IMHO is the only way to improve the quality professional of this section. Code's comment refers to the fact that Livio ignored my comment followed by an immaturity act. --The Photographer (talk) 22:26, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@INeverCry: Come on, seriously? My comment was offensive? Don't you think it's offensive to ignore other users comments or attempts to help and to tell them that one doesn't care of their opinion? If he doesn't care for other users' opinions why is he presenting his pictures here? At FPC, everything is about the opinions of the community. We're not only allowed to talk if Livio wants us to. Although Livio's behaviour is always very rude some users (including myself) try to help him improve his pictures again and again and all we get in return are statements like the ones cited above. You're defending that by pointing out that he's got 96 FP stars? Really? BTW: I don't expect him to change his pictures upon my request. But I expect him to at least answer other users' comments. It's a simple issue of politness. --Code (talk) 05:24, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Ha ha! The same Simon Cowell who passed up Jennifer Hudson for Fantasia...a great judge... Face-tongue.svg INeverCry 01:00, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @INeverCry: Oh, fine. A Sysop who finds it funny when I'm being insulted by Livio. Very funny indeed. You call me offensive and laugh about Livios obvious insults? Instead of laughing about Livio's bad jokes you should advise him to be polite to others. It would be nice if someone else could have a look at this thread, maybe @Christian Ferrer: , @Natuur12: or @A.Savin: for example. I don't want to take this to AN/U immediately. --Code (talk) 11:43, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for pinging me [2] --A.Savin 14:25, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I cant't tell that I'm happy with blocking him, however, this type of behavior within the community are unacceptable and is very regrettable also see an admin support this behavior. I have nothing more to say on this matter, only thanks A. Savin --The Photographer (talk) 14:33, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 01:20, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Cithaerias Esmeralda MHNT.ZOO.2004.0.976 (2).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2016 at 15:19:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 01:19, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera

File:Healey Silverstone (17.06.2007).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2016 at 20:00:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Healey Silverstone built in 1949
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 01:14, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles

File:La Roque, Salagou Lake 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2016 at 15:26:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Thank you, hdr simulation from one RAW file, the less sharp areas were the most shadowed areas Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:11, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
oh no I know from where it come from, I try currently the DXO software free version and a bokeh simulation is activate by default, I will upload a sharper version...let me a few minutes Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:20, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
✓ Done Alchemist-hp, I uploaded a version without these setting, that should be better Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:57, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, thanks. Now Symbol support vote.svg Support. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 20:04, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 01:18, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Modelo didatico bovino correto.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 00:53:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Anatomy model of a bovine (cow), showing several organs and organic systems in left lateral view with the rumen highlighted in the foreground.
Alt version

Anatomy model of a bovine (cow), showing several organs and organic systems in left lateral view with the rumen highlighted in the foreground.

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info It's not a correction, it's a restoration from original file, because, IMHO Arion nomination has destructive alterations like oversharpening, overexposition and color saturation, btw, I preffer a black background, remembering that it's only my opinion --The Photographer (talk) 03:52, 23 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Really a nice work, thanks! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 04:01, 23 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This has evident relevance for Wikipedias! Joalpe (talk) 13:25, 23 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:11, 23 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As a Wikipedian, I thank you. :) w.carter-Talk 16:38, 23 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:01, 23 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ~★ nmaia [[mia diskuto]] 19:54, 23 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

*Symbol support vote.svg Support, although to make this even much more valuable, parts should be labeled. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:58, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I'm finding the remarks in opposition pretty persuasive, particularly Adam's remarks below. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:30, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Thennicke (talk) 09:52, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg strong opposition what's that in the mouth of the animal? Did you invented a new part? And this is a anatomic model, colours are painted by the human, it's not oversaturated, it's the colour of the model, and could be any colour actually, it's a educational model... And it was not "destructive" was we do not have any lost of information. Next time, ponder your words, or at least bring truths... Btw, your cuts are not clear, and the reason is simple, you changed the background colour, but do not took into consideration the invasion that black creates, now we have harsh white knurled lines, and you also do not removed the invasion of magenta provoked by the model itself. Remembering that it's only my opinion. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 17:25, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
PS:I strongly suggest you bright down your monitor, the grey it's not even close to be black, and we do not have areas overexposed in the orginal image. Seeing those evidences, your monitor is probably away more bright that should be to work with images. If you do not believe me, check the histogram... grey vs black. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 17:38, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
✓ Done Rodrigo please, we are here to learn, take it easy. --The Photographer (talk) 19:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
well, The Photographer, we are here to collaborate, not for learning, learning is the reward, and you started listing number of problems that was not there, and more, qualifying the contribution as "destructive". How this is collaborative? -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 12:25, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi Rodrigo, please don't take it personally, how you can see, destrutive is a word very used here. --The Photographer (talk) 05:17, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The Photographer 23 results, we can not classify as very used, we have more presence of the word "shit" [3], and this do not mean that is good way to classify the work of someone, and more, using adjectives in an evaluation it is not appropriate and unproductive.
You still wrong in your affirmative...
And removing the poll and the clamps, made this away more unrealistic that already was, if you will remove the poll, remove the base... Clone stamping something so big should have the {{Retouched picture}} warning, specially in FP. Did you notify the volunteers that voted before this modifications? -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 09:21, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pido disculpas si fale uma coisa errada, analisando um pouco, tudas as modificações som destructivas e a gente faz sempre o melhor independentemente gente para algums seja bom o ruim. --The Photographer (talk) 14:11, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm not comfortable with the amount of digital edits made. It is what it is, and removing the pole, changing the background... Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:58, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Adam, thanks for your recomendation, however, the pole is a rusty suit that has nothing to do with the main subject and black blackgrounds are used in most scientific anatomy books to enhance the main subject. --The Photographer (talk) 05:17, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This isn't just a diagram; it's a model. It loses a lot of value if parts of the model are removed. Besides the pole, the various screws and latches were also removed. But not the base. It's an awkward hybrid; you're basically trying to turn a photo of a 3D object into an SVG diagram. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:38, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Atsme 📞 18:58, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Adam Cuerden. Seems imbalanced only in two legs. Jee 03:46, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 04:20, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Myurella nebulosa 01.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2016 at 18:56:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Red-cloud Auger; Length 3.7 cm; Originating from Panglao Island, Bohol, Philippines
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 01:17, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Túnel natural, Hartelholz, Múnich, Alemania, 2016-04-03, DD 05.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2016 at 17:24:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Natural tunnel with a viewer at the back :) in Hartelholz Forest, Munich, Germany.
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 01:21, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Ноќен пејзаж во Мариово.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2016 at 11:58:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Night landscape of Mariovo, Macedonia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Petrovskyz - uploaded by Petrovskyz - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:58, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:58, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the nood of the picture, but the following aspects lead me to not support the candidature: De-noising artifacts in the lower part of the picture in particular, yet quite a lot of noise is still visible in the sky. Stars on the right side create trails - exposure time was too long vs. the "600/f" rule. An airplane flew through the picture, see note. --Hendric Stattmann (talk) 13:35, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I'm not sure what to think about this picture. It looks pretty good at full-page size, but at full size, why is the sky sharp on the left side and blurry, with traily stars, on the right side? Different photos stitched together? And the land looks a bit strange at full size, though I could tolerate that and perhaps it couldn't be helped. I'm not sure the contrail makes the photo unfeaturable, but I think that overall, the photo, while good, isn't one of the most outstanding on the site. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:22, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too noisy (actually looks hopelessly NRed, which is even worse) even by starry skies standards. And while I agree about the nice mood, I think we have much better starry skies than this (Including this incredible one, which ended 3rd at POTY). - Benh (talk) 18:47, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. Daniel Case (talk) 05:48, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:01, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 22:24, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:St Peter's Square, Vatican City - April 2007.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2016 at 04:04:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St Peter's Square in Vatican City. The current list of featured pictures shows this as an FP, but this image doesn't appear on any nomination pages, so with this nomination I hope to formalize the image as an FP.
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:28, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

File:Akbari Mahal.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2016 at 10:52:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Glistening Akbari Mahal
Dialog-warning.svg
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: sorry, but your image is noisy, oversaturated, distorted and low quality. - Alchemist-hp (talk) 11:08, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply] 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.
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Framing, saturation, distortion and noise could be fixed, but the arm protruding from the lower left corner cannot. Sorry to decline my support for this picture of a beautiful subject. --Hendric Stattmann (talk) 11:37, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 19:58, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Oca do Brasil.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2016 at 15:18:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Oca do Brasil
no Zoo de São Paulo --The Photographer (talk) 23:33, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 20:01, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Mannheim - Planetarium.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2016 at 17:21:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mannheim: planetarium
I think planetarium buildings are interessting in their shape and therefore not common or ordinary. The building is centered, like 95% of all building images are, also FP-building-images. The light is strong, the sky is blue, no rubbish, just a good and concise shot. If I compare this image to all other images this photo persuades with it's simplicity. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:50, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg weak support I find myself wondering if the image would be more pleasing if you'd moved a little to the left to take advantage of the symmetry? Regardless, this is an interesting building and a high quality photograph. -- Thennicke (talk) 01:44, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per INC. Daniel Case (talk) 02:40, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per INC. Adding a bit for the benefit of Alchemist-hp: Some buildings are interesting enough to look good in a straight forward centered photo, this is not one of them. This building needs more shadow/light interaction to make it "come alive" and be interesting enough for an FP. Since the main part of it is almost the same hue as the clear sky it doesn't stand out that much. Imagine if there had been some linear cirrus clouds behind it, that would have been effectful. Or perhaps reshoot it in autumn and get the yellow leaves to complement the blue roof. It is a very good QI/VI but it lacks the wow of an FP. w.carter-Talk 03:14, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I have no problem with the positioning of the planetarium, but with no clouds or significant chromatic variation in the sky, it just sits there and detracts from an otherwise very good photo that could have been featurable in my opinion. I'd like to see a similar photo with interesting clouds and/or during sunrise or sunset. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:55, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sure, a few clouds in the blue sky would be nice, but a part from that there is nothing to object about this picture. Remarkable sharpness without sharpening artifacts. Nice colors and lighting. --Hendric Stattmann (talk) 06:34, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • of course Symbol support vote.svg Support, because absolutely incomprehensible opposes. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 08:22, 29 August 2016 (UTC) P.S. I think we are here more and more in a photocommunity, no real votings here?!? My opinion!Reply[reply]
    • @Alchemist-hp: I don't understand the meaning of this post scriptum...--Jebulon (talk) 22:21, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • @Jebulon: : and I don't understand the other (o)votings here ... Now we have both a problem!? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 23:59, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • @Alchemist-hp: Sorry, I did not vote for now. I understand your support vote, and that you are angry against "o" votes, but I really don't understand this :"I think we are here more and more in a photocommunity, no real votings here?!?" What do you mean by this ?--Jebulon (talk) 07:48, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
          • I guess he means that the voting behaviour is more than the tase of a photocommunity and disregards the encyplopedic value of an image. Indeed we already have a forum for valued images but nevertheless we shouldn't forget that this image pool is primarily for the encyploedia and not other purposes. --Wladyslaw (talk) 07:56, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
            • I had the same point of view when I came here but have since learned that FPs need to be both encyclopedic and visually stunning, with an ephasis on 'stunning'. Perhaps we should have a new project for pictures that are simply fantastic from an encyclopedic point of view, Perfect Pictures or something. ;) I'm only joking, but the thought has crossed my mind, I know I could contribute with plenty to that. For now those pics goes into the QI section. --w.carter-Talk 11:41, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
              • I use thumbnails of Commons photos on Wikivoyage, a travel guide, not Wikipedia. Moreover, each Wikipedia has the power to select a picture that's of great encyclopedic value but insufficiently good quality or composition to be a Featured Picture on their site. I think most of us do take educational and encyclopedic value into account in our voting, but for many of us, neither of those are our primary criteria, but rather, criteria that can make the difference between support and oppose votes in more or less close cases or in the cases of extremely unusual subjects, sometimes it may override a lot of reasons for opposition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:35, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
              • @W.carter: We have such a project already. No need to duplicate this on Commons. - Benh (talk) 09:17, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
                • @Benh: I know that, you missed the part when I said I was only joking, it's called brainstorming. Let's just put this to rest now shall we. --cart-Talk 09:56, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, QI, but nothing special IMO. It is a well presented building--Lmbuga (talk) 02:25, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 20:05, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Leopard-digitalART.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2016 at 10:06:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 20:02, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Mallnitz Tauerntal Tauscherböden 20160807.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2016 at 06:15:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Alpine pasture Tauscherböden in the Tauern Valley near Mallnitz, Carinthia
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 20:03, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Austria

File:Градбата на Саат Кулата во Неготино 1.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2016 at 12:47:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Architecture of a wall of the hexagonal clock tower in Negotino, Macedonia
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 20:07, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:CoA Catherine de' Medici Petites Heures d'Anne de Bretagne.png, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2016 at 15:25:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

CoA Catherine de'Medici
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Book created by the Master of the Petrarch Triumphs - found, uploaded, restored and nominated by me -- Jebulon (talk) 15:25, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Something different today, from the french national online library. Here we have a (restored by me) manuscript illumination featuring the coats of arms of dowager queen Catherine de'Medici, widow of king Henry II of France. This was included ca.1560CE in a ca.1500 CE illuminated prayer book manuscript called Petites Heures d'Anne de Bretagne. One can see that they are CoA of a widow due to the Ordre de la Cordelière around the escutcheon. This chivalric order was created after the death of her husband king Louis XII of France by queen Anne of Brittany, for widow noble women. You have at left (dextre in french heraldry) the CoA of kings of France, and at right (senestre, yes, it is inversed) the CoA of Catherine, showing her descent (Boulogne, Medici, Tour d'Auvergne). During her life, she was Queen Consort, and a very powerful Queen Mother of the three last kings ( brothers Francis II of France, Charles IX of France and Henry III of France) of the House of Valois of the Capetian dynasty. Her death marks the end of the french Renaissance. The original version of this image is available as first upload for comparison, as I usually do.-- Jebulon (talk) 15:25, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Might be QI but I see nothing outstanding here. Edges aren’t straight. --Kreuzschnabel 17:07, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Something wrong with your breakfast ? Face-smile.svg--Jebulon (talk) 17:20, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • What’s breakfast? --Kreuzschnabel 18:11, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • No matter, just a joke: as you opposed with the same words two completely different pictures, I thought you were angry, maybe due to the fact that someone had stollen a part of your breakfast, or something. Please don't care, that's a french kind of reaction.--Jebulon (talk) 19:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As far as I can see, this is an excellent rendition of an old illumination. Most likely made on handmade paper (no straight sides, vellum usually have cut sides) in an age when rulers and set-squares were optional. Colors are consistent with those of the era and so is the gilding. Granted, it's been some years since I studied such manuscripts at the British Museum, but from what I recall this seems ok. Nice to see something unusual like this here. :) w.carter-Talk 18:27, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:44, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per W. carter. Daniel Case (talk) 02:55, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Good to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:36, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:21, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ~★ nmaia [[mia diskuto]] 14:12, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:56, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 02:12, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media

File:Pelícano pardo de las Galápagos (Pelecanus occidentalis urinator), Punta Pitt, isla de San Cristóbal, islas Galápagos, Ecuador, 2015-07-24, DD 80.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2016 at 21:17:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Exemplar of brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis) watching in Punta Pitt, San Cristobal Island, Galápagos Islands, Ecuador.
Alt version

Exemplar of brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis) watching in Punta Pitt, San Cristobal Island, Galápagos Islands, Ecuador.

  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I see I changed my mind. What did it is that I thought about how detailed the picture of the pelican is, and the background looks OK at full-page size, though it still looks strange to me at full size. Best for me not to think about that part too much... -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram-voting question.svg Question What do you mean ?--Jebulon (talk) 09:38, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Previously, when this photo, now presented as an alternate, was nominated, I opposed featuring it on the basis that I couldn't get past the background on the right side being so blurred at full size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:46, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --w.carter-Talk 07:28, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I'm confused. This image is already shown in the gallery as FP. Charles (talk) 08:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Same as Charlesjsharp... Strange.--Jebulon (talk) 09:37, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Jebulon, Charles: if it would be a Commons FP you'd see the FP star in the top right. As you can see in the FP template it is considered FP in the Spanish WP, but not in Commons. Poco2 15:20, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Mmmmh, yes of course, I've noticed this, but anyway, this picture is now listed as Commons FP--Jebulon (talk) 15:30, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Please have a look to the current categorization of this file...--Jebulon (talk) 17:19, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Are those cats for exclusive use of Commons FPs? That would be knew to me. I have though no problem with removing any categories containing "Featured" and not in "xxx Wikipedia" if there is consensus about that, but it isn't the place to discuss that, I guess. Poco2 17:47, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The trees of Category:Featured pictures by country and similar, are only for Commons FP, because "FP's" on many wikipedia languages are not necessarily what we consider as the finest of Commons, making these categories rather trivial when sorted into. Thanks --A.Savin 18:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It should be on category page, anyway, now diliff will win the first place --The Photographer (talk) 02:21, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A.Savin: no problem, will remove the images that are FP somwhere but not on Commons (I just checked they are 20) from Category:Featured pictures by country and from Category:Featured pictures of landscapes (or whatever subject).
The Photographer: is there something to win? what do you mean? Poco2 06:43, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I have the idea that in some point WMF will support the photographers with more FP. Maybe I'm wrong, however, could be nice see WMF supporting us with a camera or a lens, for example. --The Photographer (talk) 17:50, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 04:34, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes

File:Santissima Trinità dei Pellegrini (Rome) - Dome.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2016 at 13:45:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Santissima Trinità dei Pellegrini (Rome) - Dome
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - In this case, a Google image search shows other photos of this cupola that are comparable with the colors in this picture. I'm not sure all the colors or saturation are ideal (some parts seem a bit washed out to my eyes), but I accept that this is probably what they look like, and I like the picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:47, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 02:10, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Francis Fukuyama at Fronteiras do Pensamento São Paulo.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2016 at 00:52:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Francis Fukuyama at Fronteiras do Pensamento São Paulo.jpg
Alt version

Francis Fukuyama at Fronteiras do Pensamento São Paulo.jpg

I try to recreate the Francisco Fukuyama chin based on other pictures of him, however, this was a mental base and not real. We are changing here the main subject (Francisco) and it's a good question and I invite you to see the history of this FP --The Photographer (talk) 05:25, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I really do admire your photoshop capabilities! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:09, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Sir :D --The Photographer (talk) 14:44, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry? This is one of the worst photoshoppings I have seen within months. Collar and background extremely pixelated, and the cloning on the chin is too obvious to be trustworthy. --Kreuzschnabel 10:24, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
✓ Done Pixelation on background is gone now --The Photographer (talk) 14:44, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Then you haven't seen any really bad photoshopping in the past months... ;-) But ok, at 100% the result is less convincing - which was to be expected. And please note that I didn't even support the edited alternative. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:51, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • And another alternate. Pretty soon every nomination will have an alternate by The Photographer... INeverCry 06:21, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Totally agree with INeverCry. The Photographer is good with the photoshoping and is apparently only trying to be helpful, but as I said before this is becoming a bit too much. w.carter-Talk 08:31, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am sorry, Understood, I'll stop doing this kind of photoshoping and yes I think this was too far --The Photographer (talk) 14:44, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 12:19, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Pelícano pardo de las Galápagos (Pelecanus occidentalis urinator), Punta Pitt, isla de San Cristóbal, islas Galápagos, Ecuador, 2015-07-24, DD 80.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2016 at 21:17:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Exemplar of brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis) watching in Punta Pitt, San Cristobal Island, Galápagos Islands, Ecuador.
Alt version

Exemplar of brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis) watching in Punta Pitt, San Cristobal Island, Galápagos Islands, Ecuador.

  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I see I changed my mind. What did it is that I thought about how detailed the picture of the pelican is, and the background looks OK at full-page size, though it still looks strange to me at full size. Best for me not to think about that part too much... -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram-voting question.svg Question What do you mean ?--Jebulon (talk) 09:38, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Previously, when this photo, now presented as an alternate, was nominated, I opposed featuring it on the basis that I couldn't get past the background on the right side being so blurred at full size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:46, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --w.carter-Talk 07:28, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I'm confused. This image is already shown in the gallery as FP. Charles (talk) 08:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Same as Charlesjsharp... Strange.--Jebulon (talk) 09:37, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Jebulon, Charles: if it would be a Commons FP you'd see the FP star in the top right. As you can see in the FP template it is considered FP in the Spanish WP, but not in Commons. Poco2 15:20, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Mmmmh, yes of course, I've noticed this, but anyway, this picture is now listed as Commons FP--Jebulon (talk) 15:30, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Please have a look to the current categorization of this file...--Jebulon (talk) 17:19, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Are those cats for exclusive use of Commons FPs? That would be knew to me. I have though no problem with removing any categories containing "Featured" and not in "xxx Wikipedia" if there is consensus about that, but it isn't the place to discuss that, I guess. Poco2 17:47, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The trees of Category:Featured pictures by country and similar, are only for Commons FP, because "FP's" on many wikipedia languages are not necessarily what we consider as the finest of Commons, making these categories rather trivial when sorted into. Thanks --A.Savin 18:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It should be on category page, anyway, now diliff will win the first place --The Photographer (talk) 02:21, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A.Savin: no problem, will remove the images that are FP somwhere but not on Commons (I just checked they are 20) from Category:Featured pictures by country and from Category:Featured pictures of landscapes (or whatever subject).
The Photographer: is there something to win? what do you mean? Poco2 06:43, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I have the idea that in some point WMF will support the photographers with more FP. Maybe I'm wrong, however, could be nice see WMF supporting us with a camera or a lens, for example. --The Photographer (talk) 17:50, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 04:34, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes

File:Croatia BW 2014-10-10 12-41-09.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2016 at 11:28:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 19:52, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Pelícano pardo de las Galápagos (Pelecanus occidentalis urinator), Punta Pitt, isla de San Cristóbal, islas Galápagos, Ecuador, 2015-07-24, DD 80.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2016 at 21:17:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Exemplar of brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis) watching in Punta Pitt, San Cristobal Island, Galápagos Islands, Ecuador.
Alt version

Exemplar of brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis) watching in Punta Pitt, San Cristobal Island, Galápagos Islands, Ecuador.

  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I see I changed my mind. What did it is that I thought about how detailed the picture of the pelican is, and the background looks OK at full-page size, though it still looks strange to me at full size. Best for me not to think about that part too much... -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram-voting question.svg Question What do you mean ?--Jebulon (talk) 09:38, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Previously, when this photo, now presented as an alternate, was nominated, I opposed featuring it on the basis that I couldn't get past the background on the right side being so blurred at full size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:46, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --w.carter-Talk 07:28, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I'm confused. This image is already shown in the gallery as FP. Charles (talk) 08:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Same as Charlesjsharp... Strange.--Jebulon (talk) 09:37, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Jebulon, Charles: if it would be a Commons FP you'd see the FP star in the top right. As you can see in the FP template it is considered FP in the Spanish WP, but not in Commons. Poco2 15:20, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Mmmmh, yes of course, I've noticed this, but anyway, this picture is now listed as Commons FP--Jebulon (talk) 15:30, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Please have a look to the current categorization of this file...--Jebulon (talk) 17:19, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Are those cats for exclusive use of Commons FPs? That would be knew to me. I have though no problem with removing any categories containing "Featured" and not in "xxx Wikipedia" if there is consensus about that, but it isn't the place to discuss that, I guess. Poco2 17:47, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The trees of Category:Featured pictures by country and similar, are only for Commons FP, because "FP's" on many wikipedia languages are not necessarily what we consider as the finest of Commons, making these categories rather trivial when sorted into. Thanks --A.Savin 18:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It should be on category page, anyway, now diliff will win the first place --The Photographer (talk) 02:21, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A.Savin: no problem, will remove the images that are FP somwhere but not on Commons (I just checked they are 20) from Category:Featured pictures by country and from Category:Featured pictures of landscapes (or whatever subject).
The Photographer: is there something to win? what do you mean? Poco2 06:43, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I have the idea that in some point WMF will support the photographers with more FP. Maybe I'm wrong, however, could be nice see WMF supporting us with a camera or a lens, for example. --The Photographer (talk) 17:50, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 04:34, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes

File:Thira (Santorini) - Fira-01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2016 at 07:51:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Santorini: Fira
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 19:51, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places#Greece

File:Panteon de Emilio Bacardi y Moreau.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2016 at 13:08:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Burial vault of Emilio Bacardi y Moreau
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 03:25, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Pelícano pardo de las Galápagos (Pelecanus occidentalis urinator), Punta Pitt, isla de San Cristóbal, islas Galápagos, Ecuador, 2015-07-24, DD 80.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2016 at 21:17:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Exemplar of brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis) watching in Punta Pitt, San Cristobal Island, Galápagos Islands, Ecuador.
Alt version

Exemplar of brown pelican (Pelecanus occidentalis) watching in Punta Pitt, San Cristobal Island, Galápagos Islands, Ecuador.

  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I see I changed my mind. What did it is that I thought about how detailed the picture of the pelican is, and the background looks OK at full-page size, though it still looks strange to me at full size. Best for me not to think about that part too much... -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram-voting question.svg Question What do you mean ?--Jebulon (talk) 09:38, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Previously, when this photo, now presented as an alternate, was nominated, I opposed featuring it on the basis that I couldn't get past the background on the right side being so blurred at full size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:46, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --w.carter-Talk 07:28, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I'm confused. This image is already shown in the gallery as FP. Charles (talk) 08:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Same as Charlesjsharp... Strange.--Jebulon (talk) 09:37, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Jebulon, Charles: if it would be a Commons FP you'd see the FP star in the top right. As you can see in the FP template it is considered FP in the Spanish WP, but not in Commons. Poco2 15:20, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Mmmmh, yes of course, I've noticed this, but anyway, this picture is now listed as Commons FP--Jebulon (talk) 15:30, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Please have a look to the current categorization of this file...--Jebulon (talk) 17:19, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Are those cats for exclusive use of Commons FPs? That would be knew to me. I have though no problem with removing any categories containing "Featured" and not in "xxx Wikipedia" if there is consensus about that, but it isn't the place to discuss that, I guess. Poco2 17:47, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The trees of Category:Featured pictures by country and similar, are only for Commons FP, because "FP's" on many wikipedia languages are not necessarily what we consider as the finest of Commons, making these categories rather trivial when sorted into. Thanks --A.Savin 18:39, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It should be on category page, anyway, now diliff will win the first place --The Photographer (talk) 02:21, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A.Savin: no problem, will remove the images that are FP somwhere but not on Commons (I just checked they are 20) from Category:Featured pictures by country and from Category:Featured pictures of landscapes (or whatever subject).
The Photographer: is there something to win? what do you mean? Poco2 06:43, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I have the idea that in some point WMF will support the photographers with more FP. Maybe I'm wrong, however, could be nice see WMF supporting us with a camera or a lens, for example. --The Photographer (talk) 17:50, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 04:34, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes

File:Pihtsusköngäs canyon in winter.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2016 at 13:46:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pihtsusköngäs canyon in Enontekiö, Finland, in winter 2010
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 03:27, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Xanten RömerMuseum 2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2016 at 21:43:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Facade of Thermae, RömerMuseum in Xanten, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Till Niermann - uploaded by Till Niermann - nominated by W.carter -- w.carter-Talk 21:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- w.carter-Talk 21:43, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wow, simply amazing and I can feel the geometric art here --The Photographer (talk) 21:49, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:51, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per The Photographer. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:28, 24 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:51, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Nice view, interesting light conditions. But it looks a bit to dark and underexposed for me. --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:15, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:30, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Weak Symbol support vote.svg Support Very interesting composition but a bit too dark -- Spurzem (talk) 09:41, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Upped the light a little bit per requests and cloned out the partial bird/UFO while I was at it. If Till Niermann don't agree with this, then I apologize and you can of course reverse it. The change was so very little that I did not see the need for a new version. We already have one alt version, no need for three since the change was suggested by two editor and I agree with it. If I was wrong in doing so, please let me know. w.carter-Talk 11:37, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Thanks for optimizing, I'm far from opposing the enhancements. --Till (talk) 17:55, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • That was reassuring, thanks for letting me know. If you want to vote for your own picture, you can do so if you like. w.carter-Talk 18:08, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For me both are too dark. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great composition! The editor of a photo calendar would probably prefer the de-molehilled version below, but the more I think about it the more I like this version, as they somehow break the otherwise strictly geometrical patterns in the image. --El Grafo (talk) 09:07, 26 August 2016 (UTC) Also kind of reminds me of "Der Maulwurf Grabowski": a picture book I had when I was a child, telling the story of a mole who has to find a new place to live because people are turning his meadow into a construction site …Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 11:23, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ~★ nmaia [[mia diskuto]] 14:13, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alexmar983 (talk) 22:21, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great use of abstraction -- Thennicke (talk) 15:16, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For me both are too dark, as King of hearts. Oversaturated IMO--Lmbuga (talk) 02:45, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Just FYI, the saturation was never touched. --Till (talk) 17:39, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Alt version

Facade of Thermae, RömerMuseum in Xanten, Germany

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Fixed black UFO, sharpening problems, noise and severals distracting objects like irregular lawn. --The Photographer (talk) 03:26, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:47, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:51, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - The only difference I see is that clods of dirt on the grass were cloned out, but those don't bother me. I won't oppose this, though; it's fine, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:30, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support move to Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral on this for less confusion now that the UFO is gone on the first. - Thanks for fixing the UFO (or part of bird top center on the other pic) and the noise. The lawn did not bother me in the original version, looks like they have a problem with some rodents or other animals digging there, but that is part of the landscape. I'm fine with either version. w.carter-Talk 09:35, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For me both are too dark. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I prefer the original. INeverCry 06:28, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alexmar983 (talk) 22:20, 26 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose For me both are too dark, as King of hearts. Oversaturated IMO--Lmbuga (talk) 02:44, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support − Meiræ 15:47, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 20:09, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture#Germany
The chosen alternative is: File:Xanten RömerMuseum 2.jpg

File:Elsie Leslie (1899) by Zaida Ben-Yusuf.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2016 at 04:53:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Elsie Leslie
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 09:30, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:La Jolla Cove cliff diving - 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2016 at 12:31:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cliff jumping near the big cave at La Jolla Cove, with La Jolla Shores in the background.
✓ Done I removed the rock and added some explanation of the creation process. --Jarekt (talk) 16:00, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The "dots" in the air in upper left corners are around en:Torrey Pines Gliderport. --Jarekt (talk) 19:05, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Air around en:Torrey Pines Gliderport.
Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:19, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
By the way, that's quite a beautiful photo, too, and I'd support it for FP if it's nominated. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:20, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ikan Kekek: Yes, this is a very beautiful one and I would have nominated it, but the strange white stripe in the lower left corner needs to be fixed first. Can you have a look, Jarekt? --Code (talk) 13:28, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - If it's unbalanced, removing the rock in the lower left corner is what made it unbalanced, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:21, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:40, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support. Very nicely done. —Bruce1eetalk 05:53, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment. I've withdrawn my vote for now. I didn't see that the lower left corner shows clonning problems when the rock was removed. Once that's fixed you'll get my support again. —Bruce1eetalk 14:33, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That looks good to me. Thanks --Jarekt (talk) 18:38, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol support vote.svg Support. That's better, thanks. —Bruce1eetalk 04:59, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 14:10, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:BMW Isetta - Bad Wörishofen (2015-08-29 3164 b).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2016 at 16:34:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

BMW Isetta
Why should the image tilt or why should the terrain be irregular? I don't understand what you will say or criticize. -- Spurzem (talk) 17:52, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I added a note. Maybe I'm wrong but the horizon could be inclined --The Photographer (talk) 18:03, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I was actually thinking something similar, not with the horizon since this is rather close to the Alps and there are plenty of rolling hills there, but all the poles of the fence behind the car are leaning slightly to the right. A minor fix if so. Great car! I think I'm in love. cart-Talk 18:24, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please look now. -- Spurzem (talk) 18:48, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well done tilt is better now!, however, a white corner border was generated, you could cut it --The Photographer (talk) 18:59, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
✓ Done -- Spurzem (talk) 19:16, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Nice car, but in this instance, I will oppose because the blurry grasses in the background and especially the foreground are too distracting to me. There's also an obvious stitching error in the lower left corner. That error should be fixed, but when it is, I still won't support a feature for the other reason. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:21, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Incredible! I withdraw. -- Spurzem (talk) 19:24, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Negative votes founded like Ikan Kekek because help improve the quality of your photos. Some votes/opinions may be wrong, however, if you are not prepared to accept a critique perhaps this is not a good section. --The Photographer (talk) 19:28, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I accept entitled criticism but not chicane. -- Spurzem (talk) 19:31, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And you also are engaging in a conversation on my user talk page to complain about my vote. I'm one person. You don't have to "accept" (agree with) my criticism, and you probably withdrew your nomination prematurely. But if you want more people to support your work, getting all indignant whenever they oppose it isn't a good strategy. No-one should let anyone's attitude about opposition to their work affect their voting decisions, and I certainly don't plan to do so, but as we are all human beings doing something for fun that we're not getting paid for, if you are so unpleasant whenever people oppose your work, don't be surprised if your support votes start to dry up at some point. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:33, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear Spurzem A similar situation happend a time ago with user @Livioandronico2013: blocked by his criticism or comments and I'm sure this is not your case, however, it is always good to be grateful especially with the negative comments with a good base. Words have no emotion and perhaps sometimes can be misunderstood, I apologize if I made a comment that could have been misinterpreted --The Photographer (talk) 19:28, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 0 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 23:07, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Copysul house.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2016 at 18:25:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Copysul house
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thanks for explaining. Great subject anyway. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:34, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for answer and sorry for my delay --The Photographer (talk) 03:49, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Also looking at how the house looks at Google street view, it seems like the picture has been retouched, wires and graffiti gone and also the roof(!). While I understand that some of this is necessary I'd like such things to be pointed out in the file description of an FPC. If the house has been significantly renovated since the Google photo, I sincerely apologize for this comment. cart-Talk 06:41, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dear W. Carter, thanks for your question. I have always added the geolocation as far as possible in my photos to yourself to observe reality and google street map image have a one month apart and many things can happen in one month as a house remodeling, for example, however, it's not the case, I made alterations in this photo, which I considered not alter the main subject (mural and window), the changes were to remove distracting elements of the main subject, including cables, isolated roof, graffiti on the wall, an unknown dirt and black sign. I sincerely apologize my idea is not to show false images, however, I understand that some changes may not be acceptable. --The Photographer (talk) 17:37, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you or that full explanation. I never thought you intended to be deceiving especially since you always provide a geo tag. It was simply a matter of form for an FPC that changes should be recorded so that every voter can form their own opinion about how to view the image. From a photographic point of view I can very well understand all the changes that were necessary to create a beautiful picture, the encyclopedic standpoint is somewhat different for me. I don't mind if corrected things are movable objects like cars, window displays, garbage, dust, birds, etc or things that could have been avoided if the angle was slightly different, as long as they are not the main object in a picture and only a small percentage of that. So the cables, graffiti and dirt are ok, but to change a gable of a house, that is not what I'd like to see in an FP. I also think the roof gable framed the artwork rather nicely, explaining why it has a triangular shape. Others may think differently and regard only the artwork and the windows. Sorry, but for my part I'll have to Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose this. --cart-Talk 18:12, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 23:16, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Apis mellifera - Cirsium arvense - Keila.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2016 at 13:44:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Honey bee and creeping thistle
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 23:24, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera

File:PL-PK Mielec, rzeźba Miotacz (Henryk Burzec) 2016-08-15--15-01-02-001.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2016 at 18:50:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mielec, rzeźba Miotacz (Henryk Burzec)
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by User:Kroton - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:50, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I just really like the gesture the sculpture is making, and I think this photograph captures the sense of motion in this actually static work of art well. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:50, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:25, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose I like the pose too, and the detail is great. But that may be its undoing. It looks like, in the pursuit of that excellence, the image might have been oversharpened (look at that bit of the white truck in the background for something a bit too processed). The WB also seems a bit too cool, even given the predominant colors. Daniel Case (talk) 03:33, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I do see a bit of seeming oversharpening, now that you point it out. I think it's slight, though. Very small areas of the picture may be posterized. User:Kroton, would you like to make some edits based on Daniel's points? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:01, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Regretful Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Pose, light and detail are fine but I find the cars disturbing, especially having a bright green between its legs. I also keep wondering what the statue's feet look like but maybe the hedge is unavoidable. Sorry. w.carter-Talk 03:38, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Kroton, there are 3 days of voting remaining. Do you want to offer the new one as an alternative, or would it be better for me to withdraw this nomination and for you to submit the new file at some future point? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:29, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:01, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 23:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Parthenos sylvia-Kadavoor-2016-06-25-001.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2016 at 13:31:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Parthenos sylvia
  • Thanks The Photographer. Yes; it is not something we are going to see everyday. I was in search for the rare damselflies in forest streams, after the rain. Stumbled by seeing this rare moment! He didn't care me much as he was busy collecting the minerals for the nuptial gift. :) Jee 16:10, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I was a little surprised the article about the nuptial gift did not include the chocolate and flowers male humans use to seduce us females with. Encyclopedic error... Face-wink.svg --w.carter-Talk 20:21, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Face-wink.svg Jee 03:19, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Je ne peux pas imaginer combien d'heures vous avez passéz là à essayer de prendre cette photo. Il est tout simplement magistrale dans la qualité et la netteté, peut-être juste un peu sous-exposée. --The Photographer (talk) 21:20, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Both of us are inside the narrow forest stream, covered by foliage. So little lights there. I'm still learning the correct flash settings. Jee 03:19, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 23:25, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera

File:A U.S. Navy Hull Maintenance Technician 3rd Class Robert Frey fabricates a steel countertop aboard the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz (CVN 68) Aug. 20, 2013, while underway in the Gulf of Oman 130820-N-JC752-778.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2016 at 04:16:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

U.S. Navy Hull Maintenance Technician 3rd Class Robert Frey fabricates a steel countertop aboard the aircraft carrier USS Nimitz (CVN 68) Aug. 20, 2013, while underway in the Gulf of Oman.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by US Navy / MCSN Kole E. Carpenter - rotated by Pine - uploaded by Fæ - nominated by Pine -- Pine✉ 04:16, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pine✉ 04:16, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sparkly! I wish I could prowl around a carrier for a month or so with my camera, so much activity and hardware to shoot... >(sigh)< --w.carter-Talk 08:40, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support strange... colors and less than perfect sharpness resemble 1940s film photography in a way. Could be a picture taken during WW2 --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:58, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 09:03, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I think the sparks are the main thing that make this picture an interesting enough composition for me to want to feature it, but the positions of the electrician and various objects also help. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:52, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 14:44, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - cool shot! Atsme 📞 20:07, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The man seems a bit scrunched up in such a vertical composition. Other than that, a photo of a man doing a common job like welding isn't wowing for me. INeverCry 20:38, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per INC. You want cool sparks in a welding picture, cool enough to be an FP? Then compare the nominated image with this one. Daniel Case (talk) 20:50, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Awsome example, but I'm enjoying the Norman Rockwell feel this pic has, the hunched concentrated position, goggles (instead if face shield), baggy pants (yes, used by welders to prevent burns) has a dated look to them, the shoes (steel capped toes gives a dated look), not to mention the light and color, very 1940s just like Martin said. w.carter-Talk 21:13, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 21:47, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People#People at work

File:Ermita de la Virgen de la Mencalilla, Almazul, Soria, España, 2015-12-29, DD 33.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2016 at 17:28:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hermitage of the Lady of Mencalilla embedded in a typical winter landscape in the center of Spain, more precisly near Almazul, a tiny village in the Province of Soria, Castile and León.
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 21:43, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:Ida B Wells High School San Francisco January 2013 002.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2016 at 22:43:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ida B. Wells High School, San Francisco
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 21:49, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Image of Tholpavakoothu.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2016 at 02:18:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tholpavakoothu From Kerala, India.
Symbol support vote.svg Support after reading the other !votes. Daniel Case (talk) 04:15, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 21:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Komodo dragon (Varanus komodoensis).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2016 at 21:11:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Komodo dragon (Varanus komodoensis) in the wild
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 21:11, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Charles (talk) 21:11, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't like the dark shadow. Whatever's behind his head, maybe an oval-shaped rock (darker than the rest of the shadow), is an added distraction, as it almost looks like it's connected to his head. INeverCry 21:20, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Fair enough, but the harsh shadow is intended to add menace. Your 'rock' is one of its legs. Please remember that this is not a zoo picture and he was not particularly happy that I was kneeling down pointing a large camera lens at him Charles (talk) 23:06, 27 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I don't know if you really need to add much menace to a huge dangerous lizard, but good for you for having the guts to get in close... Face-wink.svg INeverCry 00:27, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support "Here he is ...Your komodoooo DRAAAA-gon". Although I agree that there's more of that shadow at the right than there needs to be ... perhaps you could get rid of that part with the bit of sun? Tightening the image so that the beast fills more of the frame would IMO go further toward your goal (already partially accomplished) of making it more menacing, leaving the viewer with only this small stretch of darkness to seek refuge in. Amazing coincidence ... I went out to get more whole-bean coffee at Starbucks, and because of this picture I picked Komodo Dragon Blend. And now that you've made him look even more badass, we can sing: "Mr. Ko Mo Do DraaaaaaGON ... Got to keep on draggin'" Daniel Case (talk) 15:49, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Addendum: See note. Daniel Case (talk) 15:50, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Cropped version uploaded... Charles (talk) 18:06, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My support upgraded to strong. Daniel Case (talk) 21:01, 28 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
After the photoshoot I asked him if he minded being called a cold-blooded killer. 'Not at all', he replied. 'I am a reptile after all.' Charles (talk) 07:41, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Face-grin.svg --w.carter-Talk 08:47, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 21:51, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles

File:National Library of Australia, ACT - perspective controlled.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2016 at 11:59:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • User:Code I didn't use a pano head (hence all the stitching errors). It's 15 single frames: I've added that info to the description. -- Thennicke (talk) 08:37, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Sorry, but still no. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:50, 30 August 2016 (UTC) P.S: I ask me: why do you use a stitching, if you can do the same work as a single shoot without errors?Reply[reply]
  • @Alchemist-hp: Reason 1 is that I can't take this in a single shoot without errors. I don't own a 24mm tilt-shift lens, which I would need to do that. Reason 2 is resolution. My camera is limited to 20MPx. I wanted to create the highest-resolution image of this building that I could, for Wikimedia's sake.
Is your opposition due to there still being stitching errors? If so could you point them out please? -- Thennicke (talk) 02:30, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 21:46, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Stramberk castle - View from Kotouc.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2016 at 10:38:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of Stramberk Castle, Czech Republic from Koutouc.
  • Pictogram-voting question.svg Question - What, in your opinion, is wrong with centering? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:31, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The tower in the center with the trees hiding the Stramberk castle and houses make a center unbalanced composition, there aren't a main indentificable subject. I invite you to read Balance in Photography --The Photographer (talk) 14:33, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'll have a look, but I consider the identifiable subject to be the landscape itself. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:29, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Is this the issue you have with the near-symmetry of this picture? "The main issue with symmetry is that most scenes do not have two identical halves." The thing is, I don't see the tower as being dead center, anyway - it seems a bit to the right to me. And I don't think there's been an attempt at symmetry, as there is more greenery on the left. Also, there had been a bit more to the right, but I requested a crop because a construction site was overly distracting to my eyes. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:33, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I agree that in terms of balance, it would be helpful to place the tower slightly more off-center. Unfortunately, the way the buildings are set, an off-center composition does not work, so I had to stick with the composition as it is. I think it is still pleasant and gives an accurate representation of the tower and its surroundings. --Hendric Stattmann (talk) 19:18, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 21:45, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:MonumentoEcuestreaSanMartin-MDP-ago2016 alt 3.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2016 at 00:04:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

The image has a previous nomination

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ezarateesteban 00:04, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Again. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 00:42, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Again. And in my opinion, it's not a problem that the interesting tree takes away attention from the monument, because the monument is not the subject of this picture. Instead, this is a picture of the monument and the tree, and in my strong opinion, there's nothing whatsoever wrong with a picture having a dual subject. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:48, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Still doesn't work for me. Daniel Case (talk) 06:13, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Hopefully we don't get two more alternates... Face-tongue.svg INeverCry 06:59, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor lighting. Charles (talk) 07:31, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Raghith 10:00, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose bad shadow side ... --Alchemist-hp (talk) 11:05, 29 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others, and strong sharpness IMO--Lmbuga (talk) 02:29, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment You could try the same image with a sunset sunrise on background, if it is posible of course --The Photographer (talk) 14:23, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I suppose that would be sunrise since Mar del Plata and Argentina are on the east coast of South America. ;) w.carter-Talk 16:24, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I go to stay here until get the FP (or the FP´s, one with trees and another without trees) :) Ezarateesteban 16:31, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Vote not valid: user with less than 50 edits. Yann (talk) 09:16, 29 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Mile (talk) 10:11, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2016 Funchal. Madeira. Portugal-22.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2016 at 16:36:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Port and boats of Funchal, Madeira, Portugal.
  • Category: Pictures of Portugal
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by lmbuga - uploaded by lmbuga - nominated by Lmbuga -- Lmbuga (talk) 16:36, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination -- Lmbuga (talk) 16:36, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:47, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The composition just isn't working for me. It seems too tight at the left with the boat, and too slack at the right with the pier. There's potential for an interesting juxtaposition of the tiny figure on a board and the huge ship, but it's too loose in this wide view. I tried some crops but nothing strikes me. -- Colin (talk) 19:37, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Edit conflict)*Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A good straightforward picture of a very large ship, a smaller boat and a man on a surf board, but those things don't make up any wow-factor for me, nothing exeptional. The description also calls this "Port of Funchal", a more appropriate description would be "inlet to Port of Funchal". You'd have to be at the opposite side of the scene (or on the cruise ship) to take a picture of the actual port. Sorry. --cart-Talk 19:38, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Colin & W.carter. INeverCry 20:07, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Ok. The composition has more readings, but ok--Lmbuga (talk) 20:15, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 20:39, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2016 Funchal. Madeira Portugal-17.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2016 at 17:13:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Burned areas in Funchal. 2016

Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by lmbuga - uploaded by lmbuga - nominated by User:lmbuga -- Lmbuga (talk) 17:13, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination -- Lmbuga (talk) 17:13, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:41, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:23, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I get that this has documentary value, but as a picture, I don't find it interesting to look at, as I don't find that anything really helps my eyes move around it enough, especially in the right half+ of the picture frame. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:41, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Ok: it's not important. The center of Funchal is the picture and around is a burned area. No problem, you're special. Qualiuty of the picture is poor? Or not?--Lmbuga (talk) 19:46, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • The quality (focus, etc.) is fine. It's the composition that I am criticizing. This is not QIC, where the good quality by itself would be amply sufficient. And this is not about me and whether I'm "special", so don't get all huffy and personal. As you see, I'm happy to vote for photos when I think they merit a feature. I am not going to start voting to feature every photo, just because some photographers get personally insulted and lash out whenever anyone opposes any feature. Have a nice day, and keep in mind the example of Livio. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:59, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Regretful oppose Sorry, but I have to agree with Ikan here. It's a good panorama of a really tragic event, but there is nothing in the image that makes it more than that, no line, light, feature or whatever it is that makes a QI become a FP. It would be better suited for an VI of the fire or a FP on one of the Wikis. Also why is it necessary to shout out the 'Info' at the beginning with big bold letters? I think all of us here are intelligent enough to read facts and info about a picture without a war-sized headline. I understand that this is a recent event and that this may be emotional for some editors, even so, we judge the images as they are here. cart-Talk 20:16, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Not a bad pic yet no outstanding photographic work. --Kreuzschnabel 20:48, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:14, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 22:59, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Boring composition, and the areas of interest look like water color painting (which I guess comes from aggressive NR), ruining intent of author to highlight them. - Benh (talk) 17:39, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I think that I understood you, Benh. (Sorry, poor English) But the water color painting is due to the fog of the island and due to avoid the fog and the little ("less" or "few") clarity (sorry, I can't say what I want and I think that it's not important). Thanks for your review. I think it's better this way: The fog is not pleasant--Lmbuga (talk) 14:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination. Sorry, Better composition is impossible if you can't sail or fly--Lmbuga (talk) 14:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • (es): Se podría hacer una foto mejor compuesta, sin volar ni navegar, si yo fuese en un transatlántico. Yo anduve el puerto completo (varios km), buscando la manera de tener la mejor perspectiva y no pude tenerla mejor porque todo el puerto de los transatlánticos está vallado. El único punto libre es este. Sí, lo entiendo, es cierto: para hacer FPs hay que tener dinero (buena cámara, posibilidades...), además de amigos como sois vosotros--Lmbuga (talk) 14:36, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • (es): Los que iban en transatlántico tenían acceso sin vallas a todas las vistas.--Lmbuga (talk) 14:45, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • Único lugar para hacer esa foto: File:2016 Porto en Funchal. Madeira Portugal-16.jpg. Se ve la niebla--Lmbuga (talk) 14:54, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
          • Español: Haced la foto siendo gente común, personas sin más posibilidades; y esperad que se os diga, cuando la propondrais, que teneis que ser como los otros para ser FP (que teneis que volar, que teneis que acceder a un transatlántico,...). Lo siento, Algo falla si es que esto es Wikimedia--Lmbuga (talk) 16:59, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 20:42, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Wien Karlskirche Aussicht 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2016 at 20:00:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from the portico of Karlskirche (St. Charles Church) over Resselpark, Vienna
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places#Austria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info View from the portico of Karlskirche (St. Charles Church) over Resselpark, Vienna. All by me --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:00, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Uoaei1 (talk) 20:00, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I really like this view, but it's hazy at full size. I could also nitpick a bit on what the crop does to the steeple at the upper right, but that's a minor point. Do you think you might have a chance to take a photo of this view in clearer light? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:17, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram voting info.svg Info No, this point at the roof of the church is usually not open to the public. It was an unique opportunity (Lange Nacht der Kirchen) --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:03, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the idea of this but unfortunately the execution, while definitely a QI, does not rise to the level of FP for me, through no fault of the photographer. Daniel Case (talk) 04:12, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Interesting to see a side of a statue that we don't normally see, but I'd have to agree with Daniel. Also, though I understand that the composition is centered around the lightning rod I think the right crop is too close to the edge of the pool. Maybe there is some practical explanation for this. cart-Talk 17:09, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 04:03, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:39, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 20:43, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Stift Melk Gartenpavillon 04.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2016 at 06:05:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Garden Pavilion in the park of Melk Abbey, Lower Austria
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 20:15, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture#Austria

File:Technique of dehydration applied in a foal.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2016 at 02:17:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Foal. Technique of dehydration - piece showing the syntopy of organs on display at the Museum of Veterinary Anatomy FMVZ USP.
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 20:14, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:2016 Funchal. Madeira. Portugal-21.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2016 at 20:21:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Funchal, Madeira, Portugal

Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes

  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Thanks for such scientific consideration. It not due to my surname is another? Thanks.--Lmbuga (talk) 21:24, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Thanks for such scientific consideration. It not due to my surname is another? Thanks--Lmbuga (talk) 21:24, 7 September 2016 (UTC) Automatic tranlation, in my English I would say: I'm not important, as other users--Lmbuga (talk) 21:28, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I hope Google translate won't alter my words, but you've been roughly trying to pass three similar pictures but in my view, none of them addresses the main issue which is lack of wow and lack of a strong pattern in the composition. They all seem a bit random. So no, I don't think the opposes are due to your nickname. - Benh (talk) 21:36, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Now, Benh, it's the same: Not worth trying to find out what you say (es ¿Que más da lo que opines?). Thanks folk--Lmbuga (talk) 21:57, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • If you want a scientific explanation, let me quote the advice I got from User:Diliff when the panorama of my home town was 'Opposed' here at FPC: "Cityscapes often are busy by nature, but not in such a way that each element competes with the others- there's usually something unified about a good cityscape; a sweeping view, a single architectural style, converging lines, etc. Anyway, just my opinion." This was actually very good advice, this photo has none of these elements. --cart-Talk 21:40, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Interesting W.carter, thanks; but not worth for this picture IMO--Lmbuga (talk) 21:48, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I shall (or will) think about the question. Thanks (Diliff is a reference for me)--Lmbuga (talk) 22:03, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Español: No vuelvo a perder tiempo con una foto. Esto no compensa. Nunca más--Lmbuga (talk) 22:11, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 0 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 23:08, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Citroën 2 CV Charleston (2015-08-29 3174 b).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2016 at 17:33:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
@Iifar: O.k. – But I don't see any necessity. -- Spurzem (talk) 18:56, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 23:14, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles

File:Dlieja da Sacun cun Saslonch.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2016 at 20:38:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. Jacob church
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 23:13, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:Hamburg, Speicherstadt, Block S -- 2016 -- 3330-6.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2016 at 16:16:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Block S in the Speicherstadt, Hamburg, Germany
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Thanks for your review. I'll fix it this weekend. --XRay talk 17:17, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • ✓ Fixed Sorry for the first image. I've rebuild the image. And it's better now - and more naturally. --XRay talk 17:37, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Sorry to nitpick but it now looks underexposed :/ (I don't think you need my help, but if, like me, you use enfuse, go with the openmp version which doesn't render these blue dots for some reason.) - Benh (talk) 18:59, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I don't think the image is underexposed. It was nearly midnight. The first one was overexposed, sky to bright, buildings to bright. The buildings in the front are not illuminated. BTW: I'm working with Photomatix. The first image was made as HDRI, tone-mapped. This one is much more naturally, made with exposure fusion. But I'll check the image again. May be better with +1/3 EV. Tomorrow. --XRay talk 19:51, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Yup you know better, and it's a photographer's choice to render things more realistically or to "alter" things a bit (brightening per my suggestion). As for me, I really like the first version. Cancelling my oppose. - Benh (talk) 20:20, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 23:15, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture#Germany

File:Nasir al- mulk mosque, Shiraz.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2016 at 13:07:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Nasir ol Molk Mosque , also known as the Pink Mosque, is a traditional mosque in Shiraz, Iran. It is located at the district of Gowad-e-Arabān, near Shāh Chérāgh Mosque.
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I agree with this. I really look forward to another attempt to capture the beauty of this mosque. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:27, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 23:18, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Pterynotus elongatus 01.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2016 at 16:24:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Five views of a shell of a Club Murex, Pterynotus elongatus
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 23:15, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Bones, shells and fossils

File:White Orange and Gray Tabby Cat.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2016 at 23:55:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

White Orange and Gray Tabby Cat Lying on Gray Textile
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Mile (talk) 10:55, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Five rusty rebar nets.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2016 at 13:27:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Five rusty rebar nets
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:15, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Others

File:From Tennfjorden towards Raftsundet, Hinnøya, Norway, 2015 September - 4.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2016 at 02:10:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Hi, thanks for support! I would suggest natural panoramics category as I think the boat is not the main subject but more like the area. --Ximonic (talk) 16:13, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Hi I did add the link to the Panoramas category but somehow missed changing the text. Done now and thanks! Nikhil (talk) 03:01, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:19, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

File:Jane Addams - Bain News Service.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2016 at 17:02:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jane Addams
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:24, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:Josselin Château Evening Light Reflected 2016-08-15 WLM.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2016 at 17:26:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Josselin Castle
What you call tilt is a natural visual effect produced by the angle of view over the lake reflection --The Photographer (talk) 17:51, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Spurzem, the towers taper slightly and some of the windows are wonky. They are 15th century fortifications. The reflection is vertically aligned with the castle, so I think I'm true to what is there. -- Colin (talk) 19:19, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice light and detail, but composition is imho unbalanced (almost half of the image is empty) and sky is partly overexposed. --Ivar (talk) 18:03, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Ivar, a hot air balloon in the top right would balance things! It isn't easy to choose an angle of view with reflection. This image is nearly straight on and I suspect taken from a window in the hotel opposite, and suffers from distortion due to the wide angle-of-view. And this image was taken further along the river from the opposite direction. (That latter photo seems to benefit from flood lighting that seems to no longer be there -- I waited for the blue-hour but only tiny street lights came on). I disagree the sky is over-exposed - none of it came close to being over-exposed, but it was very bright near the horizon at that exact time of day (earlier it was more evenly blue, and later less saturated+darker). -- Colin (talk) 19:19, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support I disagree with Ivar. Sky does not appear overexposed to me. Charles (talk) 10:54, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per my previous review : nice light and composition with the reflection on the water. And @Colin: sorry you had to fix this yourself. - Benh (talk) 18:44, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:35, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support very good motive/image, and extraordinary quality --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:24, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as before --cart-Talk 20:28, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:09, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely subject and very well done. @Colin: How could you use the 50mm lens on your crop camera with the NN3MkII? As far as I know the rotator supports 50mm lenses at full frame cameras at max, doesn't it? --Code (talk) 06:51, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Code: Sorry to steal Colin's spot. Not sure I fully get ur question, but my guess is that you look at Colin's setup to produce a 80mm equivalent which shouldn't work on the NN3MkII. But the lense itself remains a 50mm, so not an issue. I think it's all clearer when you think of it as taken with a FF 50mm and only cropped to 80mm in post - Benh (talk) 10:09, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My 50mm lens is equivalent to 75mm on FF camera. According to FoV tables (looking at the DX columns, which match my crop Sony sensor), the 50mm lens has a vertical FoV of 17.7° (which is the horizontal FoV in portrait mode). The NN3MkII has several brass rings for various degree-step detents and the finest is 15°, giving a 2.7° overlap (about 18% overlap, which when I measured a picture is correct). I took File:City from One Bishops Square.jpg at 15° horizontal intervals. It is just enough. However, usually I prefer more overlap. It lets me fix up the panorama afterwards if there is more redundancy. For this image, I simply paused the horizontal rotator midway between the 15° detents. I did the same for File:Tower Bridge from London City Hall 2015.jpg. I've even used a telephoto zoom lens at 100mm for this photo, stopping roughly every 5°. I think Fanotec only recommend up to 50mm lens (on full frame camera) because the next standard prime is 85mm, which would have a 16.1° FoV that is just too tight at 15° intervals. One can actually reverse the brass disc to its blank side with no detents at all, and go by the 5° markings or judge by eye. -- Colin (talk) 11:43, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, Colin, that makes sense to me (sounds like a difficult job, though). --Code (talk) 14:04, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Code: Ah got it now. Never an issue for me either ; I don't use these click discs :) and rely on live view + overlap grid instead. - Benh (talk) 20:15, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support of course --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:19, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support At the end of afternoon things always looks more contrasted, and indeed the horizon at this time always look brighter. Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:36, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:06, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak I was not sure about my vote because the composition, however, Colin explain and hight details in this picture is enough for me --The Photographer (talk) 20:51, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:48, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Gronk (talk) 12:28, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 10:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Congrats. A pity the Rohan flag is not visible... I hope you enjoyed your stay in Morbihan !--Jebulon (talk) 13:39, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Thanks Jebulon. The lack of wind for the flag was a help for the water I suppose. We had fabulous weather despite your doubts. And no midges, which makes a change from our usual holiday destination. A Eurostar strike nearly ruined the start of the holiday, but fortunately it seems those striking were surplus to requirements, and our train was unaffected. I was rather concerned to see several restaurants offer filet de colin! I can think of a few people on Commons who would like to see that dish. -- Colin (talk) 14:08, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Funny indeed. But the name "colin" is known as for parisians or tourists. The real name along the atlantic coast is "merlu". In my native city (La Rochelle, your next trip to France...), if you go to the fishmarket and ask for a "colin", you will be served as a parisian, if you ask for a "merlu", you will be served as a "normal local person". The players of the local FC Lorient have "les Merlus" as nickname.--Jebulon (talk) 14:30, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 02:46, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:49, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:13, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications

File:Lech - Warth - Schutzhütte 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2016 at 15:33:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Shelter between Bürstegg and Steffisalpe, a bench, views over the Lech valley and Biberkopf mountain. Lech/Warth, Vorarlberg, Austria
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 22:25, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Nisyros - Stefanos Caldera1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2016 at 11:40:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nisyros (Greece): Stefanos Crater
Christian Ferrer: the problem should be fixed now. --Wladyslaw (talk) 15:22, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:16, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places#Greece

File:Potsdamer Platz, Berlin, 360x180, 160403, ako.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2016 at 16:49:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

360° view of Potsdamer Platz, Berlin
If I would stand at the place where you stood to take the photo I would never see a panorama like the image. -- Spurzem (talk) 18:13, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please, could you be more specific?, I'm trying to understand --The Photographer (talk) 18:21, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you turned around and looked up from where you were standing, you could see a panorama like that. Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:24, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Spurzem: Since there's nothing more natural than a 360° panorama, I suppose you didn't realize that you have to use the 360° viewer (Panellum) to watch this one. Please click at this link. If you still think that the picture looks "unnatural" afterwards then I'd be happy for a further explanation. --Code (talk) 06:31, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you. I did not know this viewer. But the buildings tilt as before. Best regards -- Spurzem (talk) 07:35, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The sky is a bit blown out, but it's still quite good considering the lighting conditions. I can also notice some white fringes between some buildings and the sky (on left edges). Overall a very good spherical panorama. And it's a bit of a challenge to capture a usually busy place empty. - Benh (talk) 18:55, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thank you for your review, Benh. Indeed I expected someone to mention the partly overexposed sky. It's nearly impossible to avoid an overexposure when taking a 360° pano outside on a sunny day. In this case I tried to hide the rising sun behind the buildings of Leipziger Straße but of course there's still a lot of light in the east. However, I think it's quite how the light really was this morning. If you look in the direction of the sun, you won't really see anything else than pure white. --Code (talk) 06:27, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:14, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

File:Sandhamn August 2016 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2016 at 09:52:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Archipelago forest
  • Have you heard of this thing called "fiction"? ;D I can't recall there has ever been someone murdered in Sandhamn, the only unnatural deaths there are those who've drowned. In the past during fishing in bad weather and in modern times being drunk in any weather... --cart-Talk 21:13, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:17, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Sweden

File:ApogonVithisma.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2016 at 09:14:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Apogon imberbis in a small cave in Alonissos, Greece
Dialog-warning.svg
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: too noise and unsharp 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.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 05:33, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Saudades de Nápoles by Bertha Worms 1895.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2016 at 18:55:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saudades de Nápoles by Bertha Worms 1895
Bertha Worms  (1868–1937) Blue pencil.svg wikidata:Q16498026
 
Bertha Worms
Alternative names Anna Clémence Berthe Abraham Worms
Description Brazilian painter
Date of birth/death 26 February 1868 Edit this at Wikidata 27 June 1937 Edit this at Wikidata
Location of birth/death Uckange, France São Paulo, Brazil
Work location Paris São Paulo
Authority control
creator QS:P170,Q16498026

, photography and uploaded by -- The Photographer (talk) 18:55, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, maybe Google use a filter and you can see in anothers Google art images. Look the follow example --The Photographer (talk) 16:08, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • My camera colors

    My camera colors

  • Google filter

    Google filter

  • My camera colors

    My camera colors

  • Google filter

    Google filter

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 06:04, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Gold rim swallowtail (Battus polydamas jamaicensis) underside worn 2.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2016 at 12:24:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gold rim swallowtail
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Mile (talk) 17:11, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera

File:Sun Glint over Atlantic Ocean.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2016 at 11:37:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sun Glint over Atlantic Ocean
I added the most obvious one. Daniel Case (talk) 14:46, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Looking at the original pic it looks like this is a composite from several shots, maybe this should be mentioned on the file's page. I would not have minded if the left part with the solar panel had been left in since it gave a new dimention to the pic, like you were on the spaceship yourself. But either version is fine by me. w.carter-Talk 15:01, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - Of course it's a beautiful photo, though I prefer the original. However, if you've decided to crop out everything but the Earth and space beyond, I would suggest for you to crop a little further, so that the remaining dark area noted by Ivar as a "crop error" is also cropped out. When you do that, I will support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:25, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 20:39, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Pretty glaring stitching error on the left, breaking the circle "continuity" (?). Not the most impressive view of earth to me, even though the sun specular reflection is a nice effect. - Benh (talk) 20:59, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Same feeling as Benh.--Jebulon (talk) 23:04, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ~★ nmaia [[mia diskuto]] 20:49, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per stitching error -- Thennicke (talk) 05:23, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose insufficient work. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 05:50, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for the break of the spherical curve, supporting flat-earthers unintendedly --Kreuzschnabel 20:54, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Mile (talk) 17:12, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Vista de Quito desde El Panecillo, Ecuador, 2015-07-22, DD 25-29 PAN.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2016 at 21:00:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of Quito, capital of Ecuador, from El Panecillo. The city population is about 1,620,000 inhabitants and due to the orography of the region the city has a particular longish form.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info View of Quito, capital of Ecuador, from El Panecillo. The city population is about 1,620,000 inhabitants and due to the orography of the region the city has a particular longish form. All by me, Poco2 21:00, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 21:00, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:00, 30 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ~★ nmaia [[mia diskuto]] 00:44, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Would have liked sunny weather, I guess, but given that this is pretty damn good. Daniel Case (talk) 03:10, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:12, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:51, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I do want to support this, but shouldn't you state that this is a stitched or panned panorama? Charles (talk) 11:57, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I have added a template Charles, additionally I always state this kind of information in the file name. 25-29 PAN means that the frames 25, 26, 27, 28 and 29 have been stitched to a panorama. Poco2 17:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, I guessed your coding, but the template is good. Charles (talk) 16:08, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment A geo tag would also be nice. :) --w.carter-Talk 12:07, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    W.carter: ✓ added Poco2 17:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment too bright! Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:20, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I agree with Christian. Also there is one blurry stitching line (note added) and foreground saturation level looks too high for me. --Ivar (talk) 13:36, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Christian, Ivar: I've reduced the brightness and also a bit of saturation. It took me a while to identify a "blurry stitching line", I rather found some spots where sharpness was not as good as other areas, I sharpened them. Poco2 17:22, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support light is better, always some less sharp areas in the middle but acceptable for me Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:24, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Moderate support Definitely an improvement, but still not perfect (stitched frames are not equally sharp). --Ivar (talk) 18:30, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 20:40, 31 August 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 03:54, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Moderate support per Ivar. w.carter-Talk 09:56, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In fact, it's a green hill and all the houses have been cloned there. (Just kidding...) --Hendric Stattmann (talk) 13:40, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Cayambe:  ?--Jebulon (talk) 09:02, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose SORRY? Buildings are mostly overexposed (or over-contrast-enhanced subsequently), sharpness leap in the center. Stopped looking for more flaws having spotted those. --Kreuzschnabel 18:48, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good. es: Es increíble que se diga que la mayor parte de los edificios están sobreexpuestos (mentira). Es increíble que se diga que en zonas de cosido hay áreas desenfocadas (mentira). Además, se puede proponer una imagen de 2 megapíxeles y esta tiene más de 84 megapíxels. Ciertamente, pienso que o la gente no sabe, o hay mucho rencor: Técnicamente no parece la foto criticable--Lmbuga (talk) 17:45, 5 September 2016 (UTC) New comment: Busque usted otras críticas --Lmbuga (talk) 19:09, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:23, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes

File:Goat skeleton.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2016 at 02:15:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Specimen of goat skeleton prepared by the bone maceration technique and on display at the Museum of Veterinary Anatomy FMVZ USP
Daniel actually there is only one blown area, I highlighted via note, and it's not what you pointed.
In the parts that you listed it seems that are blown up because, naturally, they do not have texture. You can use a software to see that (red is near to loose info), or compare to the previous version [4].
thank you for your time. :) -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 01:33, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 07:50, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Cirsium vulgare - Keila1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2016 at 11:03:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Spear thistle
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Jee 13:45, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Asterales

File:Eurasian Brown Bear.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2016 at 07:50:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 13:44, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Euthalia aconthea-Kadavoor-2016-06-25-001.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2016 at 05:15:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Euthalia aconthea
  • Thanks Charles for your opinion. Yes; it is a risky nom. As a buttefly enthisiast, I try to document and highlight all types of behaviour shots than just beautiful "butterflies on flowers". Sometimes it works; many times, not. :) Jee 02:26, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • And I think it is GREAT that you do! Keep up the good work with all sorts of backgrounds, situations and bold experiments. The diversity is much appreciated. --cart-Talk 20:25, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Alt version

Euthalia aconthea-Kadavoor-2016-06-25-003.jpg

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Less magnification compared to original; but having a better background. -- Jee 09:43, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'll go for this just because it's a better photo. I like the little green plants on the right-hand side, combined with the buttefly at the bottom it looks like an old Japanese print. w.carter-Talk 09:59, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. The background is better; the crop is a little tight at the bottom, but not enough to oppose. —Bruce1eetalk 10:29, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I like the more interesting background in the other picture. I also think the butterfly is a bit clearer in the other picture. Purely at full size, the little rocks in the other picture produce a somewhat more assertive blur, but at full-page size, I prefer the other picture. So after all that, I'll vote to oppose this version in favor of the other one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:56, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info @Jkadavoor: I increased slightly sharpness, please revert, if it's not better. --Ivar (talk) 11:19, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like them both. INeverCry 19:24, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment It's a great shot, but tricky to go for FP with this sort of puddling shot and the inevitable ghastly background. Charles (talk) 21:10, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Like the other one, I thought the background was food at first. Daniel Case (talk) 21:20, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • This butterfly likes rotten fruits. Here it is enjoying them in my courtyard under the Guava tree. The background includes the remaining of many guavas. Jee 02:26, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks Lmbuga for the comment. The Google translator deliver it to me as "Congratulations for joining seven votes (and there will be more) with any of these images. In my opinion, the best fabrics". My vague guess is that you like the texture on its wings? (The only one word I understood in my visit to Asturias to represent the WM community in the Princess of Asturias Awards is "Hola". I love Spain; an interesting culture with several languages as in India. Jee 02:58, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support (Sorry, I had forgotten to vote)--Lmbuga (talk) 13:59, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I too forgot to vote while adding the alt. Jee 02:04, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 13:51, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera

File:Kaks paadimeest Paunküla veehoidlal.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2016 at 07:57:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Two fishermen at Paunküla water reservoir
  • I've never been fond of categories like "September 2009 in Estonia" and adding coordinates to images made by others may often be difficult. But I'll see, if I could get a geo tag to it. Kruusamägi (talk) 09:10, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
✓ Done Kruusamägi (talk) 09:39, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! The "September..." was just a bonus cat, it was more the other cats that needed some fixing, like why add "Fishing boats" when the "Fishing boats of Estonia" is a better sub cat. And yes it is difficult to add coords to other editors' pics, yet necessary and we do it all the time since FPs should be as perfect as possible. --w.carter-Talk 09:49, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --w.carter-Talk 09:49, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support − Meiræ 15:48, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:40, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ~★ nmaia [[mia diskuto]] 20:49, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another great image for an Estonian tourist poster. Daniel Case (talk) 21:23, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 04:14, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:46, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose another unsharp image, backlit photo. No educational and no wow for me. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 05:48, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --The Photographer (talk) 14:34, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't like anglers but this image is very atmospheric. -- Spurzem (talk) 17:47, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:20, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good frame; but I failed to see any photographic excellence here. Jee 04:24, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I thought about this photo for a long time, and it's too flat for me, especially in the background, which just seems to end in an almost undifferentiated mass just beyond the lake. I understand that this is a kind of retro photo, suggestive of old platinum prints of yesteryear, but I believe that many of those were more volumetric than this, even in similar light. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:04, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 13:48, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Verdi conducting Aida in Paris 1880 - Gallica - Restoration.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2016 at 12:33:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Giuseppe Verdi conducting Aida in Paris in 1880
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 13:42, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:Resciesa Mont Dedite y Danter la Montes Urtijei.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Sep 2016 at 19:47:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The pasture Resciesa in Val Gardena Dolomites
  • It may be your monitor ;) (have you calibrated it ?) Looks fine on mine (even a bit bright and washed out) and histogram reflects what I see. But I do need to calibrate mine. - Benh (talk) 21:41, 1 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oops @Benh: . I meant over-exposed! Sorry Charles (talk) 11:47, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I've looked at this on a few monitors and it seems fine -- Thennicke (talk) 00:50, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I thought this might be an FP when I saw it in QIC. Jee 04:09, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:48, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support cart-Talk 05:49, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very good mix between foreground, middleground and backgrounds of increasing distance, and really well photographed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:38, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A beautiful picture indeed. Still, I would appreciate a "punchier" look, as the contrast is somewhat reduced by the haze. Also, the corner sharpness is less than optimal due to lens limitations, perhaps combined with a generous usage of hyperfocal distance and field curvature. I know I am nitpicking, but we are here to select the very best of WP Commons... --Hendric Stattmann (talk) 11:46, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I can't ask for much more. Daniel Case (talk) 21:32, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Beautiful scenery but I don’t like these washed-out colours. --Kreuzschnabel 20:52, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 10:26, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support − Meiræ 15:11, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Kreuzschnabel --Milseburg (talk) 14:19, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 23:43, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Spot-billed duck at Expo’70 Commemorative Park in Osaka, November 2015 IV.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Sep 2016 at 21:06:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded, nominated by Laitche -- Laitche (talk) 21:06, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I know the duck is a bit dark and not enough sharp though :) -- Laitche (talk) 21:06, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Lovely background, however, Peer Laitche. I love your duck pictures like this one, but in this case the quality is not the best and if I had to choose between the beautiful water in the peak and waves or a focused duck, I would choose the focus. Your image is lovely it's only MHO --The Photographer 21:35, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment not sure why you would nominate an image you know is not sharp? Charles (talk) 22:08, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I agree, it's not very sharp. Also, the red bokeh color in the water, probably a reflection of fall leaves, looks kind of bloody. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:26, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan Kekek. --Karelj (talk) 22:36, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan. INeverCry 23:13, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unlike Ikan, I'm not bothered by the red reflections in the water ... it looks different, and I thought of red autumn leaves first. Like him, though, I think the duck's rear should be sharper. And I'll add to his oppose my own observation that the boundary of the front of the duck with the water looks a little too overprocessed. Might not have been intended, but it's there. Daniel Case (talk) 00:36, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment For me, the only issue is the underexposed rear end. Jee 03:46, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Thanks. --Laitche (talk) 06:54, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Tripterygion.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2016 at 10:26:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tripterygion trypteronotus
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and nominated by --Gronk (talk) 10:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC) }}Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Gronk (talk) 10:33, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Welcome, and thanks for nominating a photo. However, I will Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose this time, because the depth of field is too shallow for my taste (only the head is fairly sharp), and I don't love the composition (it would be better to have more space to the left of the head, as that's the direction the fish would seem to the viewer to be going in, and all the blur to the right really doesn't help anything, compositionally, to my mind). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:47, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment @ Ikan Kekek. The picture is a portrait or at least a close view of the fish, thus shallow dof is obvious. You can catch the whole body of the fish from above or by a lateral view, but it would result banal. Having placed the head of the fish in the first third of the image from left and having faded the rest of the body is a way to enhance dynamism. The blur appearance contributes to this effect. Instead, if the subject was more centered, as you suggested, the composition would have been poorer and less dynamic.--Gronk (talk) 12:07, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - Thanks for clearly explaining your point of view. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:54, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Unfortunately not so sharp and significant chromatic noise. I am also concerned with shallow DoF. Charles (talk) 15:08, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A VI in all likelihood given its wide use, but not an FP and probably not even a QI, for the issues noted above, particularly the color noise. Daniel Case (talk) 17:21, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Daniel. INeverCry 21:22, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 20:44, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Cálice, Patena e Colherinha.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2016 at 04:41:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cálice, Patena e Colherinha
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 21:06, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Dlieja da Sacun dovia cun ciampanil Urtijei.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2016 at 11:25:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The antique St. Jacob church in Urtijëi, in Val Gardena.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 11:25, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 11:25, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very nice little church! Beautiful photography, no negative points detected. Just asking: Why did you need to stitch several pics together, when you are using a 36MPix camera? Or is it a HDR stack instead? --Hendric Stattmann (talk) 11:34, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • The church is in the middle of the forest and I was too close with my 35 mm lens. Btw taking more shots allowed me also to focus better the top.Thanks for the comment--Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 11:48, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment My 2 cents, but I find the alternative so much more attractive (size aside, but it's not all about it, or is it?) - Benh (talk) 16:56, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Do you mean the "other version"? There is no alternative candidate. The size is pretty much the same --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 17:29, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I guess Benh ment this: Dlieja da Sacun cun Saslonch.jpg and I can understand why. --Ivar (talk) 17:38, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - On its own, this stands as a FP to me, but the "alternative" is truly spectacular and should be nominated separately. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:22, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:55, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 22:20, 2 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I like this one, but I prefer the other version up above. So I will refrain from !voting on this one. Daniel Case (talk) 03:32, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • We are talking about two completely different subjects imho. This one is architectural while the other is landscape--Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 07:29, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Yep, two different photos not two alternatives. The discussion just got a little sidetracked. cart-Talk 09:16, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --cart-Talk 09:16, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose a straightforward high quality pic - but I'm not wowed --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:47, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Martin Falbisoner. --Ivar (talk) 11:51, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like this view very much --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:36, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not this one, pretty good but "normal" but the other (which is not an alternative), yes !--Jebulon (talk) 20:05, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 21:05, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:Duisburg, Landschaftspark Duisburg-Nord, Erzbunker -- 2016 -- 1229-35.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2016 at 16:14:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ore bunkers in Landschaftspark Duisburg-Nord in Duisburg, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 08:28, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture#Germany

File:Delano South Beach.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2016 at 20:17:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Delano Hotel, in Miami Beach (Florida, USA).
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Gzzz -- Gzzz zz 20:17, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Gzzz zz 20:17, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Very nice Art Deco hotel, but the overall composition isn't memorable. Also, though, the focus is too soft for FP and probably too soft for QI, too. I'm wondering if there's an angle that could produce a more compelling composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:34, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose entirely per Ikan. --Kreuzschnabel 22:03, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan. INeverCry 23:10, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ikan said it. Preferably and angle that is slightly less bright. There is some purple CA on the very top of the building, the sky is so dark that it almost blends in with it though. cart-Talk 23:20, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ordinariness of composition per Ikan. Also seems like the exposure could have been better balanced—the building is brighter than necessary and the sky too dark. I can't tell if exposure compensation was used or not. Daniel Case (talk) 02:40, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination -- Gzzz zz 20:18, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 22:00, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Poste indicador GR25 Ganalto 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Sep 2016 at 15:16:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hiking guidepost and hiking trail in light fog
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Spain
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Basotxerri -- Basotxerri (talk) 15:16, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basotxerri (talk) 15:16, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I like this picture, but I'm undecided on whether it's outstanding enough to feature. The crop of the tree feels random and could be improved somewhat by moving it a bit to the left, where there is space at the top of the tree, but I'm not sure that would make the difference between not supporting and supporting a feature for me. For me the crux of the issue is that I like the mood, but the scene is not memorable. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:16, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A lovely dreamy picture, but unfortunately I do not find it special or significant enough for an FP. This is one of those instances when it probably felt more special being there and experiencing the place, than it is to look at in a photo. Sorry. cart-Talk 21:03, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per W.carter. INeverCry 23:20, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per W.carter. I see what might have appealed to you, but it just didn't make it. Daniel Case (talk) 23:32, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Thank you, it was a try. I see that this one isn't what I thought. And thank you for your opinions. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:34, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Basotxerri (talk) 15:34, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 22:01, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:AlegoríaOceanoAtlánticoMonumentoalaBandera-sep2016.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2016 at 11:22:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination I'll try again later with another shot --Ezarateesteban 16:08, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 22:02, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:AIRPOWER16 - Air to Air SK35C Draken (29366239356).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2016 at 11:18:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lower planform of a Saab SK35C Draken
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Air_transport#Military_jet_aircraft
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Katsuhiko TOKUNAGA - uploaded by Tm - nominated by Revent -- Reventtalk 11:18, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as nominator -- Quite simply, an outstanding photograph, with impressive detail and perfect focus, of what had to be an extremely difficult subject. You can count the rivets. Reventtalk 11:18, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 23:06, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great action photo. And the rivets, ah yes, I remember... I built several models of this plane when I was a little girl, loved the double delta wing even then. And who could resist a plane called Draken (The Dragon) :) --cart-Talk 23:09, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes it's almost a burocratic procedure, btw, I added some selective noise reduction and selective sharpening --The Photographer 23:10, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I agree that the sharpening was an improvement, though..subtle, it takes really looking to notice. Nice job. Reventtalk 11:26, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Perfect as it is. Others can touch it. IMO--Lmbuga (talk) 02:13, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 02:18, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A bit of posterization in the exhaust, but that's such a small fault for an otherwise great picture of a military jet (a pretty stiff competition here). Daniel Case (talk) 02:26, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Outstanding! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:12, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very big wow. Honestly thought it was computer generated. Love how some users find gems like that and share with us here. - Benh (talk) 07:07, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 10:58, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ~ Moheen (talk) 11:10, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ivar (talk) 11:57, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. However, The Photographer, you may have overdone the sharpening on the spike on the nose. -- Colin (talk) 12:10, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I have no idea what version I am voting on. -- Colin (talk) 17:53, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, Let me revert the sharpening only in the nose --The Photographer 13:03, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
✓ Done Dear @Colin: I was trying fix the problem and I think that it's fixed, else please feel free to revert all my alterations please. Thanks --The Photographer 02:19, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment … and again we’ve got three versions mixed up into one nomination. Though it’s a great pic, I keep my oppose just for the sake of this procedure, and I beg all of you again: Please do not edit an active nomination unless it’s a very minor flaw (e.g. a dust spot) that all voters agree upon. Sharpness is too much a matter of taste, and alterations into any direction might affect other’s opinions on it. For me the image was best in its original version but since I cannot express this view any more, I’m opposing. --Kreuzschnabel 06:38, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Plenty of wow. A great picture of an unusual aircraft that was built in limited numbers. --Pugilist (talk) 13:50, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per The Photographer’s edit. Sharpening entirely overdone. The original version is featurable enough, the latest one isn’t IMHO. – Generally, please abstain from altering active nominations, or at least make sure to notify all previous voters personally as to reconsider their voting. --Kreuzschnabel 14:44, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Please, let's not start this multi-version-thing again. I think the picture was fine and featureable even before The Photographer stepped in with the usual fixing. Could you at least wait until an issue is raised that needs correcting or if someone actively asks for a correction. Especially with so many editors voting and no 'pinging'. cart-Talk 15:14, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel. I prefer the original. INeverCry 23:38, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Anyone that dislikes an edit should just revert it (per COM:OVERWRITE) and ask the person who made the change to put their version under a different filename as a derivative. Voting this down, when people like the original, is a silly result. Just put the original back. (sigh). Reventtalk 09:21, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment D’accord – any edit which does not just fix a clear flaw (and should be done by the author) but enhances the image to the editor’s taste, such as Photographer’s sharpening here, should never replace the original but always be uploaded (and then nominated) as a derivative work. The more so on an active nomination being voted on! As soon as this point is not very clear among ourselves, I cannot change my vote here since it would be unclear which version I am referring to. User:The Photographer already made a major edit to one of his own nominations here a few weeks ago during voting period and got a lot of sand into his face for that, I really do not know why he tries now the same on other’s works. – As for this nomination, I suggest to withdraw, then reset the image version, and put it up again. Now in this discussion votings for three(!) different versions are already mixed up. This is pointless. --Kreuzschnabel 17:11, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Revent. We encourage people to avoid making changes during a nomination but it does happen and often for good reason but then people who have voted already need to be pinged, which isn't happening here. I see now that Tm has reverted the sharpening, thus many votes/comments are irrelevant. I've changed my vote to oppose because this is too unstable and people are editing without pinging. Imo The Photographer should not have changed the nominated photo without your permission (as nominator) and without pinging others. But when you were pleased with the results, it would be very rude of others to revert simply because they preferred the unsharpened version. Clearly the sharpening is contentious now and so policy requires a separate image, but imo The Photographer's edit is debatable as to whether it could have been considered contentious in advance. I agree with others that we need to get out the recent habit of fiddling with other people's images or creating alternative versions during other people's nomination, and aim (as much as possible) on some stability for the period of a nomination. I suggest if you prefer the sharpened one, you create a different file and nominate that while withdrawing this one. Currently, I think this nomination is invalid as we have no idea what people are voting for (like Brexit, sigh). -- Colin (talk) 17:53, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Colin: Actually, the more I more I look at it, the more I prefer the original as well... he did a lot more than I realized at first, and you are right that the nose, in both of his versions, was way too much... it makes all the edges flat, instead of appearing to 'round off' into a reflection of the sky, and it's not just on the nose. Tm has reverted it now, but I think that you're right that I should just withdraw this and put it back up again later (or let someone else do so)... the voting is far too confused now. Reventtalk 18:21, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Revent: I wouldn't have felt comfortable reverting The Photographer's changes after you (the nominator) expressed approval of those changes. I would've considered that disrespectful toward you. I hope you do re-nominate this, as it's a great image (as is). INeverCry 21:02, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • With that response, I will go ahead and actually formally "Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination", and start over again with a clean vote in a few days. I wish I had looked closer, sooner, at the edited version... that was my mistake. Reventtalk 21:18, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Colin: @W.carter: @Revent: I think part of the problem are my modifications. So that in the future but I will modify only my own nominations. --The Photographer 22:59, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 22:03, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2016 Pałac w Kamieńcu Ząbkowickim 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2016 at 10:15:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 22:04, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Sydney Harbour during Vivid Sydney 2015.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2016 at 00:56:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Robert Montgomery - uploaded by Ashton 29 - nominated by Thennicke -- Thennicke (talk) 00:56, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Thennicke (talk) 00:56, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 02:12, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Great. Lots to look at. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:56, 3 September 2016 (UTC) - I looked at this again at full size. The opponents are right: It's colorful, but the quality is rather poor. Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:36, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Spurzem (talk) 07:14, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --cart-Talk 09:13, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unfortunately - the image is fun to look at. But there are too many minor technical / quality issues so that - in sum - I can't suppport the nomination. The image(s) were taken with a 5D III after all - at first I thought that the author used his smartphone... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:52, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 10:21, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • without any doubt Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry but the image quality (100% view) of this nighttime view is horrible, every compact camera can make today better images. Beside of this the lights of the bulb exposure isn't very nice, random and just confusing. --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:44, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Martin and Wladyslaw. Daniel Case (talk) 17:34, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per other opposes. Painful to look at full size. - Benh (talk)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, too bad. --Berthold Werner (talk) 09:10, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination -- Thennicke (talk) 12:48, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 22:06, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:A bunch of rebar up close.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2016 at 13:30:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A bunch of rebar up close
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Others
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by me. -- cart-Talk 13:30, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- cart-Talk 13:30, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting. -- Spurzem (talk) 14:20, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:50, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very good art photography that I find pleasant to look at. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:29, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 19:51, 3 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:13, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Another "why hasn't anyone taken a picture of this sort of thing and nominated it before?" picture. Just the right amount of rust ... I can almost smell the metal. Daniel Case (talk) 05:10, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:14, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing extraordinary --Uoaei1 (talk) 16:27, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I like the idea, but I don't really dig this specific execution of it. There's a huge shadowy area right in the middle, and within it a small slit where you can see the ground. That slit is much brighter than almost everything else and thus draws attention away from the actual subject. There are a lot of nice converging lines, but they neither converge directly in the (horizontal) center nor does it look like the point of convergence was put off-center on purpose. --El Grafo (talk) 10:55, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The small slit has been toned down a bit. You were right about that, thanks for pointing it out. I was only trying to keep the file as "au naturel" as possible. The odd angle was chosen to produce the best color and light on the bars. The bunch was about ten meters long and weighed about a ton, so I could not move them about to position them. Besides, I don't think the workers at the site would have liked me messing with their material. :) cart-Talk 11:34, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:11, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Others

File:Col-d'Izoard-Queyras-DSC 0130.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2016 at 07:56:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:09, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Courtyard Zappeion Athens, Greece.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2016 at 14:49:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

courtyard of the Zappeion, Athens.
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:12, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

File:ISS-40 Coastlines of the southern Baltic Sea.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2016 at 15:37:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Coastlines of the southern Baltic Sea are featured in this image photographed by an Expedition 40 crew member on the International Space Station.
Addendum: And it has a noticeable dust spot in southern Sweden. Daniel Case (talk) 05:51, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pictogram voting keep-light-green.svg Fixed Dust spot cloned out and the good people of Eslöv have clear skies again. cart-Talk 09:04, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@W.carter: Too bad—I was hoping to be able to accept credit when they decided to promote themselves as "Den märkbara damm plats i södra Sverige" Face-smile.svg. Daniel Case (talk) 17:40, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The not-the-usual-map-orientation was the first thing that attracted me to this photo, and the sun is high-lighting Skagen as usual. I like things being looked at from a different angle. cart-Talk 05:45, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 22:11, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Landsort August 2016 04.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2016 at 10:38:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Abandoned coastal artillery bunker
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:10, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places#Sweden

File:Pha That Luang Sunrise Panorama BLS.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2016 at 21:25:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • I'm not too sure but it was taken in May when the weather is very hot and not too humid. So the sky had a lot of haze, which I think is why I was able to catch a sun without being blinded. I now regret a bit I didn't take it 10 min later. I think the sun would have been right on top of the stuppa, greatly improving the composition. - Benh (talk) 07:12, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 23:07, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Your pictures are in general amazing. --The Photographer 23:23, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I'm impressed! I'm impressed! I'm impressed!--Lmbuga (talk) 02:16, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support There's a hint of CA on the side towers, and the yellow light on the tiles is a little posterrized—but if that's what it took to get this scene, I'll accept it gladly. Daniel Case (talk) 02:20, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Hmmm it seems you are right about these. That's strange because I always tick the "remove CA" checkboxes in LR... but those ones made their way through. Or is it a symptom of exposures blending (don't think so, they really look like CA)? I really am too lazy to get back to this panorama though :D - Benh (talk) 18:12, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks. Will sort this up when I get home (guess they are a result of using a bot for transferring from Flickr to here). - Benh (talk) 12:37, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting keep-light-green.svg Fixed - Benh (talk) 19:59, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:25, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent -- Thennicke (talk) 23:38, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice morning. Better you upload directly as you're active here. The Flickr will add the old outdated license. Jee 03:44, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Jkadavoor: That's the point. I'm not so active anymore :(. I still seldom upload photos to Flickr because it takes only a few clicks from LR. But I haven't found something as convenient for Commons. Will look this weekend, but if anyone has suggestions... :) - Benh (talk) 21:59, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Btw, Fae has a bot that can synchronize your flickr account with commons --The Photographer 10:55, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 06:16, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:20160803 - Meiktila, Myanmar - Phaung Daw U Pagoda - 7321.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2016 at 09:06:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Phaung Daw U Pagoda in Meiktila, Myanmar
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by User:Jakub Hałun - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:06, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I think this is a really striking image and a fine picture of the pagoda. I can imagine objections to the wires and the modern tower, but that's what's there and I find the photo a worthy candidate, anyway. We can consider it a picture with the pagoda in the foreground and a slice of life in modern Myanmar in the background, including the people who I at first thought were cultivating rice but may be gathering something growing by itself near the lake. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:06, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm afraid that it has several technical issues. BTW I woudln't despise clonig out wires and towers since photographically speaking they don't represent well "a slice of modern life" but are rather disturbing. Sorry--Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 09:18, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - Of course I understand and even anticipated the reaction you're giving me, but to partly address it (and I hope this doesn't come across as vehement, let alone personal, and I mention that in parentheses because I know it's very easy to misread tone online): I think people may be too quick to clone things out. Not everything in a photo needs to be a perfect representation of an ideal view that doesn't exist. The wires and the tower exist, and the pagoda is maintained in a modern country that has electricity and other things. It's not some mythical, timeless thing of anyone's imagination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:54, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment On the contrary, I appreciate your comment but it's obviously a matter of personal taste and a lenghty discussion out op place here --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 11:52, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:21, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info @Jakubhal: I removed several dust spots, fixed perspective distortion and added slghtly sharpness for main subject. Please revert, if it's not ok with you. --Ivar (talk) 16:58, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 20:37, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Paso fronterizo con Chile, Bolivia, 2016-02-02, DD 01.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2016 at 09:16:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Border crossing between Chile and Bolivia
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by User:Poco a poco - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:16, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I like the contrasts in this picture: Between the cracked exterior of the building and the new DirecTV satellite dish and between the vehicles and people on line and the vast desert. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:16, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Cool, thank you Ikan, I indeed enjoy the subject as most of people here would expect an inmigration office / border control to look a bit different :) Poco2 10:24, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support High EV. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 14:29, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A well composed and executed photo with high EV. Although I must repeat myself: Geo tag pretty please and some more specific cats. It's a very long border... :) --cart-Talk 14:47, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A nicely done image, a QI for sure, but it just doesn't wow me. Daniel Case (talk) 22:11, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Daniel. I don't like how the building blocks out the mountain/s either. INeverCry 23:11, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The light comes from a wrong direction, the facade of the building is in shadow, not the good moment of the day IMO.--Jebulon (talk) 22:39, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 20:36, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Haut-Languedoc, Rosis cf06.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2016 at 19:29:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
@King of Hearts: The older version was made with the DxO software but I was not happy with the blown highlights on the tree... Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:19, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 02:18, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Kreta - Panorama Rethymno Hafen.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2016 at 13:50:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Crete: panoramic view at port of Rethymno
The solution of the three-arm-man-mysterie (please open and look at 100% view)
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Stitching errors across the water (notes added). --Ivar (talk) 16:18, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The stitching issues I'll fix tomorrow evening. The "three-armed-men" is in fact a two-armed who angle his leg and holds s.th. in between his hollow of knee. But you're right: if you not look closely enough it seems strange. --Wladyslaw (talk) 18:58, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I see the "three-armed man". When you fix that, I'll support this photo. Among other things, you photograph water very well. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:49, 4 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ikan Kekek: Please read again my comment carefully. The "three-armed-men" is not a three-armed-men. It is everything alllright with the picture in this area.--Wladyslaw (talk) 04:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see. Thanks. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:38, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Whatever the stitching issue is, I'm sure you'll fix it. Meanwhile, I think this is a good and interesting enough photo to Symbol support vote.svg Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:22, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Provisional support on getting the stitching errors fixed. Daniel Case (talk) 01:23, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment For me the stitching errors in the sea are hardly to see or identify. But I have tried to minimize them. --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:52, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm sorry, but the last result is not much better. Stitching lines are still clearly visible (stitching error on ship ropes is also notable). --Ivar (talk) 18:27, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:39, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --ST ○ 21:33, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 02:22, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places#Greece

File:Landgericht Berlin, Littenstraße, Eingangshalle, 360x180, 160906, ako.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2016 at 14:29:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

regional court of Berlin in Littenstrasse
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by Code - nominated by -- Benh (talk) 14:29, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • To be viewed with the right tool before judging..
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Code makes great 360° panoramas, I like them ;) -- Benh (talk) 14:29, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support No doubt. --Kreuzschnabel 14:39, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - That's pretty awe-inspiring. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:02, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Like being in a fairy tale. :) cart-Talk 15:07, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Thank you very much for the nomination, Benh! I spend a lot of time in this building and I don't always enjoy it but the architecture is really awesome. --Code (talk) 15:36, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:18, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Glad to see more of these. At Wikimania, in one session, we were considering how we could rethink the layout of Wikipedia articles in a post-desktop (well, post-predominantly desktop era) and I pointed to these as something we might want to make better use of on other platforms, or as-yet-uninvented future platforms. So the more of them, and the more good ones, the better. Daniel Case (talk) 16:42, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram-voting question.svg Question Are the stitching errors on the bottom part fixable? --Ivar (talk) 18:13, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Iifar: It's very difficult in this case (I really don't know why) and I already tried a lot to get rid of them. I'll give it another try this weekend. --Code (talk) 08:29, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 02:19, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:Lech - Rauher-Kopf-Scharte 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Sep 2016 at 15:20:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mountain saddle Rauher-Kopf-Scharte, border between Tyrol and Vorarlberg. Austria
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 02:21, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Austria

File:Uitgebloeide bloem van Cirsium vulgare in mild avondlicht. Locatie, De Famberhorst 03.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2016 at 04:43:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 20:43, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Garpenbergs gruvkapell May 2015.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2016 at 15:51:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Psst ArildV, gruvbrytningen går tillbaka till 1300-talet, på engelska blir det "14th century", du vet det där eviga trasslet med att man alltid måste lägga till ett århundrade när man ska översätta. ;) cart-Talk 19:41, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I love the reflections in the old non-flat window panes. Glad to see that they are intact. A starkly lit (very appropriate) pic of an unusual building. cart-Talk 16:57, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support For the sheer Scandinavian starkness of it. I would like it more if the buildings in the rear at the left were cropped out. Daniel Case (talk) 19:18, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The buildings in the background are very appropriate, they are part of the modern Garpenberg mine (now run by Boliden AB), a mine that has been in operation since the 14th century. The chapel (Garpenberg Mining Chapel) was built right next to the mine to serve the miners in the 17th century, so it is very much a part of the mining area, even if it's been moved a hundred meters or so this way and that to not be in the way of the mining operation over the centuries. cart-Talk 19:36, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - The wooden chapel and the great sky with billowy clouds really do it for me. The cut-off tanks at the right margin bug me a little at full size but are no big deal at full-page size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:44, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Mild Symbol support vote.svg Support per Daniel and Ikan. A tighter crop on both sides would improve this. INeverCry 23:02, 5 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 02:36, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:31, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per INeverCry.--Jebulon (talk) 22:49, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 10:24, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nothing special, no wow. --Karelj (talk) 22:22, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose No wow for me either; mainly due to the lighting and the composition being too weighted to the right side -- Thennicke (talk) 00:14, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 01:35, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:Plaza Mayor, Ágreda, España, 2012-08-27, DD 05.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Sep 2016 at 17:28:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Plaza Mayor, Ágreda, Spain
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 01:34, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Common warthog (Phacochoerus africanus) male.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2016 at 21:28:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Male Common warthog (Phacochoerus africanus)
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 10:51, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals

File:Cyclosia papilionaris-Kadavoor-2016-06-17-001.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2016 at 02:47:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cyclosia papilionaris female
  • It's a moth. There are some moths (and their caterpillars too) more beautiful than butterflies. That may be why this beauty is called "Drury's Jewel". :) Jee 04:48, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Poor assumption on my part. I've seen some pretty moths in real life, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:13, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, so I have to be biologically correctFace-blush.svg and call it a moth. Daniel Case (talk) 05:15, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful and sharp moth. The benefit of arriving late is that you can pretend you knew what critter this was (otherwise I would also have called it a butterfly). Is there some "How to tell a moth from a butterfly for dummies" that you can share with us? Face-tongue.svg --cart-Talk 08:34, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Sure. The first thing you notice on a moth is a "comb-like or feathery antennae". :) Jee 08:55, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Ah! The Old Faithful WP delivers. Thanks! :) --cart-Talk 09:06, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:53, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Nice image I want to support, but I don't like the crop. Too much leaf for me. Charles (talk) 15:17, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I find the crop very harmonious and balanced, it gives the moth some clear and uncluttered space. It's a composition, not an examination under a microscope, but it's all a matter of taste. cart-Talk 15:43, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great detail from top to bottom. -- Colin (talk) 20:54, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support And I personally like the crop as it is -- Thennicke (talk) 23:47, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 07:01, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera

File:Joshua Tree NP - North Overhang - 5.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2016 at 03:38:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Climber on last pitch of North Overhang (5.9) on Intersection Rock at Hidden Valley Campground in Joshua Tree National Park.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jarekt - uploaded by Jarekt - nominated by Jarekt -- Jarekt (talk) 03:38, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Jarekt (talk) 03:38, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Interesting enough for me to support. I wish the ground wasn't quite so dark, but that contrast has its plusses, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:55, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The climber isn't doing anything interesting, like reaching for a hold, the sense of scale as to how high he is isn't that clear, and this gives me no real indication of what his next move is. Overall, not quite as exciting or dynamic as I'd like. INeverCry 03:58, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I have to admit, I agree with this. I may end up abstaining. I will deliberate... -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:17, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 07:00, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Oxythyrea funesta - Pedicularis sceptrum-carolinum - Keila.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2016 at 04:42:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

White-spotted rose beetle
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info White-spotted rose beetle, all by Ivar (talk) 04:42, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ivar (talk) 04:42, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I looked at the 4 current QIs of this type of beetle, but rather than deciding whether to support this picture based on a comparison with those, I'll just go with my first impulse, which is that I love the beetle, even though ideally, I'd rather see a bit more of the flower, too. It gets less and less clear from thumbnail to full-page to full size. Of course, that was purely intentional on your part. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:17, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:47, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --cart-Talk 08:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lovely colors! 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 09:08, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose DOF too small. The head is out of focus. --Hockei (talk) 10:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support nice colors, sharp image--Gronk (talk) 10:35, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Hockei. So much about this has been done right, but the bar here for this kind of image has been set pretty high. Daniel Case (talk) 14:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry Ivar, I wouldn't promote this as QI. Nowhere near sharp enough. Charles (talk) 15:13, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I really don't get it. This is a field shot of a moving beetle and something like 80-90% of him is crisp sharp, including the eye. You can have 100% sharpness only in studio with dead specimen. --Ivar (talk) 16:04, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per opposers, sorry. Under our "bug bar".--Jebulon (talk) 22:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment A good photo indeed; well document its behavior. The partially hidden dorsal view and the position of right antenna are some drawback. Jee 13:44, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Super picture! --Vamps (talk) 18:22, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 06:58, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods

Gamingforfun365's Presidential picks[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2016 at 00:33:22 (UTC)

  • Portrait of Dwight D. Eisenhower

    Portrait of Dwight D. Eisenhower

  • Portrait of Richard Nixon

    Portrait of Richard Nixon

  • Portrait of George W. Bush

    Portrait of George W. Bush

Gamingforfun365 (talk) 00:33, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The Nixon image really needs to be cleaned up. INeverCry 01:30, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dialog-warning.svg
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: We had discussed earlier and concluded not to allow entirely different subjects as a set. Jee 02:02, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply] 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.

File:Emerald damselfly (Lestes sponsa) male 3.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2016 at 15:05:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Male Emerald damselfly
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Odonata
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 15:05, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Charles (talk) 15:05, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 15:54, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Lines of bokeh harmonize well with the branch. Daniel Case (talk) 17:23, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Airborne jewels. cart-Talk 18:49, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Lmbuga (talk) 19:52, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:21, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:16, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Why just f/6.3... even i would put bigger. This should go some f/8 at least-APS-C --Mile (talk) 10:07, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Why F6.3? Let me explain. Hand-held macro photography in the field is a balance between shutter speed, Aperture and ISO. All the key features are in focus on this image and 1/1000 sec was needed because of the conditions. I try to use 1/500 sec where possible. I chose ISO400 as a good compromise. Charles (talk) 10:50, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Charles: OK, saw your statement. I would say you are free to some f/9, i use f/8 mostly on my m4/3, which is smaller than, yours, APS-C. But i still woldnt go to some f/16 as some do, would be worse. Saw EXIF, i think even 1/500 would be very fast, and you are calm on some 1/300. So lets say if you put to F/8 you come to 1/500, on same ISO. Good question where will you handle, best MTF for bad DOF, or some less MTF for better DOF. I think you have some free space there. --Mile (talk) 10:49, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • My two cents. I haven't done a lot of field macro, but when I have, I used a tripod. I believe that guy used a tripod too (amongst other tricks I'm unaware of). - Benh (talk) 12:05, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • Benh, a tripod/monopod won't help as those can't freeze the subject. The plant stem will dance in the mildest wind. Jee 13:41, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
          • Yes agree it doesn't freeze the subject, but for that matter, I go in the morning when I found that plants are still "enough" to give me room for an additionnal exposure time. One can also shield the subject from the wind. I think freezing anything for 1-2 sec is enough. What do you think? - Benh (talk) 13:56, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
            • No chance, I'm afraid.
              1. There's often nowhere to plant a tripod.
              2. By the time you set up the tripod, the animal would have long gone
              3. Even 1/10 sec would be blurred in the still morning air
              4. These damselflies don't fly in the early morning. Remember, this photo is taken with the lens less than 100mm from the damselfly, about five seconds after he has landed.
              The only chance to use a tripod (for larger dragonflies) is to 'stalk' out a perch and wait for him to return, but that can only work with a long lens that doesn't crowd the perch, not a macro. Charles (talk) 14:07, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
            • Charles mentioned most points. This will be condition of damselflies in early morning. They too good subjects; but different views. Further, tripods are meant for still subjects in macro. Otherwise those small animals will flee in fear seeing big setups. It may work on a 300+ tele though.
            • I found another FP of same subject taken at 150mm on a Olympus means 300mm in FF. Less detailed and tail end out of focus. This is a good FP from same family with comparable details. Jee 15:53, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose shallow DOF. --Ivar (talk) 10:20, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg OpposeDecent picture of a damsel...among thousands of others here. Nothing special deserving a FP star, sorry.--Jebulon (talk) 13:25, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I compare it with all my Lestidae photos. Better in all aspects. I'm shooting up-to f/14 using flash; but no better results. Seems the faster shutter speed is the secret here. Jee 13:40, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment. Thanks Jee @Jkadavoor: . Not sure what equipment you have now, but remember my Canon 100mm Macro is an 'L' (professional) grade and has IS (Image stabilization) worth 2-3 stops. I use a crop frame body, having experimented with Canon 5D full frame and not getting any better results. Charles (talk) 15:36, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • I'm using Sony A77II comparable to your Canon 70D. My lens Sigma 150 is also comparable to your 100mm. It seems you shoot in Shutter priority AE. I never get such an aperture value in such a speed. I get only 2.8. May be due to my low light condition or a difference of my camera. In Aperture priority mode (as Ivar shoots) I get very slow shutter speed like 1/30. So I ended up using flash. :) Jee 16:03, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the blue eye and the diagonal bokeh. The body is sharp. -- Colin (talk) 20:27, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 21:45, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Thennicke (talk) 23:45, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 02:32, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Odonata

File:AlegoriaalRioParanaMonumentoalaBandera-RosarioArgentina-03673.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2016 at 00:30:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Allegory to Parana River in National Flag Memorial, Rosario, Argentina
Hi Ikan, yes but a bit, next is the top of the sculpture Ezarateesteban 11:44, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pictogram-voting question.svg Question Isn't there a violet tint here, as compared with this one? --Cayambe (talk) 18:00, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Adjusted the WB and crop Ezarateesteban 18:59, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Face out of focus, poor crop (too little space on top, too much on bottom). Sorry but with such an easy to shoot FPC I expect no less than flawless perfection. --Kreuzschnabel 19:06, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A QI but don't see enough special to be FP. -- Colin (talk) 19:49, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but I don't see anything special that would take this to FP. cart-Talk 19:56, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 20:10, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Hi all. I uploaded the original DNG file, do you think doing anything on it the picture reach FP status? I don´t see the head out of focus.

Commons Archive icon.svg

Source materials for this file are available from Commons Archive:

  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment The head is definitely less sharp than, for instance, the penis. (No hint intended as to what the artist focuses on a man’s body.) Whether it’s a DoF problem or a poor lens, the fact remains. --Kreuzschnabel 10:02, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Looks like lens-related corner unsharpness, but I've seen far worse; this is OK IMO. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:14, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment The lower left corner needs to be cropped. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:14, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, King ✓ Done Ezarateesteban 16:26, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 06:56, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Museo Bode, Berlín, Alemania, 2016-04-22, DD 28-30 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Sep 2016 at 20:58:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Moon light view of the Bode Museum, located in the Museum Island of Berlin, Germany.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Moon light view of the Bode Museum, located in the Museum Island of Berlin, Germany. The museum, originally called the Kaiser-Friedrich-Museum (after Emperor Frederick III) and later honored to its curator, Wilhelm von Bode, was designed by architect Ernst von Ihne and completed in 1904. The museum hosts a collection of sculptures, Byzantine art, coins and medals. All by me, Poco2 20:58, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 20:58, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:21, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Moving my 'Support' to alt version. Lights, camera, action! --cart-Talk 21:54, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I love it! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:02, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A classic postcard view of Berlin. When I was looking at the thumbnail version I thouhgt it would surely be featurable but when looking at it at 100% its way too soft. Nearly all the details are gone. Looks like you've overdone the noise reduction or something similar. Very well done otherwise. --Code (talk) 22:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:32, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Code, even if the moon is a "plus".--Jebulon (talk) 22:41, 6 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Tempered support Taking Code's criticisms into account, I still think this one works. Daniel Case (talk) 01:53, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Daniel --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:18, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I find it too dark, even for a night shot. Maybe the contrast is to high here. But what really triggers my oppose are the colours smearing all over the place, which is particularly noticeable around the cranes. Very aggressive NR I think (and this is applicable to the oher nom, where bricks render as row.) - Benh (talk) 07:53, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Benh, sorry. --Ivar (talk) 10:18, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dark and the moon is looking strange. I prefer alternative version. --Ivar (talk) 05:24, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Code, Jebulon, Benh, and Iifar: thanks for your feedback, I agree that the denoising was too much, or rather the smoothing of it was far from ideal causing that the colours smeared. I've uploaded a new version where I believe I've this problem under control. Please, let me know what you think. I do actually like this picture very much. Poco2 19:26, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The new version looks somewhat better indeed but I'm still not fully convinced. It looks very soft overall, especially the museum itself which is the most important part of the composition. However, considering that the size is very high and the composition is really nice, I removed my oppose and stay Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral. --Code (talk) 05:11, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I see an improvement between the versions particular the colour smear issue. It isn't stitched-image sharp, but overall the image is very pleasing and the moon is lovely. -- Colin (talk) 19:55, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Removed my oppose after colours smearing has been fixed. Still a bit noisy and dark in my view, which is a bit surprising given the camera body. @Poco a poco: any idea why it's this noisy at ISO 200 on a 5DS? - Benh (talk) 20:50, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yes, Benh, I can explain it. The shot was taken from a small and shaky bridge due to the continuous traffic on it. As I didn't want to go for a too high ISO I was maybe a bit conservative and the result was a bit too dark. The HDR processing of Lr was not good either and make it even darker overall. I had to compensate with a strong increase of exposure and noise was too obvious, then I had to denoise,...In the version below I have not used one of the 2 darker frames and the result of the HDR processing of Lr is overall better so that later I didn't have to apply a strong denoising due to high level of noise. Poco2 18:02, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Code. --Karelj (talk) 22:19, 7 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Moon light view of the Bode Museum, located in the Museum Island of Berlin, Germany.

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Ok, nom is stable enough so I'll move my vote to this version. Thanks for getting rid of the color-bleed. cart-Talk 09:49, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 19:30, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Poco a poco: What is that square gray shape between the tower and the two buildings? It's barely visible in the original version, but in this version it really stands out. INeverCry 20:30, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    INeverCry: it looks indeed a bit ackward but they are clouds Poco2 21:41, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the original too, so any improvement to it is good as well. Daniel Case (talk) 20:31, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I prefer the original. The clouds mentioned above would be better cloned out in my opinion. When I look at this version, that gray block is the first thing I see. INeverCry 21:51, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - I also prefer the original. The edits you made had the result of blowing the "Achtung" sign, and I don't see any overall improvement but mainly less contrast. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:09, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support also fine with me --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:47, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Sorry Poco. It's gotten much better, but I'm still not wowed enough, even though the sky looks terrific on that one. Wouldn't be sad at all that is promoted :) - Benh (talk) 22:14, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 17:01, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Jee 06:54, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Elbe in Saxon Switzerland.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2016 at 10:23:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Elbe river in Saxon Switzerland
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 21:42, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Pont Vieux de Béziers cf02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2016 at 17:43:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pont Vieux de Béziers
True, you're right, it's ✓ Done, thank you Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:45, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks! Now you have my Symbol support vote.svg Strong Support. :) --cart-Talk 18:48, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
✓ Done hope I deleted the good one, I also found one in the water, thank you Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:25, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 21:40, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Bridges

File:Gorbea - Camino Mairulegorreta 02.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2016 at 12:40:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landscape on the Mairulegorreta trail to Gorbea summit; view of Anboto summit. Álava, Basque Country, Spain
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Spain
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Basotxerri -- Basotxerri (talk) 12:40, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basotxerri (talk) 12:40, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Striking composition with a bold angle as well as depth and EV (the mountain). cart-Talk 12:53, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - cart is a good advocate for your photo and may have helped me look at it better. But in any case, I like how my eyes move around the picture frame. The rocky hillside has an interesting relationship with the sky, and the trees greatly help in completing the movement. The distant mountain adds to an already good picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:11, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Underexposed I’m afraid. Just too dark. In case Basotxerri agrees and wants to fix this, please do not just upload a new version but withdraw this one and set up a new nomination. I strongly oppose the habit of mixing multiple versions into one nomination. This is image assessment, not image improvement; candidates must be completely processed and ready for release and thus are voted on as they have been nominated. --Kreuzschnabel 15:12, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment OK, we'll do it how you wish. Thank you for the review! --Basotxerri (talk) 16:11, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Basotxerri (talk) 16:11, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 00:55, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Salar de Uyuni, Bolivia, 2016-02-04, DD 13-15 HDR.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2016 at 04:37:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Salar de Uyuni, Bolivia
  • Yes it can, if it's great, but this composition is lacking. Something a simple a kneeling would have made this photo better, then the car and the persons would have "risen" and all cut through the horizon. Like in this very crude photoshoped version of the pic: Crude photoshoped example of low vs original high horizon.jpg. Now they look kind of "submerged". Shooting towards a horizon, I always get my knees dirty, many times it increases the wow factor. I always think of Jean Giraud's work when I see Poco's flat lands since Giraud got much of his inspiration from places like this and he often uses the low horizon to draw dramatic scenes. cart-Talk 09:45, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose because of composition, subject and technical merit. There's a person moving through the shot among other weaknesses. Charles (talk) 09:15, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I'd give it a pro if it wasn't that tilted. Would surely be better if there wasn't the moving person visible. I don't really see why it should have been necessary to use HDR here. --Code (talk) 12:53, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Reminds me this. Jee 12:55, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • User:Poco a poco, I hope it wasn't inappropriate for me to nominate this photo. If you'd like to edit it to address the criticisms that have been made above, please go ahead and then ping everyone (or I could ping everyone). If you would prefer to withdraw the nomination, do that. I like this photo a lot, but I understand the criticisms. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:22, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Hello Ikan! Thank you very much for this unexpected nom. I can address the mentioned issues but to do so I need access to this raw files and I don't have it right now (nor in the next weeks). Can you withdraw the nomination? I will work on the file when I am back from my trip. Sorry, the timing is just pretty bad for me. Poco2 18:20, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Charles plus man in the center has glaring head and double contour. --Ivar (talk) 14:54, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Very nice idea which I wanted to support on first glance but then, regretful Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for poor craftmanship. Double contours on standing man and car roof baggage, Warning Symbol – Chromatic Aberration.svg chromatic aberration on the car wheels, blurred person, horizon leaning to the right. This might be one of our nicest pictures but it’s surely not one of our best ones. Sorry for putting it so harshly. --Kreuzschnabel 15:19, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination - Thanks for your votes and comments. Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:49, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 00:56, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Détails du Mihrab 03.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2016 at 11:57:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

tiles surrounding the mihrab of Moque Okba in Kairouan

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination--IssamBarhoumi (talk) 13:44, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 00:57, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Würzburg, Panorama, 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2016 at 11:34:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Rainer Lippert - uploaded by Rainer Lippert - nominated by Rainer Lippert
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Rainer Lippert (talk) 11:34, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 12:45, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don't think the composition is working. It feels like you are looking at the city side-on rather than directly. The river and path lead the eyes to nowhere interesting. It's very wide-angle so has strong cylindrical distortion causing the river to bend more than reality. The buildings are sharp at 100% but in the full view are all very small. I think a smaller image (e.g. 16:9) looking directly across the river would work better. -- Colin (talk) 12:51, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OOjs UI icon clock-warning.svg
 Nomination denied. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines because only two active nominations per user are allowed. -- Colin (talk) 13:11, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 00:59, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Schloss Werneck, 4.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2016 at 19:48:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
OOjs UI icon clock-warning.svg
 Nomination denied. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines because only two active nominations per user are allowed. -- Colin (talk) 13:11, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 01:00, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Gersfeld, Panorama, a.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2016 at 17:04:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
OOjs UI icon clock-warning.svg
 Nomination denied. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines because only two active nominations per user are allowed. -- Colin (talk) 13:11, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 01:01, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Sagadi mõisa peahoone pargipoolne külg.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2016 at 10:25:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sagadi manor
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - However, as a painter's son, I've decided to support a feature, anyway. This is the kind of thing that you could easily see a great painter like Stanley Lewis doing. I consider it great art, and if great art is achieved by unconventional means, it's not less great. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:38, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 01:01, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Festung Königstein - Magdalenenburg.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2016 at 11:05:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Festung Königstein, Saxony - Magdalenenburg
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 11:05, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 11:05, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I like this photo and would like to support it, but I'd like a slight crop on the bottom of the picture frame to get rid of the unsharp foreground at the extreme near right corner (the top stair). But didn't we already vote on a similar picture recently? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:09, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I cropped this photo. I do not remember similar picture from Konigstein --Pudelek (talk) 12:38, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - It's possible I just remember the photo from seeing it at QIC. It's a very interesting view; I really like the sharp slant downwards. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:34, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yes, this photo was at the beginning of September in QIC ;) --Pudelek (talk) 13:56, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A very well-done image, but I just can't get past the top crop. Daniel Case (talk) 16:08, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 00:52, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Kreta - Chania - Kathedrale der drei Märtyrer.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2016 at 18:23:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Crete: Cathedral of the three martyr in Chania
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Greece
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Wladyslaw -- Wladyslaw (talk) 18:23, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wladyslaw (talk) 18:23, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great Greece again. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:12, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:45, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:55, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Thennicke (talk) 23:54, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:55, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram-voting question.svg Question A good QI, and I love Creta, but why should this picture be featurable ?--Jebulon (talk) 19:51, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Jebulon. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:08, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    poor reason to oppose --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:40, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    As for me, I just asked a question, with no special meaning. I did not oppose, and I'm open to any answer.--Jebulon (talk) 21:19, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It would be really nice if Wladyslaw were willing to answer on his behalf. For my part, I find the photo restful and don't find the composition ordinary but also find it well done. It's not beyond criticism: I might have liked the palm in the left foreground not to be cut off. But that's a minor matter. But although the artist's answer might or might not persuade, it's good to hear their thoughts. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:17, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The reason for my oppose is simply that there is not enough "wow" factor. The lighting and composition are both ordinary; good but not special. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:07, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Jebulon: my question was not for you but for King of H. King of H: I'm sorry, but "no wow" is for me not a sufficient and useful argument. But not problem for me: you aren't forced to give one. I just asked. --Wladyslaw (talk) 11:04, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I agree: nobody is forced to answer. You are not, as I see. If you nominate this picture, it is because you feel some "wow" about it. It could be interesting to know why...--Jebulon (talk) 09:39, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Rainer Lippert (talk) 20:07, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 20:09, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 00:51, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Greece

File:Museu de Zoologia da Universidade de São Paulo.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2016 at 22:51:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Museu de Zoologia da Universidade de São Paulo
Please, could you explain the sense?, I chose this kind of vision because it is a small room and is the best way to show animals collection, Thanks --The Photographer 21:20, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Uoaei1. The table also looks a bit haphazard. 3 chairs on one side, 2 with a big space between them on the other; another random chair at right. INeverCry 08:11, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. No wow, no clear message. Most of the table is out of focus. Not even QI for me. --Kreuzschnabel 08:53, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Uoaei1. Daniel Case (talk) 17:54, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 00:49, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:San Pablo Bastion, Castillo de San Marcos.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2016 at 17:33:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A nighttime view of the Castillo de San Marcos National Monument in St. Augustine, Florida, USA.
Hi Julian, thanks for you improvement and it look better, however, IMHO, the image look too yellow (the main problem and why my oppose vote) and a big porcent of this image is QI criteria underexposed.svg Underexposed. Btw, another detail is the little space from the fort to the grass edge down exactly in the middle. --The Photographer 19:19, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh, I misunderstood! I thought it was too blue. :) Cooled the WB back down and tried a different crop to allow for more room on the bottom. –Juliancolton | Talk 19:32, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You can see what I am trying tell you here --The Photographer 23:23, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's much, much bluer than it looked in reality. I know the warm hues are somewhat unnatural and artificial, but I'd rather keep it close to the actual appearance, right or wrong (and personally I like the complimentary blue/orange tones, from an aesthetic point of view). –Juliancolton | Talk 14:17, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
NP, remember that it's only MHO --The Photographer 23:35, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 00:52, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications

File:Aerial photo of WTC groundzero.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2016 at 01:58:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Image taken by NOAA's Cessna Citation Jet on Sept. 23, 2001 from an altitude of 3,300 feet using a Leica/LH systems RC30 camera.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by NOAA - uploaded by File Upload Bot (Magnus Manske) - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 01:58, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 01:58, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very fine detail, very striking view. And timely. Daniel Case (talk) 05:46, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 05:58, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I remember very well this picture. I struggled to opened it on my computer at that time, but it was a lot of wow : technically, and for what it showed. I'm not sure why we should promote the cropped version above the original one. Significants parts are gone and the borders weren't so distracting in my opinion. Will add alternative later. - Benh (talk) 07:30, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Benh, I think this is fine and the extra buildings aren't relevant to the WCT. I see there is some complaint of too many alternative nominations created, often without nominator permission. I think we had a discussion on this at FPC talk a while ago and I thought we'd agreed to always respect the nominator and only "disrupt" their nomination with their blessing. And some people are quite against alternatives in general. -- Colin (talk) 10:24, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • @Benh: don't hesitate to nominate a non cropped version under your own name !--Jebulon (talk) 11:32, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • @Jebulon, Colin, and ArionEstar: If I{{ping|Jebulon|Colin|ArionEstar can't use an alternative here, then I don't know when I can. If I nom separately, we could end up with two very similar FPs. Not sure this is desired. I don't know about the conversation Colin refers to, but I could understand than an alt. disrupts a self nom (authors don't necessarily want their work altered). Not the case here. But my apologizes in advance if any inconvenience. - Benh (talk) 17:39, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
          • I understand the dilemma and personally I think alts are fine for crop variations, but if you add an alt, it splits the vote, and one could get neither promoted. I think the safest thing is to consider that the nominator owns this nomination and you haven't any right to alter it. We have seen some people get upset that their nomination was disrupted without permission. There's also the hassle of pinging people who voted prior to the alt -- many people do not revisit nominations they have voted for. -- Colin (talk) 17:55, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • @Benh: If I can't use an alternative here, then I don't know when I can. yes I agree. The answer is : never ! Clin --Jebulon (talk) 19:49, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --cart-Talk 07:34, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 10:24, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Mild Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose in favor of the original. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:17, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support We generally go with edited versions of "official" pictures if they significantly enhance the encyclopedic quality of the image, despite any loss of perceived "authenticity." --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:03, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I support the original because I consider it a better composition - ergo on artistic, not encyclopedic grounds. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:54, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I would like a crop with a non cropped corner of the park, above.--Jebulon (talk) 21:23, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Image taken by NOAA's Cessna Citation Jet on Sept. 23, 2001 from an altitude of 3,300 feet using a Leica/LH systems RC30 camera.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'd rather go with the original one (which is also featured en en:FPC) - Benh (talk) 17:39, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I prefer the original. However, it's important to ping everyone. @Daniel Case, INeverCry, Jebulon, Colin, ArionEstar, and W.carter: , which version do you prefer? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:15, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I prefer the crop. I like having a square composition with clean borders, and Ground Zero is the subject, so I can spare some water, a boat, and few buildings. INeverCry 08:24, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:03, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Jee 06:31, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Ayuntamiento Rojo, Berlín, Alemania, 2016-04-22, DD 37-39 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2016 at 21:05:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Moonlight view of the Rotes Rathaus (Red City Hall), town hall of Berlin, capital of Germany.
  • @PetarM: From my experience (I'm living near this building) tourists rarely shoot HDR pictures with tripods (13 seconds exposure time) and 50MPix cameras, but your experience might be different, of course. --Code (talk) 04:51, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Code, i expect to see flag normal, in one piece. To be Featured. Also crop isnt good here. But flag... Also, Megapixelation isnt something i consider. --Mile (talk) 11:14, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:05, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 06:34, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Homeless on Paulista Avenue, São Paulo city, Brazil.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2016 at 02:33:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Homeless on Paulista Avenue, São Paulo city, Brazil
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People_at_work
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info All by -- The Photographer 02:33, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Poetic, although sad. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 02:40, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 05:57, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I generally don’t find a top-down view on humans or other creatures very striking, especially when the face is hidden. I don’t see anything of interest here: What’s on the board, what’s his face like? Did the photographer not dare to ask if a frontal shot could be taken? Then, it would need some background (which could be obtained by taking the pic from eye level). Technically, it’s very noisy, the more so considering its small size. Sorry, for me there’s nothing outstanding about this shot. --Kreuzschnabel 06:22, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's "small" because is the max size that my camera sensor can take. Thanks for your review. --The Photographer 21:19, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The composition is that of a painting's, the lack of background underlines the outcast nature of being homeless and not showing his face gives him a bit of privacy. The picture probably shows everything he owns, rather neatly arranged. It is what is not shown that keeps us guessing and makes the picture intriguing. cart-Talk 08:00, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per W.carter, who says everything I would have said and then some. Daniel Case (talk) 16:20, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Very good ! You'll get my support when the bottle will be vertical...--Jebulon (talk) 19:25, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Excellent comment, I had not noticed, please let me know if it's done, thanks --The Photographer 22:16, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Karelj (talk) 21:52, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I love your social commentary pictures. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:49, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Why "a top-down view" instead of an "inline view" is indeed a concern when we see a photo. But here the man looking down, the board (?) is slanting; so the photographer is well inline to them. I respect the privacy of him an live without seeing his face. What more is already said by W.carter above. Jee 02:34, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Thennicke (talk) 10:42, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As promised. A very good illustration.--Jebulon (talk) 13:11, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ~ Moheen (talk) 16:28, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not sure a verticals straightening was necessary on that kind of pictures though :) - Benh (talk) 21:07, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Bad perspective. Did you ask him if he is homeless ? --Mile (talk) 06:15, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've seen him sleeping in the same place, playing his guitar and walking. --The Photographer 12:29, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 06:26, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People#People_at_work

File:Sun dog with reflection over Brofjorden.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2016 at 22:51:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A rainbow-colored sun dog, or halo, to the left of the sun.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Sun
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info As I've said before, there is a lot of cool cloud activity by the water where I live, but I was not prepared for this halo phenomenon when it appeared right in front of me a few days ago. I probably did everything wrong. The whole thing lasted less than ten minutes and I don't think I've ever gone through so many settings on my camera in such a short time, hoping that some of it would turn out ok. At first I was so taken in by the halo that I just took pictures of it, but then I realized that I needed the sun too as reference. Just as the halo was vanishing a large flock of swans flew over the water in front of the camera. Minutes later the evening had only a nice normal sunset. The timestamps on the photos are correct. All by me -- cart-Talk 22:51, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- cart-Talk 22:51, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:55, 8 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose because the sun is blown and posterized Haha, just kidding!!! Symbol support vote.svg Support. Remarkable photo. :-) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:05, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Face-grin.svg Yes, if this nom works it will be the FP's equivalent of "getting away with murder". I know that there are several things wrong with this photo, but I'm glad I was able to catch some of the event. This is the third time in my life I've seen a sun dog but the first time I've had a camera handy. Never leave home without it! cart-Talk 07:17, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • It's a great photo! And like Benh, I wasn't aware this phenomenon existed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:18, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, the sun is blown. That's hard to avoid sometimes with this sort of image where the setting/rising sun is behind a cloud that does not completely obscure it. And in any event it is not the primary subject of the image, the sun dog is. On the whole I find it a very relaxing image to contemplate, what with all the cool colors, wide space and general late-summer evening mood. Daniel Case (talk) 05:31, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Later comment: I just found the song that perfectly captures the mood of this image: "Monochrome", by Lush. Give it a listen while you're looking. Daniel Case (talk) 01:01, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Great song and perfect soundtrack! Face-smile.svg Thanks to our very own DJ Case. cart-Talk 10:39, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 05:59, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Kreuzschnabel 06:26, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support wow (yes, wasn't aware of such phenomenon) - Benh (talk) 22:05, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Benh: Sun dogs can be observed rather frequently, several times a month if you’re lucky, they usually come with cirrus or cirrostratus clouds. This is an extraordinary bright one, though. --Kreuzschnabel 19:26, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 06:33, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena#Sun

File:Nutella sweet, São Paulo city, Brazil.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2016 at 14:51:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Nutella sweet, São Paulo city, Brazil
Confirmed results:
Result: 0 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 22:57, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2015 Villa Barbara w Lądku-Zdroju 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2016 at 13:06:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Guesthouse "Villa Barbara" in Lądek-Zdrój
Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg CommentTilt and color balance corrected. --Jacek Halicki (talk) 19:06, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Mild Symbol support vote.svg Support for this version. This is the funny house in the middle of the woods of fairy tales. I like the motif and the funny windows that poke out from the roof. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:55, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Just to make sure: FP stands for Featured Pictures, not for Fairy Puildings ;-) --Kreuzschnabel 20:22, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice house. But don't think this is an exceptional photo. -- Colin (talk) 20:44, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Colin. INeverCry 00:36, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel, especially regarding the color, which struck me about this one from the beginning. Daniel Case (talk) 03:47, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Contrast between white house and dark trees is too jarring for my eyes. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:35, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Jacek Halicki (talk) 09:58, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 22:58, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:2016 Bahai House of Worship Langenhain 1 ks01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2016 at 13:19:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Baha’i Temple Frankfurt, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Baha’i Temple Frankfurt, which is located at Langenhain village (about 25 kilometers off Frankfurt). Managed to catch it in good light this morning. Panorama image made of 8 exposures. I took 2 more views (see my user page) but I think this is the finest, and it’s entirely free of stitching errors AFAICS. c/u/n by --Kreuzschnabel 13:19, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Kreuzschnabel 13:19, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well done, although I'm not sure whether the guy with the broom is a bug or a feature. --Code (talk) 13:40, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Good question. In the image, he’s a feature of course. In real, he turned out to be a bug when he told me my dog wasn’t allowed inside. That’s why I didn’t take any interiors today. --Kreuzschnabel 19:08, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Don't worry. Interiors would have been a copvio anyways. --Code (talk) 04:34, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Yes, I like it and IMO a very good FPC. But there's a little thing: IMO the image is leaning in. Please have a look at the doors. Can you please check it? --XRay talk 14:23, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I think I straightened them carefully but having had a very, very close look (and admired your sharp eyes), I admit the left side is leaning in by maybe 0.08 degrees. I don’t want to fix this since such a small correction might do more damage than benefit. Thanks for the hint anyway! --Kreuzschnabel 15:21, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I see a couple minor stitching errors toward the left side of the frame (one in the foreground vines and an even smaller one in the background grass), but it took me a while to find them and they don't affect anything important. Not a big issue for me. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:58, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg CommentConsidering the eagerness you obviously put into your search for stitching errors, I am much satisfied you found as few larger ones as I did :-) --Kreuzschnabel 19:06, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • ✓ Done Vine twig and grassline fixed. --Kreuzschnabel 19:53, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support FP without restriction for me. High EV furthermore, and useful for wp's.--Jebulon (talk) 19:17, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:09, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support of course yes: a centered building in average light ;-) --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:08, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Pleasing lines in the picture and a bit of clouds to soften the sky. This could have been a normal good pic of a building, but for some reason it is more than that. --cart-Talk 22:16, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - That's a really striking building and a good composition, so I'm willing to tolerate the blurry branches in the foreground on the left side, which I find a bit distracting at full size and definitely consider sub-optimal. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:27, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Interesting building (sort of reminds me of the U.S. Pro Football Hall of Fame (which has that shape for an entirely different reason) photographed well. Daniel Case (talk) 00:34, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice; but not beautiful as the one in India. Jee 02:19, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Excellent QI/VI to me, but I don't feel much wow from a centered frontal view of a building in regular daylight. I prefer shots like File:The Scoop at More London.jpg by Colin, or File:4 Cilindros, Múnich, Alemania, 2013-02-11, DD 04.JPG by Poco a poco, where the architecture really comes to life. INeverCry 08:13, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:40, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Per poco a poco, it's a good picture, but it lacks the impressive part (Wow factor) that I'm looking for in a FP. --PierreSelim (talk) 08:47, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Now I want to squeeze oranges and get fresh juice. :D - Benh (talk) 10:21, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support although the plants on both sides are disturbing a bit, but nevertheless a great image --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:39, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment The entire building is embedded in plants, forming a park. Therefore, I chose a planty foreground on purpose, to make the building kind of emerge from them --Kreuzschnabel 07:10, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:54, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings

File:City from One Bishops Square.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2016 at 08:13:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

File:City from One Bishops Square
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info An unusual view of the City of London, taken from the north-east rather than from the south bank of the Thames. The camera location is the roof terrace on an office that was open to the public only on Open House London 2015. The tall building nearby is apparently student accommodation but the other buildings are more concerned with finance. All by me. -- Colin (talk) 08:13, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment If the 150MP image is too big for your browser, you can use the "interactive large image viewer" that is linked on the image description page. However, be aware the Flash version produces a soft image that doesn't stop zooming at 100%, and the non-flash version displays heavily compressed JPGs (the results may vary depending on your internet connection).
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 08:13, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • It would be very helpful, not just for the nomination but for using the picture in the future, if you uploaded a version of it that is say half as big as this and listed that one under "other versions". That would give the pic a bigger chance of being used on more Wikipedias. cart-Talk 08:38, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Agree W.carter. Someone suggested already that idea for my previous nom. I'll do that tonight. You can use the MediaWiki thumbnailer to request smaller resolution images, up to a point. For example
is the largest it will create and 39MP in size. You just take the URL from the "Other resolutions" links below the image, and change the XXXpx bit to a larger value. If you get an error, you've gone too big. -- Colin (talk) 08:57, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks. I don't have a problem with big files or tech things, but a good photo should also be avaliable for those with slower broadband connection and less tech knowhow. cart-Talk 09:02, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Agree. But to be honest, that's really the responsibility of Commons file description pages and the MediaWiki software behind them, to offer various sizes. Stock photo sites and Flickr for example, don't expect photographers to upload different sized source images. I think it is pretty dire that the largest "Other resolutions" that is offered as standard is just 0.4MP. The sizes 320x, 640x, 800x, 1024x are VGA, SVGA and XVGA dating from 1990 -- before some people here were even born! Perhaps a Phabricator ticket is needed... -- Colin (talk) 09:09, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ...I almost forgot! ;) cart-Talk 09:39, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Would be more valuable with all significant buildings identified using notes. Charles (talk) 09:44, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Thanks. Didn'tknow they don't show up on FPC page. 21:56, 9 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Excellent details level and size, however, IMHO, the composition is important and the railing cut is too distracting to me. --The Photographer 10:46, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 14:24, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Provisional support As always, Colin, your compositional approach to the contemporary City skyline is excellent. But I'd like to know if it might be possible to burn down those clouds at upper left? They made me aquint the first time I looked at them. Realistic, no doubt, but probably not a reaction you want viewers to have. Daniel Case (talk) 16:26, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Daniel If you check with The Photographers Ephemeris, the sun is just to the left of this scene, lighting up those clouds with an "ou! ou! my eyes!" brightness. It was quite a challenge with this lighting because of the effect of this glare. I dislike when images are adjusted so the maximum white is just paper white. So if I've translated this scene onto your monitor, then I'm pleased. But, also, perhaps your monitor is set too bright -- most monitors are default set far too bright. The image might be a better one without such clouds, but that's what was there, and I don't really want to make them unrealistic. -- Colin (talk) 18:09, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, thanks. I knew you'd give a satisfactory answer either way, but I had to ask. (Due to my hopefully-soon-to-be-resolved computer issues, I'm using a laptop monitor at the moment, which I grant is perhaps different from the desktop monitor I have used for years). Daniel Case (talk) 18:32, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Agree with Photographer and with Daniel (about the clouds). But it's still nice, technically very good, and very interesting to browse. - Benh (talk) 22:10, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I would suggest a crop that enables you to get the very unsharp grass in the near right corner out of the picture. I'm thinking that a horizontal crop might be less damaging to the rest of the composition than a vertical crop, but I wouldn't oppose a well-done vertical crop, for example one to the left of Broadgate. I also think that you could crop in somewhat from the left side, but that wouldn't have been a reason for me not to support a feature. I feel like the grass is a reason. It's a nice compositional element at full-page size, but having something that blurry in the foreground of a landscape picture is bad, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:03, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 08:20, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:48, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:06, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but the left part of the image is overexposed for me + per The Photographer. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 13:41, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • That's a good point. So because of the blur in the near right corner and the problems on the left side, I'll mildly Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:59, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Alchemist-hp, this is a three-exposure HDR and the darkest frame has plenty headroom. So there's no "overexposed" technical flaw. The left part of the image is significantly darker and more contrasty than reality, because if it was reality then your monitor would burn your retina if you stared at a white Word document. I can understand from a composition value that one may not want such bright clouds there, or that it could have been taken at a different time of day, but the lighting is representative of what it is, and most certainly not "overexposed". -- Colin (talk) 14:26, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, whether too bright or overexposed, the optical result is the same for me: not optimal light. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 01:43, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Alchemist. --Ivar (talk) 16:31, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 04:47, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram-voting question.svg Question Only about 8000 px height? Using 2 rowas and upright format there would be 12,000 possible with your camera. --Milseburg (talk) 22:42, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Do you know: what is a crop? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 05:54, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I do and I don´t mind. Full 12,000 shouldn´t be possible, because of the necessary overlap, but neraby? --Milseburg (talk) 12:41, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Milseburg, the rows do overlap quite a lot. I've got about 50% overlap vertically but only about 20% overlap horizontally. I think I overlapped too much vertically here but only just enough horizontally. I generally like quite a lot of overlap. For some scenes this can be very helpful as you have two or more frames to choose from for any part of the image, and this can help with moving people/cars to avoid ghosts or stitching issues. Also the corners of a frame are softer due to the lens not being perfect and so overlap helps to use the sharpest central portion of the image. For this image, I didn't have to edit the result produced by PtGui to select individual portions of frames by hand, but many others I have had to, and was grateful for having a choice. -- Colin (talk) 20:44, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 21:09, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes

File:Drottningens paviljong October 2015.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2016 at 09:51:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Drottningens paviljong (The Queen's pavilion) in Drottningholm. Part of Royal Domain of Drottningholm - World Heritage Site. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Arild Vågen (talk) 09:51, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- ArildV (talk) 09:51, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment You should probably have the file renamed since "October 2016" is still in the future. (Or lend me the keys to your DeLorean for the weekend.^^) cart-Talk 09:57, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice lines with the walkway and the tree leaning over it. That tipped the scale of an otherwise just very good photo of a building. cart-Talk 10:39, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I'm sorry, this is just a very good QI. Nor the building, neither the composition are more than at an average level. We have many QI candidates like this. Not bad but no FP, in my opinion.--Jebulon (talk) 11:25, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jebulon's oppose !vote notwithstanding, I like the deep lines and the insistently corrected perspective, the latter of which is more than you can sometimes hope to get from a QI. Daniel Case (talk) 18:45, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Jebulon. --Karelj (talk) 21:55, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I agree that this isn't a slam-dunk, but I come down on the side of the supporters. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:32, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Jebulon. INeverCry 08:14, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 06:15, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the atmosphere, which comes among others from the corresponding colors of the leaves, the house and the gravel--Christof46 (talk) 07:14, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Milseburg (talk) 00:07, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:17, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like the image and the vanishing lines --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:48, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 21:07, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Détails du Mihrab 20.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2016 at 09:35:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by --IssamBarhoumi (talk) 09:35, 9 September 2016 (UTC) - uploaded by --IssamBarhoumi (talk) 09:35, 9 September 2016 (UTC) - nominated by IssamBarhoumi -- IssamBarhoumi (talk) 09:35, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- IssamBarhoumi (talk) 09:35, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too dull and too soft for its small size, sorry. The threshold for building interiors is really high on FPC. --Kreuzschnabel 15:32, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Mild support I agree we do have a high threshold, but for a small image not using a long exposure or elaborate multiple-image tonemapping scheme, this ain't bad. And I feel we certainly could use more mosque interiors to go with all the churches. Daniel Case (talk) 18:38, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment While I agree with Daniel, the clash between the yellow light from the chandelier and the blue light from outside does not make this a harmonious picture IMO. The clock on the wall is excellent for WB and making the pic more about warm light. It could also use a little more brightness. Yes, this is actually me proposing a change of the picture (!) and I did a version of this just to see how it would look, but I will not upload it unless asked for it by the nominator or several other editors. The only reason I propose this is because IssamBarhoumi is relatively new to both QI and FP and not used to all the tricks of the trade we use here to improve our pictures. :) --cart-Talk 22:32, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment dear --W.carter just do it and tell me more about IMO --IssamBarhoumi (talk) 22:47, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Ok, since you ask I will upload a new version instead of an alternative and also 'ping' those who have voted already. I will explain what I have done later on your talk page. The "IMO" is just a short form of writing "In My Oppinion" so it's not a technical term if that is what you thought. :) cart-Talk 22:53, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @IssamBarhoumi: It is generally regarded as bad manners to upload new versions and ask the community if it is better. When you nominate something here you have to be sure that it is the final version and be prepared to stand by it, this is not like QI where you have discussions about your photo.(Even if it sometimes turns out that way anyhow.) I made a huge exception when I suggested that I could help you out with this photo and only because you are new to this section. People here, including me, don't like to be 'pinged' back to check photos again and again. You need to make a decision on your own about which version to nominate and then leave it at that. --cart-Talk 08:17, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - W.carter's version is best to my eyes, and I would give it weak support. I'd consider a possible neutral vote for your edit at most. Might you be able to take another photo of this motif in better light with sharper focus? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:26, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Mild Symbol support vote.svg Support per Daniel. INeverCry 08:16, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Nice shoot and excellent subject and composition, however, IMHO, you should use less noise reduction and less ISO to generate a better sharpening. Please, try the same shoot with a tripod. The picture size is fine for me because I underestand the camera sensor size too --The Photographer 11:03, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello everybody thank you for your help, I ll do better next time --IssamBarhoumi (talk) 14:00, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 21:08, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:ISS-32 American EVA b3 Aki Hoshide.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2016 at 17:55:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency astronaut Aki Hoshide, Expedition 32 flight engineer, uses a digital still camera to make a photo of his helmet visor during the mission's third session of extravehicular activity (EVA).
  • There are also what look like a couple of dust spots. But no, no reason to apply normal standards to such an extremely unusual photo. Strong Symbol support vote.svg Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:29, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:50, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:Lüdinghausen, Borgmühle -- 2016 -- 3605.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2016 at 13:36:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Borgmühle in Lüdinghausen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
  • Thank you. I'll fix the crop tomorrow and try to sharpen it a little bit more. I used f/22 because the exposure time was to short. A ND filter wasn't enough. --XRay talk 17:20, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • ✓ Done I've just uploaded the image with the proposed crop (and minor improvements). --XRay talk 04:39, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • {o} Very nice place, but dull light IMO.--Jebulon (talk) 19:19, 9 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I'll wait to see how this looks after you edit, but as it stands, I would support this photo of a pretty mill. What makes the difference for me is the eddy: I really like the contrast between the peaceful sky and roiled water. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:44, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Based on your explanations I am OK with this picture as is. Daniel Case (talk) 03:41, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The eddy is a nice little plus as Ikan points out. INeverCry 08:00, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I changed my mind with a view on my iMac...--Jebulon (talk) 13:09, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 13:40, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per Ikan. It looks almost like one of those little model houses you make for a railway model landscape. I could live with toning down/removing the glaring red traffic sign though. --cart-Talk 14:25, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:16, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Brackenheim (talk) 08:34, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:53, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture#Germany

File:Stockholm Sweden God-Father-on-the-Rainbow-01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2016 at 17:35:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sculpture "Gud Fader på Himmelsbågen (God our Father on the Rainbow) at Nacka Strand, Sweden
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Sculpture "Gud Fader på Himmelsbågen (God our Father on the Rainbow). Carl Milles designed this sculpture in 1946, as a monument for peace and a celebration of the creation of the United Nations. However, he only managed to produce a bronze model. 50 years later, Milles' former student, the American sculptor Marshall M. Frederics created the sculpture to its full size. I especially liked the fact, that the parabolic arc is half steel and half water.
All by me -- CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 17:35, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I don't think so, unless they alter the law which actually states: "Work of art may be depicted if it is permanently placed on or at a public place outdoors." But thanks for the hint, I added the FoP Sweden tag. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 18:27, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Well, if they alter any copyright laws you will not be the only photographer who'll be miserable about it, Milles is sort of the best known sculpter in Sweden and his works are usually landmarks in major citeis. This is also why it's nice to see one of his works without crowds of people around it. It's very nice shot, but I miss the whole impact wave that the falling water creates as well as the last cornerstone of the fundament/pier to the right. Do you have a slightly wider crop of this? Milles' works are almost always not just the metal-thing but also the base and the area around the work. What we here refer to as "light and space". --cart-Talk 19:12, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
✓ Done I recovered some space. Thanks for pointing out this. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 04:22, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I'm fine with the new version, but you need to ping everyone who voted for the previous version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:33, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm fine with it too; that only leaves @Daniel Case: , @ArionEstar: , and @W.carter: , though she's most likely watching this already. INeverCry 07:17, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Many thanks! (and quite right INC^^) Now the artwork can be viewed as it was intended, I think Milles himself would have been very pleased with this photo. cart-Talk 08:35, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:51, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

File:Tagebau Cottbus-Nordi.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2016 at 06:15:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 21:06, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:William Birney.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2016 at 14:35:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

William Birney
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 22:53, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Bombus hypnorum - Tilia cordata - Keila.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Sep 2016 at 16:58:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bombus hypnorum - Tilia cordata - Keila.jpg
  • If I may, I find you very "severe" here. The FP you refer to as plenty of artifacts (notably on the right antenna) and the current candidate shows as much details (to say the least). One will look at the yellow fur part to compare. The left flower of the candidate is also in focus. - Benh (talk) 21:01, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • More detailed and less sharp. But I'm just one voter. If 7 people like this photo enough, it will be featured. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:28, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:45, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera

File:Church of Christ Pantocrator Nesebar.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2016 at 22:59:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Church of Christ Pantocrator, Nesebar, Bulgaria
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 22:44, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Hubble Peers into the Storm (29563971405).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2016 at 11:05:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Of course, Benh it is a joke. --Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:20, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:54, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Gorgeous. GuessJohann Jaritz is joking :) but for those who are wondering like me : I looked on a map and the andromeda galaxy won't appear here since it's too far from the large Magellanic cloud (which this picture shows a part of if I understood). - Benh (talk) 09:24, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Nice one! -- NgYShung (talk) 10:19, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:45, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Astronomy

File:Junonia almana-Kadavoor-2016-07-11-002.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Sep 2016 at 09:56:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Junonia almana
  • Indeed; but not to me. The rain started; and it wants a safe place to settle. It's a warning for the spiders and mantis to stay away! :) Jee 15:42, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • It works, it almost looks like a cat face. :) DSC08562.JPG --cart-Talk 16:17, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:24, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Very pretty specimen but I don't like the flash lighting. It makes the subject flat (not really an issue on this flat one though), casts an unpleasant shadow and gives it an unnatural look (specular reflections on the leaves). I think raising ISO a bit so the flash is less preponderant would give it a much more natural feel. Or using some reflectors? - Benh (talk) 19:59, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Most of my resent photos are using flash as I'm shooting in difficult conditions. Here all the foliage is wet in rain; that's why the reflections. See the droplets on its wings too. We can't expect sun and rain together. (Not arguing; just explaining. Thanks for the review.) Jee 03:15, 11 September 2016 (UTC) And I hope there is less reflection in my photo compared to this. Jee 03:19, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • It's fine Jee. We are here to exchange aren't we? ;) I've no doubt the conditions may be difficult, and I try to keep that in mind when making criticisms. I'm happy you correct me because of your field experience. What gives the flash feel though are not only the reflections but also the even tone across the frame (and in addition to what I already mentioned). It really striked me quickly and from the thumbnail alone. I don't know your settings. Given the direction of the shadow, I guess it's a "regular" flash on the hotshoe (vs. ring one, which I'm not sure would be better). Turning the flash to a side toward a reflector could improve this IMO. I remember Noodle Snack (JJ Harrison) showing a setup of him. It was quite complex, but the results were worth it. Easier to say than to do :-) One thing I'm sure is easy is raising the ISO, as already discussed elsewhere :) - Benh (talk) 09:58, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose per Benh. Daniel Case (talk) 21:38, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 23:26, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I've mentioned before that I don't think ISO200 and flash is a good combination. ISO800 should be fine for this sort of shot. I've got a ring flash, but it takes me too long to set up the ideal flash conditions for a butterfly capture like this. Flash works great when you want a blackish background, but naturally not for an insect on a leaf. Charles (talk) 12:52, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Charles, I tested non-flash photography in similar lighting condition today and the shutter speed I got is only 1/30 (ISO800, f/7.1). Further, I don't think flash alone is an evil as most rain-forest photographers use it. They maybe more expert than me in controlling the lights though. :) Jee 17:37, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Most of his flash shots are with black background, not a leaf. I'm actually not wild about this photographer's style, but he is obviously very experienced: but he does use twin flash and diffusers and M65 lens etc. Charles (talk) 10:02, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • See here; almost every setting is same. Jee 17:41, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • This is a butterfly house shot by an outstanding photographer and I suspect he was standing up with a well-balanced stance with lots of time and probably a tripod. You could ask him. Charles (talk) 10:02, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Argh! "Thanks" for showing that page... now I'm gonna have nightmares about creepy crawlies for weeks! Face-wink.svg cart-Talk 18:41, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:48, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera

File:Kammergericht, Berlin-Schöneberg, Treppenhalle, 360x180, 160809, ako.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2016 at 04:50:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Entrance hall of Kammergericht (higher regional court) in Berlin-Schöneberg.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info 360° panorama of the entrance hall of Kammergericht Berlin (highest state court of Berlin). The building is of great historical significance. In nazi Germany the infamous Volksgerichtshof held somoe of its trials there. After the second world war it was the seat of the Allied Control Council. In 1997 it became the seat of the Kammergericht again. Personally I've spent a lot of time in this building during my legal clerkship and nowadays I'm there from time to time for court hearings. I always enjoy the architecture of this building. It took me some time to get the permission to take photographs there but I think in the end it was worth it, I think. I took some more pictures in there, they're all linked in the description page in case you're interested. Please view the picture with the panellum viewer before judging! I hope you're not yet tired of these 360° panoramas. -- Code (talk) 04:50, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Code (talk) 04:50, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I'm not at all tired of your great 360° panoramas. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:21, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great Quality. -- -donald- (talk) 05:33, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support A pity that the ceiling is not exactly centered, but very good still. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:34, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Well spottet but in fact I didn't want to put the camera exactly under the chandelier. If it was exactly centered, the chandelier would look flat and one could think it was a painting on the ceiling or something like that. The way I took the photograph the chandelier looks more three-dimensional so that you get a better impression of how the room really looks like, IMO. --Code (talk) 06:13, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support More please. INeverCry 05:37, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well done. I often wonder how you get these places to yourself without any unwanted folks loitering about. Do you yell "Fire!" or is the composite "the best of", selecting those pics taken when a specific part is empty? cart-Talk 09:34, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Haha, nice ideas. No, when I use the 14mm lens for such a panorama I take eight frames around, two frames for the zenith and two frames for the nadir. I always wait between the frames until there's no one visible in the respective area. But honestly this building isn't very crowded in the afternoon hours. --Code (talk) 18:42, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks for letting me know. :) I was also thinking you might have a pet skunk in a cat carrier... They sure can clear a room. --cart-Talk 18:56, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Code and W.carter: interesting. If I may share my experience... (which I guess I similar to Code's) I've found out that stitching gives one a lot of room for getting rid of people. Since you get plenty of overlapping area, the likelihoods of a mask that can hide them are great. So I personally don't even wait for my frame to be completely empty (I'm only careful with central part). It's even possible to use Hugin to overlap several similar shot to get crowded places empty, like in here. If one likes it, he can leave one person for compositional purpose : [5]. A very powerful and underrated technique in my opinion (and one has to keep in mind that tripods are forbidden in the Vatican museum, so my shots weren't aligned be could easily be with a stitching program like Hugin). I think this is the idea Wcarter had in mind. - Benh (talk) 17:55, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks Benh, yes that is something like what I was thinking of. I used the "opposite" version when I stitched together this photo. I took a series of pics within a couple of minutes and then chose the four that gave the most "lively" version of the panorama. But that panorama was put together by hand since the program I tried to use (Photoshop 7) did some really wrong stitching in many places. cart-Talk 19:38, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thank you, Taxiarchos228 and please feel free to nominate the picture if you think it's worth a FP star. Maybe I'll do some day otherwise. Regarding the 360° panoramas I think they fit quite well in normal FPC. They're photographs and have more or less to be judged by the same criteria like any other picture. The panellum viewer works quite well in the meanwhile and we don't have so many of them that we could fill a whole new section with them, I think. Anyways I'm interested what others think about your proposal. --Code (talk) 05:40, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:42, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:On a Bridge Between Da Nang and Hue, Vietnam.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2016 at 03:26:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

On a bridge between Da Nang and Hue, looking towards the Hai Van pass.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 22:43, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:RUS-2016-Aerial-SPB-Peterhof Palace.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2016 at 05:09:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aerial view of Peterhof Palace and upper gardens
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Aerial photo of Peterhof Palace and Upper Gardens. Created, uploaded, and nominated by Godot13 -- Godot13 (talk) 05:09, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Godot13 (talk) 05:09, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Well-done overall. Impressive sharpness for an aerial shot! --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:33, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 05:35, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Very valuable. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:33, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --cart-Talk 09:36, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Very good indeed, however, I’d prefer less foreground to gain a bit more background. The main subject appears a bit squeezed towards the top frame. --Kreuzschnabel 12:59, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 15:52, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Partially with shadows, but IMO OK. --XRay talk 16:15, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Strong support A great deal of aerial images get nominated here because the nominator is impressed with the idea of taking an aerial photograph of something. But this subject benefits greatly from an aerial photograph, making its grand plan apparent as effectively as any carefully-sketched SVG would. Daniel Case (talk) 19:03, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Brackenheim (talk) 08:27, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Johann Jaritz (talk) 12:35, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 16:01, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not the best light, but otherwise good quality and extremely valuable. @Godot13: , it would be interesting if a couple of words on "making of" would be added to the description. Was it taken from a helicopter (however the quality is much better than I would expect from a photo taken frm a helicopter), or was the camera set on a drone? --A.Savin 11:12, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Symbol support vote.svg Support from a helicopter --The Photographer 23:45, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, a helicopter... --Godot13 (talk) 00:52, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:41, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:The lost land.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Sep 2016 at 16:48:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A landscape between Chefchaouen and Oued laou, in the road P4105, Morocco
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Othmane.elam - uploaded by Othmane.elam - nominated by Reda benkhadra -- Reda benkhadra (talk) 16:48, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Reda benkhadra (talk) 16:48, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 19:52, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Very sorry, but this hazy light isn't speaking to me. I like the scene, though, and I'd like to see photos of it in slightly brighter light or (depending on which direction we're looking in) sunrise or sunset. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:03, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Ikan Kekek: It's your personal opinion, I respect it --Reda benkhadra (talk) 21:54, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment The file needs to be renamed. "The lost land" is not and adequate description for an FP since it is metaphoric and can be used as a description for many places. Poetry is fine, just not here, a file must be named so that it is easy to find using search engines. cart-Talk 20:55, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @W.carter: ✓ Done --Reda benkhadra (talk) 21:54, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan. INeverCry 23:15, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The sort of picture that you take, you process, you upload all the while thinking "I need to go back on a clearer day". Daniel Case (talk) 23:35, 10 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Also maybe f/10 instead of f/7.1 would be a better choice to put more the background in focus. Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:34, 11 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Christian Ferrer: On this kind of photo where everything is far away, one needn't really stop down to get everything in focus. Better to shoot at the lens' sweet spot. At 85mm, f/7.1 and on a Canon 550D body, hyperfocal distance is 53,4m. Gives one some margin, and from what I can "guess", nothing looks closer than 26,7m here (if hyperfocal = D, everything from D/2 to infinite is in focus). - Benh (talk) 20:04, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    For some reason, I just had a "reminiscence" of the fact that Jeffrey's EXIF viewer computes the hyperfocal distance : [6]. - Benh (talk) 21:22, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Agreed, the unsharpness is due to some combination of haze, lens quality, and post-processing. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:41, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 22:46, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Zabriskie Point Death Valley December 2013 002.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2016 at 06:18:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Red Cathedral, Zabriskie Point, Death Valley
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:40, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Papilio polymnestor-Kadavoor-2016-07-27-002.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2016 at 03:52:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Papilio polymnestor
  • This is another one trying to settle as the rain starts showering. We've heavy monsoon in June-July. :) Jee 08:59, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • What position do they prefer when the rain starts and they get wet? Do they sit with wings out like this or do they keep them in a more upright or folded position? cart-Talk 11:08, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • This butterfly will not close its wings when it rests or sleeps. This is the second largest butterfly in India, a little smaller than Troides minos. The big white and metallic blue wings are enough to keep any predators away. The previous one will find safe shelters when rain is pouring. ;) Jee 11:16, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 07:00, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera

File:Ponte Santa Caterina (Venice).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2016 at 08:14:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ponte Santa Caterina, in Venice, on rio di Santa Caterina
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created and uploaded by User:Archaeodontosaurus - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:14, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - This is an out-of-the-box nomination for Venice. It's not a scene from a postcard or a painting by Canaletto or Guardi; instead, it's a complex composition that's rich not in wowing spectacle but in the many-textured forms for the eye to see. It's just as much a picture of Venice as a shot of San Marco is, because where else could you have this scene? But this is really not in any way just a picture of a bridge. Rather, I see it as a mini-cityscape of part of a backwater canal. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:14, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Ikan, I think you are confusing an appreciation of Venice, which you've extracted from this snapshot, with the qualities we are looking for in a photograph. As you say, it's no work of art but neither is there, imo, a "complex composition". It seems more "I aimed the camera at the bridge while I was on holiday and pressed the shutter". There's a random guy in a distracting stripy top walking over the bridge. There's a woman looking out of frame at something we can't see. And while colourful laundry can make a classic/cliched "foreign land" photo, the blue boats just look messy. The image is only 10MP from an excellent 36MP full-frame camera and yet at full size the quality is dire. Looks over-processed, soft and blown out in many places. -- Colin (talk) 09:54, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I said it's not a conventional view of Venice. I didn't say it's not a work of art. I knew at the outset that this was likely to be a controversial nomination, but it's not really a big risk because, hey, it's just a nomination and if it doesn't convince people, so be it. If others agree that the quality is dire, I wasted time nominating this for QI and having it pass muster there. Maybe QI standards are not high enough, as I was thinking the issue here would be likely to be a lack of "wow" or opposition to the composition as jumbled or something. And tangentially, I have yet to visit Venice and nominated this picture because of its composition, nothing else. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:08, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin. The picture looked a bit "overly-complicated" and too sharp. And I've also searched up Nikon D800, it states "The D800E can obtain the sharpest images possible", which is not a very good idea for this picture. -- NgYShung (talk) 10:34, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I really love "the other side" of things/towns/landscapes just because they are something you don't normally see in pictures. Even so, photos taken in such areas also needs a bit of composition and harmony. The things that stands out most in this pic are the many cut things at the frame's edges: a cut window at the top, a cut balcony on the right side, cut windows on the left and two cut boat engines at the bottom. If the whole boats/engines had been in veiw, this would also resulted in a bit more water and more reflections from the buildings. For me the shot is too tight. Had I taken this pic, I would have waited for the people to leave or for people to do something interesting or stand in more strategic places. Taking a photo of such a place usually takes about 20-30 minutes and a lot of versions to chose from if you want to get it right. My experience is also that if you wait around for the right shot, people notice you and your camera, they come up and chat, offering advice, asking people to stand back for a clear shot or point out interesting things. cart-Talk 10:45, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - Given the "out-of-the-box" nature of the subjects you often photograph, I particularly respect your points. I think I've read enough and will withdraw now. But I think the point about the standards on QIC deserves more discussion, so I've started a thread about that at Commons talk:Quality images candidates. Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:55, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:55, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Bradinopyga geminata 6563.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2016 at 06:12:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bradinopyga geminata

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination - Thanks for lending your eyes and sharing your reviews and votes. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:49, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 20:56, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Hamburg, St.-Pauli-Fischmarkt, Fischauktionshalle -- 2016 -- 3087.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2016 at 15:25:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fischauktionshalle, Hamburg, Germany
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Germany
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by XRay -- XRay talk 15:25, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- XRay talk 15:25, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Weak oppose I think you added too much foreground structure, it gives too much visual clutter and makes the photo too busy for my taste, sorry. Technique is excellent as usual. -- Slaunger (talk) 20:29, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Slaunger. INeverCry 22:30, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Slaunger, though I give you props for trying something offbeat. Importantly, though, the Fischmarkt isn't that sharp. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:36, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Thanks for your reviews. A short way to a decision. It's better to withdraw the image to spend more time to all the other images. --XRay talk 05:55, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 20:54, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:ZSSK Class 475.1.webm, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2016 at 12:54:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Karel Furiš - uploaded by Daniel Holý CZ - nominated by Daniel Holý CZ -- Daniel Holý (talk) 12:54, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Daniel Holý (talk) 12:54, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the fretful camera work isn't featureable for me --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:11, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Reminds me very much of this film, but more than a hundred years later I would like a steadier camera and a little more sharpness for an F-media. cart-Talk 17:22, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The shaky camera work is the least of my issues. At this point in time technology has advanced enough that we no longer need worry about image quality ... this is very nice in that department. What we need to see is some understanding that videos, films, whatever you want to call the moving image today, need more than one uninterrupted take to work. In this case, even if the camera had been mounted on a tripod to smooth it out I still would have problems with this view that lets that post come in front of the locomotive, waits to pull back suddenly near the end, and doesn't pan to at least follow the train as it passes. Daniel Case (talk) 18:28, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 21:15, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others, and I think the 1895 film W.carter linked to is better, because it has more action, with all the people. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:31, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. The object is most interesting of course but the photographic work is really nothing to be proud of. Apart from the shaking, there’s very poor detail (no TV station would think of broadcasting such a quality) and rookie-level camera handling. Try to zoom softer (no video professional uses motor zoom) and pan a bit more. But first of all, use a tripod. --Kreuzschnabel 19:20, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 20:50, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Mänty kalliolla Reposaaressa.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2016 at 17:55:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pine tree (Pinus sylvestris) on a cliff at Reposaari, Finland
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by kallerna - uploaded by kallerna - nominated by Pine -- Pine✉ 17:55, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pine✉ 17:55, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Nice scenery but not special enough for a feature IMHO. Generally, I’d prefer an image of this type to be entirely sharp instead of showing bokeh. Anyway, I expect crisp sharpness of a candidate less than 10 mpix in 2016. Might benefit of a square crop, suggestion added. --Kreuzschnabel 18:29, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Had the pine been a bit taller, this might have worked. Right now there is just too much empty space at the top. Also not sharp enough or enough detail for an FP. cart-Talk 19:06, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. The sky sits there and doesn't do much, so I think it would work better to crop it just a bit above the tree - Kreuzschnabel's crop suggestion - and then I might vote for a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:41, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Sharpness would be way too poor considering its size being just 4 mpix after crop. --Kreuzschnabel 05:48, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Unbalanced composition in the vertical direction, and I do not like how the pine intersects the horizon. I do like the bokeh though, and pretty good light albeit the background is a tad too bright relative to the pine IMO. -- Slaunger (talk) 21:00, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others; really wants to be horizontally oriented. Daniel Case (talk) 19:23, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Pine✉ 23:00, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 20:55, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Upper Creek-27527-4.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2016 at 17:33:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Upper Creek Falls in Pisgah National Forest, North Carolina, United States
Dialog-warning.svg
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: twelve support !votes are unlikely at this point 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.

Daniel Case (talk) 18:54, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 20:56, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Iglesia de San Alfonso, Cuenca 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2016 at 22:47:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Iglesia de San Alfonso, Cuenca, Ecuador
Dialog-warning.svg
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: there is too much opposition, per the comments above 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.

-- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:57, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 20:58, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Gorbea - Camino Mairulegorreta 02.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2016 at 18:48:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landscape on the Mairulegorreta trail to Gorbea summit; view of Anboto summit. Álava, Basque Country, Spain
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Spain
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Basotxerri -- Basotxerri (talk) 18:48, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info New nomination of a brighter version.
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basotxerri (talk) 18:48, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The brighter version works just as well, so I'll have to repeat myself: Striking composition with a bold angle as well as depth and EV (the mountain). --cart-Talk 20:16, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Lacks wow for me either, sorry. Showing a nice scenery is not enough to get a feature. --Kreuzschnabel 18:41, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry but I'm not going "wow". Seems a fairly typical "photo taken when out for a hike". -- Colin (talk) 20:42, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose sorry, but per Colin. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:30, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Colin. INeverCry 00:36, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Personally I like the composition. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:35, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Mild Symbol support vote.svg Support per KoH - Very good composition, and not so typical to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:41, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Ikan. Colin, you probably are spoiled by some of the places you hike Face-smile.svg. Daniel Case (talk) 06:08, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. --El Grafo (talk) 18:16, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I don’t find the composition particularly striking. The foreground rocks on the lower left are too dominant, the distant mountain too small relatively to the entire frame, to get a clear message of it. The scenery is nice, certainly, but theres not much wow in this composition for me. --Kreuzschnabel 18:44, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Thank you all! I understand the pros and cons. --Basotxerri (talk) 17:35, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 20:58, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Okba Mosque Main Dome 3.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2016 at 11:50:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The main dome of Mosque Okba

Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination IssamBarhoumi (talk) 13:31, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 20:59, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Anfiteatro, El Jem, Túnez, 2016-09-04, DD 55-66 HDR PAN.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2016 at 20:58:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of the Amphitheatre of El Jem, an archeological site in the city of El Djem, Tunisia.
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 01:09, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Margaret D. Foster, in Lab, 4 October 1919.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2016 at 15:07:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Margaret D. Foster
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ezarateesteban 23:20, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:Stockholm Sweden Radsalen-of-Stockholm-City-Hall-01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2016 at 19:46:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Timber framework of the ceiling in the City Council Hall (Rådsalen) of Stockholm City Hall
All by -- CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 19:46, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I agree, however, it was not allowed to roam around between the seats of the city councillors, so only a shot from the side was possible. As a tripod wasn't allowed either, I put the camera on the desk of a councilman and released the shutter with the wireless remote. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 04:59, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well done! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:38, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Classical golden ratio.--Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:55, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I grew sick of them but that one is a hell of a ceiling. - Benh (talk) 21:14, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I find the way you write english very funny !--Jebulon (talk) 19:51, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Hope the native english speakers don't laugh as much :D - Benh (talk) 21:11, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • Pas sûr ! Tu es quand même le seul à écrire comme ça, même parmi les "natifs"... Je reconnais ton style avant même d'avoir vu ta signature Clin--Jebulon (talk) 09:48, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
          • @Jebulon: Je pensais que c'était plus les fautes (type franglais) que le style qui te faisaient rire ;) - Benh (talk) 14:52, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Just one step left, please...--Jebulon (talk) 19:51, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:03, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support − Meiræ 21:00, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ezarateesteban 23:25, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:Bridge and deck of Gullbritt.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2016 at 14:53:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bridge and deck of ferry M/S Gullbritt
  • Thanks Ikan Face-smile.svg! While I may not have gone through the extreme efforts other users did, it did take me about a year to get a good photo of this ferry. I take it very often and I have been waiting for the right conditions for a good photo. You have to do it on the trip to Lysekil, not from it or the cars will be at the wrong end in regards to the sun. I wanted it rather empty so that the lines were visible but when the weather is clear and sunny, that is also when the crowds come to Lysekil, so this was very lucky! In the photo I'm hiding my reflection between two windows on the bridge above the "3", only my arm is visible by the wiper. cart-Talk 09:01, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I wouldn't have noticed if you hadn't mentioned that was your arm. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:56, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 08:21, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Water transport#Ships

File:European robin (Erithacus rubecula) juvenile.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2016 at 21:39:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Juvenile European robin
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 08:17, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds

File:Edificio principal de la Universidad Humboldt, Berlín, Alemania, 2016-04-22, DD 25-27 HDR.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2016 at 04:09:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Night view of the entrance of the main building of the Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Night view of the entrance of the main building of the Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany. The institution, founded on 15 October 1810 as the University of Berlin, by the liberal Prussian educational reformer and linguist Wilhelm von Humboldt, has nowadays over 30,000 students. All by me, Poco2 04:09, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 04:09, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Beautiful and well-lit. A bit of unsharpness in various places but I won't complain given the resolution... --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:28, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - Very interesting motif, and the photo looks great at full-page size, but when I look at it at full size, the sky looks blotchy. Why is that? Are those all little clouds? It otherwise looks good enough to me to support. By the way this daytime photo by Dr. Chriss is quite good and probably borderline featurable. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:35, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Poor quality, see statues. Very dark sky. Light not so good. --Mile (talk) 05:11, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Pudelek (talk) 05:56, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The sign on the left side is disturbing, I would make again this photo another day. The quality is good, the dynamic also. I would even prefer a blue, not a black sky, some hours before. -- -donald- (talk) 07:23, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Mile & Donald. INeverCry 08:05, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Distracting wide angle perspective, and sign on the left side. Lost detail in dark areas. Doesn't work for me. --Smial (talk) 09:32, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Poco2 19:19, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 00:20, 22 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Karlskirche Vienna, September 2016.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2016 at 18:31:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Karlskirche in Vienna, Austria, at night
  • Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture#Austria
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Karlskirche, Vienna, Austria during blue hour. Taking this picture was difficult for a couple of reasons: 1) Lighting: Dealing with the artificial illumination was a challenge as highlights tended to get blown easily, 2) Reflection: It was rather windy that day so I had to be patient and wait for the water surface to finally remain calm and smooth, 3) Movement / ghosts: It was a hot summer night so a lot people crowded this popular spot. Also, bicycles kept crossing the square. Altogether this image serves as the best compromise of approx. 25 pictures I took that night. All by me, --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:31, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:31, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:16, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The reflection in the water is unpleasantly blurred. INeverCry 20:39, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The other one looks like ice. This one just doesn't look right to me. The dome and spires are very bright and yet their reflection is much darker. It doesn't look natural to me. I may be alone in this opinion though; we'll have to see how the votes go. INeverCry 21:13, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral The crop on the sides is a bit tight, and despite the recovery efforts there are still lost highlights. I think a graduated ND filter would have helped for situations like this. Nice blue hour lighting though. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:38, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I'm sorry; I appreciate the efforts you made, but Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per INC. Compare this photo by Der Wolf im Wald. Much more pleasant reflection, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:54, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Although it is nice to have a full reflection, the other FP Ikan links is far superior in sharpness/detail despite being darker, and I don't think the brightness of the tower is realistic (too bright). The reflection is weird. Being darker is fine (I'd expect that) but it looks more like an out-of-focus or gaussian blur than water. This image shows a sharp reflection is possible and this image has a more pleasing painterly reflection. -- Colin (talk) 11:58, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Colin, yes, you're right: A sharper reflection is indeed possible. Several of the pictures I took that night show better reflections than the one nominated here (but are flawed otherwise). As for the brightness of the dome, I guess creating an HDR image might have helped - but it was much too crowed and windy to even try that. Too much was going on. I guess I'll use this failed nomination as a convenient excuse for another trip to Vienna... ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:31, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 00:21, 22 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Festung Königstein - Georgenbatterie.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2016 at 09:48:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cannons of Fortress Königstein, Saxony
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 09:48, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 09:48, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Not really stunning for me because of the tight crop at the left. Furthermore tilted CW - check the verticals in the image center. --Uoaei1 (talk) 15:48, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - It's quite a pretty motif and the combination of the fortress and the lower land beyond is a good idea, but to me, this is a good QI, not a photo with such an outstanding composition that it should be featured. To be more specific, the bit of tiled roof in the lower left bothers me; I would want it either cropped out or maybe cropped farther away, depending on what is further to the left. Agreed with Uoaei1 on the tilt, too - it's quite visible. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:00, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Pudelek (talk) 05:53, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 00:22, 22 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Kenilworth Castle Great Hall from the west 2016.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2016 at 06:05:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The ruins of Kenilworth Castle Great Hall
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 00:22, 22 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Duisburg, Landschaftspark Duisburg-Nord -- 2016 -- 1238-44.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2016 at 16:03:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hochofenstraße, Landschaftspark Duisburg-Nord in Duisburg, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 00:13, 22 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture#Germany

File:Erdfunkstelle Fuchsstadt, a.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Sep 2016 at 16:58:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Rainer Lippert - uploaded by Rainer Lippert - nominated by Rainer Lippert
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Rainer Lippert (talk) 16:58, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral as author too ;-) @Rainer Lippert: magst Du Dein eigenes Bild nicht? Hier auf Commons ist es üblich auch sein eigenes Pro zu geben. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 18:49, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Alchemist-hp: Eigenlob stinkt aber ;-) Wenn das aber hier so üblich ist, ok. Grüße -- Rainer Lippert (talk) 19:40, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Now Symbol support vote.svg Support :-) nice view. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:07, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Das ist ja wohl jedem freigestellt. Ich habe schon mehrmals meine Eigennominationen mit neutral bedacht, wenn ich das Gefühl hatte, es sei zu billig, wenn meine Stimme hinterher gerade mal die Sieben voll macht. Das heißt nicht, daß man von seinem Bild nicht überzeugt wäre. Es mag üblich sein, Unterlassung ist aber kein Grund zum Stirnrunzeln. --Kreuzschnabel 21:49, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I can see how the radial lines might have been what you wanted to shoot, but we don't see enough of them to make this striking enough for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 21:13, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Daniel. INeverCry 21:36, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Surely nice but not outstanding for me. Being nice and flawless does not yet justify a feature. Stark horizontal lines in the foreground (here the row of trees) often make the viewer feel locked out from the farther scenery. Try to crop that out, the image will be much clearer and more inviting, at least in my eyes. Ein weit entferntes Objekt wird von einem als groß empfundenen Vordergrund (und Bäume sind groß) auch sehr klein gemacht. --Kreuzschnabel 21:49, 12 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Very good photo of great encyclopedic and technical interest that should be a VI and a QI, but I don't find the composition interesting enough per se to support a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:08, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very good photo of great encyclopedic and technical interest, I see no lack of composition. This means we have a featured picture. --Wladyslaw (talk) 05:37, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 00:14, 22 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Sunset over the Pacific Ocean at the pier in Pismo Beach, California LCCN2013631703.tif, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2016 at 14:51:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pismo Beach pier at sunset
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Carol M. Highsmith - uploaded by Fæ - nominated by Fæ -- Fæ (talk) 14:51, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This photograph is part of a batch upload project from the Highsmith collection at the Library of Congress. Motivated by the lawsuit against Getty Images, see Village Pump archive. As the TIFF is a large download, over 200 MB, the Commons full size jpeg version is a useful alternative to examine details. -- Fæ (talk) 14:51, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I really like the tooth/wave-shape repeating pattern in the pools on the beach at the bottom of the frame. I also like the swirling water from the long exposure (but not so long it makes the sea look like a methane sea on some Saturn moon, which seems to be the fashion). There are some technical flaws which can't be ignored at FP. Several people on the pier have left ghosts as they moved during the exposure. And the sensor of this D800 is filthy with dust. A fair bit of careful Photoshopping could hide those defects, though I think then it would need to be uploaded as a separate file. I compare to an existing FP File:Clevedon Pier 2013.jpg by Saffron Blaze and this isn't quite at the same level. The bottom quarter is more interesting in this photo, but Saffron's got a much better composition of the pier + lights + horizon, and this pier is less photogenic in (near-)silhouette. [Btw, dust spots can sometimes be hard to spot initially. If you wiggle the image from side to side, they pop out of a featureless sky and then you can't help see them.] Colin (talk) 16:22, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose When I open this picture at a bigger size, I feel much the same as I do when I look at the pictures I took with one of my old cameras. That camera was top of the line ten years ago and I thought the pics were fabulous. Until I bought a new camera... Time has passed and criteria's are higher. Unless pictures are of historic importance, I think it will be increasingly difficult to nominate older "normal" pictures now. cart-Talk 21:30, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • W.carter, I'm not sure we're ready to class a D800 as "old". It is only four years old, not ten, and was indeed top-of-the-line. There's a few Canon owners wish they had a sensor as good as a D800 even now. It's no older than your Sony DSC-RX100 and will easily surpass it in every measure except size. Whatever flaws there are with this image, the camera is not to blame. And we know the photographer is highly talented. From the EXIF I can see this has been processed with CameraRaw but only a few adjustments applied. I wonder if Highsmith thought this was a good image but not outstanding enough to spend time polishing and cleaning, which is a shame. -- Colin (talk) 21:51, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Colin, I was not comparing the two cameras side by side, only said that that was what came to mind when I saw the quality of the picture. I know that D800 came out only four years ago, but since it was used by a professional in all kinds of situations, it would probably have way more "mileage" than I could ever rack up with any of my cameras and that changes/ages a camera in unwanted ways. That's what was at the back of my head. I may not be a professional photographer but I work with such people and some of them go through cameras at the same rate taxi drivers go through cars compared to us "Sunday drivers". (Sidebar: my "new camera" is not my little Sony, it's my Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ1000) But my guess is as good as yours and the bottom line is that the quality of this pic is not good enough right now. cart-Talk 23:08, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Hope Carter is wrong. I still shoot on my 2009 Canon 7D :D (and no offense to Canon, but none of their current body will push me to upgrade). - Benh (talk) 07:10, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • You have probably taken better care of it than my coworkers do. ;) cart-Talk 07:44, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I'm sorry, but no offense, I'm not going to download a file that's over 100 MB in size, just in order to be able to look at it in full size. Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:46, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have added a link to the large-image viewer. However, I ...
Doesn't work for this file. Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:11, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ikan, you can see everything clearly at the 7,360 × 4,912 pixels option on the file's page. It's quite enough. cart-Talk 07:48, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Doesn't really seem like enough to me, but it doesn't matter much, as I don't think my vote really matters to the outcome, either way. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:56, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Colin's comments and notes. What a shame ... it's got such great colors and mood. Daniel Case (talk) 04:38, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 00:15, 22 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Western entrance of Pasupatinath Temple, Front Gate-IMG 3466.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2016 at 04:31:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Bijay chaurasia - uploaded by Bijay chaurasia - nominated by Bijay chaurasia -- Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 04:31, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 04:31, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I really don't want to oppose this nomination, so I'll leave some comments. First, I greatly respect the thought that went into this composition, but there's a lot going on in this picture, and I think the crops on the the left and right are too close. Second, the focus is a little too soft in parts of the picture for me to feel wowed. Third, I completely understand wanting to avoid glary light, but I find this light a bit duller than optimal. But lastly, I just want to say again that I respect your artistry and sensibility, and I would really like to see more and different photos of this motif from you. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:43, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Ikan Kekek Thanks for ur comment. New version file is uploaded with bit brighten up and some other correctment.Plz review. Thanks again.. Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 05:35, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - It's not a really big change. I don't think you can change the photo enough for me to support a feature. I think that would require taking a new photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:54, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment --Ok next time when i visit there..Face-smile.svg-- Bijay Chaurasia (Talk) 06:00, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Pleeeeease, no version mixups during voting period. We do not improve images here, we do judge results. Thank you. --Kreuzschnabel 15:25, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose some way from FP. Charles (talk) 09:17, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for composition, foreground is too dominating for me, pushing the interesting buildings far away. Crop suggestion added. --Kreuzschnabel 15:21, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Strange composition --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:29, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel and Uoaei1. The composition is appropriate to a tourist snapshot, not an FP. The staircases in the foreground clash very strongly with the putative subject. Daniel Case (talk) 20:38, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per other opposes. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 22:33, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. INeverCry 00:42, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 08:03, 22 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Kilmainham Gaol Main Hall 2016-06-03.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Sep 2016 at 20:49:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kilmainham Gaol Main Hall
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info The main hall of the Victorian wing in Kilmainham Gaol, Dublin, Ireland. The year 2016 is the centenary of the Easter Rising, and many Irish revolutionaries and leaders were imprisoned and executed in this prison by the British. Photo created/uploaded/nominated by me. -- Colin (talk) 20:49, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Colin (talk) 20:49, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not something you see here every day... Light and airy pic of historically important building with a very dark past. I'll even forgive the glare up in the glass ceiling. cart-Talk 22:06, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I find this photo haunting and will support, but I would love it if there's a way to decrease the glare in the bright parts without otherwise damaging the picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:05, 13 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 02:14, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 04:32, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 15:53, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good job keeping the potentially blown highlight down. Ironic how the interior of a former prison looks so airy, its design almost like a late 20th-century shopping mall. Daniel Case (talk) 16:21, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Leaning a bit to the left, the two "bridges" are not horizontal.--Jebulon (talk) 19:46, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Jebulon, I've made an adjustment, using the lower bridge as a guide as well as some of the longer vertical lines. -- Colin (talk) 20:11, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Sinne Fianna Fáil, A tá fé gheall ag Éirinn.--Jebulon (talk) 20:30, 14 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:16, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose good composition but disturbing overexposed areas Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:32, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • There's that word, "overexposed" again. It means literally to expose film (or a digital sensor) for too long, such that detail is lost and highlights blown. In fact, this image was "exposed for the highlights" and the source raw file has no areas blown and is overall darker than you see here. By exposing for the highlights, the rest of the scene ends up under-exposed but that's no problem for my Sony sensor and the whole scene is actually raised 1 stop in post, combined with modest adjustments to reduce highlights and lift shadows. While some people like to whack the "Highlights" slider down to -100, I really dislike seeing paper-grey as the colour through a skylight. This is direct sunlight through the roof light, harshly lighting up the left side of the hall. That's how it was when I saw it with my eyes and I've attempted to render that for you. You might feel a better image would have been taken on a dull overcast day (and I would disagree -- it would be dull) but that's quite a different argument from claiming I made a technical error when exposing this scene in my camera. We are seeing a hall lit not by windows on the walls as most buildings are, nor by artificial light, but by a huge skylight, which is unusual and interesting. -- Colin (talk) 20:22, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The bright areas are for me far too much bright in the final result which is nominated here, that they were overexposed or not when taking the photo. If it is not an "overexposition", then it is for me a fault in the post-edition, at least a fault for my tastes. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:52, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fine, but please use the correct description. Remember that we all learn from reviews, some are experienced and some just starting out, and so using an incorrect term can confuse everyone, especially beginners. -- Colin (talk) 21:15, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The term "overexposition" is not entirely false, as a less exposed image would have been more in my taste, that is a fact...therefore for me it is indeed overexposed unless you brightened willingly the bright areas durind the editing process, a thing that I don't understand. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:23, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, I have brightened the raw image, by one stop, and the subsequent highlight reduction I made did not completely compensate for that increase, so yes, the bright areas are brighter than the raw file. The resulting image isn't brighter than it was in reality, because I had to under-expose to retain highlights. The highlights are not blown; they are just bright. The word "overexposed" refers solely to a technical error made during capture onto film or digital sensor. When one talks of highlights (or channels) "blown" that is when the digital value of the image hits the maximum, which is for a JPG is 255 on any colour channel. These are technical issues. If you feel the areas lit by sunlight (or that are sunlight) are too bright, then that is a matter of "taste", not a technical flaw. I think it very important on our reviews that we separate matters of taste from problems arising from technical error. I'm not trying to change your vote, just to point out that the bright sunlight here is bright in the image for a very deliberate reason. You say you don't understand why I make the bright areas bright? Because they were bright. Harder to understand is why one would try to make bright sunlight dim. -- Colin (talk) 07:43, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:23, 22 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

Hoboken Terminal, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2016 at 05:41:46 (UTC)

  • Hoboken Terminal at dawn

    Hoboken Terminal at dawn

  • Hoboken Terminal at sunrise

    Hoboken Terminal at sunrise

  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:41, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:41, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Could be better, we have makro shoter with doing f/5.6-6.3 on same sensor, and now f/11 on panorama. --Mile (talk) 06:02, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @PetarM: Not sure I follow; are you saying the sharpness is suffering from the effects of diffraction? My reason for choosing f/11 was to slow the shutter speed, and in practice I find that it doesn't reduce resolution that much compared to f/5.6 or f/8, about the same amount as an extra ND filter that would have been required. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:24, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Mild Symbol support vote.svg Support, more or less per Mile: Both photos look great at full-page size and are a good achievement; the compositions are good; and the series is certainly valuable. At full size, I can respect your choice of how close to start noticeably decreasing focus. The sky looks smoggier than optimal in both pictures, but that might be because of choices you made; I can't tell. The blown lights bother me somewhat in the blue hour picture, especially on the clocktower, so I wonder whether it's worth playing with the levels at all. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:11, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I really like The King's same-view-different-times sets. cart-Talk 07:53, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support As always. 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 12:43, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 13:25, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Excellent. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:44, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Don't see why the daytime one was f/11 since the exposure isn't particularly long (1s) vs night-time at 10s. The daytime photo is rather soft. The nighttime one has a stitching error in the reflected lights. The clock is also blown, which is a shame. Would have preferred if both photos were aligned with each other better. -- Colin (talk) 20:57, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I checked the original frame, and that is actually how the reflected lights turned out. I noticed it myself while stitching, but I can't explain why it looks so strange. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:28, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Mild Symbol support vote.svg Support per others. INeverCry 00:40, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Mild support per Ikan. It's nice to see a picture shot on the New Jersey side of the Hudson showing a skyline other than Lower or Midtown Manhattan. Daniel Case (talk) 01:51, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Code (talk) 05:29, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:54, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:20, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • still Symbol support vote.svg Support sadly the clock face is totally overexposed, but because of the little part mateched to the total image size and the very good technic of the rest and the very nive composition I support the image(s). I know the difficulty of those very bright parts, they are to handle but it's a bit tricky. --Wladyslaw (talk) 10:41, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram-voting question.svg Question Sorry, what is the candidate ?--Jebulon (talk) 11:30, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I'm not quite sure what you mean. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:29, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:26, 22 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#United_States

File:Děčín (Tetschen) - Rose Garden.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2016 at 05:54:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Děčín (Tetschen), Czech Republic - Rose Garden
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 05:54, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Pudelek (talk) 05:54, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Sorry, the composition feels jumbled to me. I'm not sure how you would get around that, because the arrangement of the buildings beyond the garden doesn't seem orderly or well-planned with an eye toward compatible architecture. Maybe if there were a way for you to do a more vertical composition that excluded most of the buildings to the left of the church. Or how's the view in the other direction, from beyond the gate? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:37, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Ikan. INeverCry 08:05, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose There is a bit too much going on in this picture, maybe a photo of just the magnificent rose garden, with a bit more sun on the flowers, would have been better or per Ikan's recommendation. Nice place though! --cart-Talk 08:52, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. Deservedly a QI, but like W.carter says, too much going on. Daniel Case (talk) 21:24, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination --Pudelek (talk) 10:28, 23 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ivar (talk) 12:32, 23 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Reloj Mundial, Berlín, Alemania, 2016-04-22, DD 43-45 HDR.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2016 at 19:20:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Night view of the World Clock (Urania-Weltzeituhr), Alexanderplatz, Berlin, Germany.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Night view of the World Clock (Urania-Weltzeituhr), Alexanderplatz, Berlin, Germany. The 10 metres (33 ft)-high clock shows the time in 148 cities worldwide and was inaugurated in 1969. The clock has become one of the symbols of Berlin and is a popular meeting point for the people in the capital. All by me, Poco2 19:20, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Poco2 19:20, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 20:54, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - The entire top of the clock is smudged. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:38, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversharpening and accordingly noise is generated, where should be white there are gray. Btw, posterization effect when the lights become fused with the black (Observe the lights of the lampposts). With regard to the composition, the top is unbalanced with respect to the bottom of the image. --The Photographer 23:04, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per noisy upper portion noted by others. Daniel Case (talk) 20:06, 22 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting delete.svg I withdraw my nomination Poco2 02:53, 23 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ivar (talk) 12:31, 23 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:MonumentoEcuestreSanMartinMDP-sep2016.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2016 at 23:48:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ivar (talk) 12:31, 23 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:ARCHIDONA-GASTRONOMÍA (19783827898).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2016 at 22:44:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Maito de tilapia, Archidona (Ecuador)
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 22:59, 23 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Branched juniper twig with shots.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2016 at 10:16:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Branched juniper twig with shots.
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Cupressaceae
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info Final result of my little juniper project. Many thanks for those who encouraged me with their advise. After several attempts both outdoors and indoors, I took the middle way and brought my indoors equipment (sturdy tripod + soft reflector screen + better camera) outdoors to a juniper growing on level ground and the sun for quality light. I used my jacket to get a more neutral background than the one provided by this juniper grove. The jacket still had needles in it when I put it on again... I noticed. All by me, -- cart-Talk 10:16, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- cart-Talk 10:16, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Pretty. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:35, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:00, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 23:24, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:47, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jee 03:36, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Mile (talk) 16:32, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Very good quality, but I'm not fond of artificial background. --Ivar (talk) 16:55, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The background is not digitally added, it's my jacket, otherwise part the background would be a rusty red/green oil drum. cart-Talk 19:10, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 18:20, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Solid support Great to see this come to its fruition (ahem). Ideally all the needle points would be sharp, but tradeoffs are tradeoffs. Daniel Case (talk) 18:51, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks Daniel, believe me I tried to get them all sharp, but since the twig branches off in so many directions I think that would require a studio shot with focus stacking (which I don't know, yet) and photo lamps (which I don't have, yet). Maybe this will be the next step in my learning curve. :-) cart-Talk 19:10, 19 September 2016 (UTC)::Reply[reply]
OK, I was thinking about how it might look stacked, but now I understand. When you get there, give it another try. Daniel Case (talk) 19:29, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(My thought was "Sharp needle points - Ow!!) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:47, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:58, 23 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Cupressaceae

File:Kittywakes (Rissa tridactyla) hunting fish at a glacier on Svalbard.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Sep 2016 at 15:59:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kittywakes hunt fish in the nutritious meltwaters of the Monaco glacier, Svalbard
  • Question: Can I fix the CA while it is still being assesed? Sorry, I am new to this process and need to ask stupid questions at times. -- AWeith 10:17, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - There might be one or two people who would say no, but yes, you can, and it's common practice to allow small changes. Once you've made the change, though, you should ping everyone who's already voted, so that they get a chance to see if they still want to feature the photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:39, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Yes, correcting such minor flaws is ok. Go ahead, fix it and upload a new version at the file's page and post here when it's done. cart-Talk 08:43, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Did it. I hope the new version is now the CA removed version; had some trouble converting it to the actual version (never did that before; however, learning curve is steep). Thx for your valued comments. --AWeith (talk) 11:22, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The current version looks ok. Once you have uploaded a new verion of a pic, you also have to purge your computer's cache for every setting or it will not show the new version. If many users are working with uploading, it can also take some time for the new version to go through all the stages of the data system. That is why you had some trouble with it. (I've also left you a small note on your talk page) So since Ikan Kekek was the only one who had done some actual voting before the new version came online, he is hereby 'pinged'. cart-Talk 12:17, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - I'm sorry, I've purged my cache twice, yet I see no difference whatsoever between the current and previous version. Any advice? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:42, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Have you purged your cache at all sizes? You have to do that. cart-Talk 13:21, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't understand the question. I purge the cache, then download the new photo again. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:34, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks, but I purged my cache to 0 bytes and still saw no difference when I downloaded the newest version again. I give up. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:16, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The general rule of thumb is: Could anyone reasonably object to is, or is it an uncontroversial improvement? Generally CA removal, tilt correction, etc. all fall into this category. For bigger changes like cropping, I would generally upload it under a different filename and add it as an "alt" (so people can vote on either of them, or both, or neither). I only upload significant changes directly on top if basically no one has voted. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:21, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 22:57, 23 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes

File:München - Olympische Bauten.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2016 at 11:20:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Munich: Olympic Parc
The colour space is defined in the EXIF as "sRGB", please look again or see here File:EXIF-Data of Image Olympische Bauten.jpg (marked with the two red dots). I've copied the EXIF from one original single shot to this pano as I do usual since you've pointed that out. --Wladyslaw (talk) 04:29, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The ColorSpace EXIF tag has two values: sRGB and Uncalibrated. It is completely ignored by all browsers. The problem is the lack of embedded colour profile, which is the only way to accurately define the colours in a JPG. See User:Colin/BrowserTest. Compare your image EXIF with my image EXIF. In mine it says "Embedded color profile: “sRGB” and you can scroll down to the bottom for ICC_Profile and click to see all the embedded data. With yours it says "WARNING: Color space tagged as sRGB, without an embedded color profile. Windows and Mac browsers and apps treat the colors randomly." and there is no ICC_Profile section at all. All professional image-making software can be configured to embed the colour profile in a JPG and most do this as standard (e.g. Lightroom, Photoshop). -- Colin (talk) 07:35, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have copied the EXIF of the original, non edited file, and I don't have the faintest idea how to fit to your perception and I'm sorry to have no time to study several technical descriptions. So far it wasn't a problem since I have copied the EXIF and this time I did it the same way like any other time in the close past. --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:01, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sigh. I thought we'd fixed this problem but I can't find the earlier FPC where it was resolved. I did find this PFC from 2011. Five years is a long time to refuse to understand the issue and the very easy fix. All modern photo software will embed colour profiles if you set them up correctly. The colour profile is not an EXIF tag. -- Colin (talk) 15:34, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Colin: , @Taxiarchos228: you might be looking for this or this. All I can notice now is that Wladyslaw seems to no longer use the Gimp, which I found to be the culprit in stripping the colour profile away. - Benh (talk) 17:10, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wenn ich mal der Einfachheit halber auf Deutsch intervenieren darf: Es gibt einen Unterschied zwischen dem Colour-Tag (der ist bei Dir da, wird aber von den meisten Browsern ignoriert) und dem eigebetteten Colour-Profile (das fehlt bei Dir). Welche Software nutzt Du? Es ist sehr ungewöhnlich, dass das Profil nicht automatisch eingebettet wird. --Code (talk) 05:33, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Taxiarchos228: , I added the profile back here. I slightly increased compression, but no one should see any difference. If you're fine with that, you can use it to overwrite the current version. I think an FP shouldn't have this kind of flaw (and especially when it takes seconds to fix) and I'll oppose if this is not fixed (not that this will change anything, but just to voice my opinion). When one buys a rule, even if there are marks on it, it is useless if the unit is not indicated. cm ? inches ? it makes a lot of difference. - Benh (talk) 19:12, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:29, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Excellent capture but it seems to me as both sides would lean in (o2-Tower is leaning to the right, BMW-building is leaning to the left). Can you fix that? Colour profile would be nice, too. --Code (talk) 04:27, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Both sides aren't leaning any more, please refreh your browser. Colour profil is part of the EXIF. -- Wladyslaw (talk) 04:30, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The green and blue work really well together. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:59, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment BMW-building is leaning to the left, it's the fist time I open the image, not need to refresh for me. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:12, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Christian Ferrer: the leaning angle is less about 1 degree! sorry, but this is not a relevenat point in my eyes any more. --Wladyslaw (talk) 14:07, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
WladyslawThat you think it is relevant or not is not ...relevant. A cat is a cat and a building leaning is a building leaning. I don't think it's indeed a reason to oppose, but, as a gentleman, when I see little defect, I comment about it in the case the uploader want to correct it, that's all. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:10, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Benh: shame on you: how could you support this candidate? --Wladyslaw (talk) 20:34, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 23:01, 23 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture#Germany

File:Pont Vieux et Cathédrale Saint-Nazaire de Béziers cf02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2016 at 11:53:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pont Vieux and Cathédrale Saint-Nazaire de Béziers
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Christian Ferrer (talk) 13:57, 24 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Bridges

File:All Saints church, Preston Bagot - Mary and Martha stained glass windows 2016.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2016 at 19:46:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mary and Martha stained glass windows by Edward Burne-Jones in All Saints church, Preston Bagot, England
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I like it because of it's mild, calm, earthy colors, plus the fact that you can actually see something through it (something that is very rare among the pics in the FP and QI sections mentioned above) and what is outside harmonize in colors with the glass paintings themselves. You don't need to go overboard in Technicolor to get an FP of stained glass windows. Here the emphasis is more on "window" than "stained". --cart-Talk 17:15, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - Thanks for your cogently expressed point of view. I might feel the same way if the view through the window were more focused. I'm not saying it's DeFacto's fault that it's not, but I think there's a very high bar for FP stained glass pictures. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:57, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 21:51, 24 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Amphithéâtre d'ElJem 11.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2016 at 11:01:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

entire view of ElJem Amphitheater
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by --IssamBarhoumi (talk) 11:01, 19 September 2016 (UTC) - uploaded by --IssamBarhoumi (talk) 11:01, 19 September 2016 (UTC) - nominated by IssamBarhoumi -- IssamBarhoumi (talk) 11:01, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Nice picture, but compare this one, which we're about to feature. The entire arena is sharp at full size in that picture, the file size is much bigger, and there are no random people in it. I feel like you are continuing to improve your skills, and this is a great motif, but please try taking sharper photos of it when no-one is hanging onto the left side. I guess I have to mildly Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose a feature, because the quality of Poco's photos of this amphitheatre is so high that this one, while good, doesn't make the cut. But if you can take another picture in which the amphitheatre is completely sharp, do try submitting that one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:17, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Another thing that voters on FPC frequently object to is for large parts of the subject to be in shadow, so try to take a photo of this motif when there is more even light, or failing that, more interesting light. -- Ikan Kekek

Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Dear Ikan Kekek I will do my best --IssamBarhoumi (talk) 13:21, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(talk) 12:55, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment dear Ikan Kekek and dear Daniel Case I made a file with less random people and sharper I uploaded it and I reverted the old one if it is ok for FP let me change it --IssamBarhoumi (talk) 05:44, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment - New files should be nominated separately. Besides, the random people are not at all the only thing preventing this from being featurable. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:58, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 0 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 21:48, 24 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Apis mellifera - Brassica napus - Valingu.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2016 at 17:13:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Honey bee
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 21:46, 24 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera

File:Bab Bhar Mahdia 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2016 at 13:41:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

view of Bab Bhar in Mahdia
Confirmed results:
Result: 0 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 21:47, 24 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Black-faced bunting in Sakai, Osaka, February 2016.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2016 at 18:30:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Black-faced bunting in Sakai, Osaka.
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 21:45, 24 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes

File:Rocks in Karystos Euboea Greece.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2016 at 20:48:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rocks in Euboea
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by me -- Jebulon (talk) 20:48, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Several shades of marble, Karystos, Euboea, Greece. -- Jebulon (talk) 20:48, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Mild Symbol support vote.svg Support I wish the sky wasn't blank, but I like the rocks. Nice texture. INeverCry 21:10, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I think any more things in the sky or water (besides waves, froth and distant islands/ships) would only have competed with the rocks and made the pic too busy. cart-Talk 21:26, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:58, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:58, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per INC. Daniel Case (talk) 05:41, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment format (portrait) doesn't fit with the image object which goes longitudinal --Wladyslaw (talk) 06:32, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram-voting question.svg Question Obviously we don't look at the same picture, but this is not new between us...Clin. Thanks for sharing opinion anyway.--Jebulon (talk) 09:34, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Harsh light at noon. I also do not like the format. --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:37, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Jebulon, if you take a square 4000x4000 crop of the top, I think the composition works much better. Better ratio of sky/sea/rocks and the lines lead in from the bottom corners. Example:(deleted, see history)

This is not an alt, so please don't vote on it. Feel free to delete above example if it confuses the nom.-- Colin (talk) 16:20, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

    • Thanks for opinion, I'll think of it.--Jebulon (talk) 20:01, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I'll let this nom leave as it is until the end of the process (which could include a withdraw of course), thank you. No reason for reviewers to stop assessmentsClin.--Jebulon (talk) 20:47, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support − Meiræ 20:57, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 21:49, 24 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Warthogs (Phacochoerus africanus) young males eyeballing.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2016 at 16:13:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Young male warthogs eyeballing
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 16:13, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support There were some requests to nominate this image -- Charles (talk) 16:13, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Oh yes! The twig in front of one of fighters is unfortunate, but the rest of the picture more than makes up for that. Talk about eyeballing your opponent! cart-Talk 16:41, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak support I can see why you didn't nominate it on your own—technically it leaves some things to be desired—but how often are you going to catch a moment like that? I'd crop off the top a bit, though. Daniel Case (talk) 18:33, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • ✓ Done I agree cropped version works better. Charles (talk) 19:28, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      • Charles I think Danie's suggestion to crop the top was better than cropping top and bottom. A 16:9 crop (2723x2094) removing only the top works much better, with a little more soil to lead into the scene and a 16:9 image is more useful. -- Colin (talk) 16:28, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
        • I'm easy either way. Image is now a 16 x 9 crop of top as suggested by Colin. Charles (talk) 16:36, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 20:08, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:13, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, and thanks for nominating it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:26, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 15:34, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Support the 16:9 crop. -- Colin (talk) 16:54, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Vengolis (talk) 04:02, 24 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 21:51, 24 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals

File:20160729 - Taungthaman Lake near Amarapura in Myanmar - 6044.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2016 at 22:35:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Taungthaman Lake near Amarapura in Myanmar
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created by Jakubhal - uploaded by Jakubhal - nominated by Lmbuga -- Lmbuga (talk) 22:35, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Lmbuga (talk) 22:35, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:45, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - Beautifully artistic. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:33, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 03:45, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- cart-Talk 11:32, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --XRay talk 12:11, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The framing is fine but a 16:9 crop (taking top and bottom off but keeping the sides) is much much stronger. However the light is really dull, and the third boat is obscured, so this is a scene with potential for another time. The foreground is of tourists rather than locals and distant bank isn't interesting. -- Colin (talk) 13:02, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose If it were just the compositional shortcomings noted by Colin I would probably forgive then; I still like this although he's right about how it could be better. However ... the whole image seems like it was overprocessed. The people on the boats look a little waxy, the far shore is less sharp than perhaps it could be, but most importantly the clouds have posterized areas with some areas of off color. Daniel Case (talk) 16:08, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Halavar (talk) 15:14, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - I'm sorry, but looking at this photo again, I see enough of the things Daniel and Colin mention to change my vote. I still like this photo at full-page size, so I'm not sure about actually opposing, but drawbacks at full size are a good reason not to feature an otherwise good photo, and what my neutrality does is give the tie break to an additional voter. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:00, 19 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Jee 06:43, 25 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Gorbea - Caballo 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Sep 2016 at 20:48:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Basque mountain horse, free roaming on the pastures of the mountain Gorbea. Álava, Basque Country, Spain
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info created, uploaded and nominated by Basotxerri -- Basotxerri (talk) 20:48, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Basotxerri (talk) 20:48, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Good quality, but no wow factor for me. INeverCry 21:07, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment It would have been better is the lower part of the horse's legs and hoofs had not been hidden. A bolder and more dramatic crop somehow, would not be amiss either. cart-Talk 21:31, 15 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral - I really could go either way on this. I think it would be fine to feature this photo; it's very good. But I also agree with the others. Ergo, neutral. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:49, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Yes, it would be even better if we could see all its hooves, but to me it is an FP even without them. Daniel Case (talk) 15:18, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose not for me because of the composition. Charles (talk) 15:26, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others. The horse is too small in the frame and the hooves. -- Colin (talk) 16:11, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per others. According to the category suggested, this is meant to be a picture of a horse, but in that case the horse itself is way too small in it. Centered composition does not help here either. --Kreuzschnabel 19:01, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Basque mountain horse, free roaming on the pastures of the mountain Gorbea. Álava, Basque Country, Spain
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info I've tried some other crops, this is the one I like most. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:31, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I like my horse anyway... :-) --Basotxerri (talk) 15:31, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I agree this is a better crop as it needs to be close. The horizon is perhaps a little distractingly steep angle (I'm sure your camera is level). But the hooves are still a problem and this is getting a bit small/lacking detail for FP. -- Colin (talk) 16:11, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 16:42, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Weak Support Crop is much better and at this high percentage of horse in the picture, I don't miss the hoofs that much. Support is weak only because the file is now so small. Had this been the original shot at full strength and detail, my support would have been full. cart-Talk 21:17, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Mild Symbol support vote.svg Support - I feel fairly comfortable supporting this version, even though the horse is still a bit softly focused on part of its body. I find this composition much more interesting than the other one, which really feels to me like it's emphasizing the rocks as much or more than the horse. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:53, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Much better than the other version but still below FP level for me. The foreground rock is too dominant IMHO, the horse partly hidden, the overall image on the verge to underexposure. Compared to other horse FPs, this is not too special – keep in mind a FP needs to be more than just good, we look for excellence. --Kreuzschnabel 19:01, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per Colin & Kreuzschnabel. INeverCry 08:20, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 06:45, 25 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Priscilla Horton (Mrs. German Reed) as Ariel.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Sep 2016 at 23:40:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Priscilla Horton, later known as Mrs. German Reed
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Jee 06:41, 25 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:Galeopsis speciosa - Keila.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2016 at 10:02:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Large-flowered hemp-nettle
  • I think it works. When the background objects are away, you'll get a smooth background with the colors of the ambient light available; green if foliage around in day time and golden in sun rise/set (in high ISO or slow exposure). But if we only need is a background, we can create it holding a leaf or golden paper behind. (See Background, Artificial Background.) I had seen my friends doing it , holding leaves behind. (What I don't like here is the golden tint on the subject too which decreases the EV as a botanical illustration for Wikipedia. That's why prefer to abstain from voting here. Off-course they may visually more beautiful in golden hours and may be useful in other places.) Jee 13:56, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Golden hour photograpy is so much more than just the background, it is also the golden light you get from the sun at that time and it changes how structures and cliffs look too. This special light is more prominent in northern countries since it lasts longer there and people have time to really enjoy it. cart-Talk 15:52, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Indeed. I can't comment further about it as the sun and light will disappear here before 18.30; complete darkness in 21.00. ;) Jee 16:32, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I know, when I visit countries further south I can never get used to how fast the sun sets. You should see the nights here in June when it never gets dark. Unfortunately it's the other way around in winter... cart-Talk 18:06, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And starting next week, the days will get shorter faster for you in the northern temperate latitudes than they do for those of us in the lower temperates. (Sunrise here at 41°33'N is at 6:42 a.m. tomorrow, with sunset coming just after 7 p.m. I believe we already have a longer day than you ... So maybe I can take some of these golden-hour images Face-smile.svg). Daniel Case (talk) 06:30, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral So why do I keep chatting on this page without voting? Truth is that this time I had a hard time making up my mind. It is a sharp and well-composed photo in many ways but with too many "effects" IMO. First there is the almost perfect symmetry of the plant, then you have the hairs of the nettle creating minute halos and catching the sun, further is the golden hour light and finally there are the water drops. Any one of these things would enhance a photo, but taken together it is just too much. Like a cake with all your favorite flavors at once. cart-Talk 08:31, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support--Vamps (talk) 09:53, 22 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Kruusamägi (talk) 17:47, 23 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Jee 13:33, 25 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Order_:_Lamiales

File:Shakespeare.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2016 at 07:13:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Jee 13:35, 25 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Anfiteatro, El Jem, Túnez, 2016-09-04, DD 38-40 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Sep 2016 at 17:36:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tunnel under the Amphitheatre of El Jem, Tunisia
Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment You're welcome. At least I get to know how it feels to nominate an image and they accept it :-) --Basotxerri (talk) 20:22, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral Yes its cool, but I'm not awed by the overexposed light pools on the floor. No detail there. cart-Talk 18:57, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 20:42, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Ralf Roleček 21:17, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:28, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:35, 20 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I understand W.carter's criticism of this picture at full size, but what a great tunnel picture at full-page size! I think that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts in this case. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:43, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Per Ikan, I accept the light pools as an inevitable tradeoff of getting the depth of field right. Daniel Case (talk) 18:47, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Pictogram-voting question.svg Question And what's that one little thing glowing on the floor like it's some sort of leftover prop from one of the Star Wars movies? Daniel Case (talk) 18:47, 21 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 01:37, 26 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:Carzago Riviera chiesa parrocchiale San Lorenzo provincia Brescia.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2016 at 20:38:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Parish church of Saint Lawrence in Carzago Riviera in Italy
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
  • Pictogram voting info.svg Info all by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 20:38, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 20:38, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support INeverCry 21:27, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support 😄 ArionEstar 😜 (talk) 22:20, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose - Truly sorry, but I'm not overwhelmed at all by the focus, for example on the ceiling or altar, and while this composition is certainly good (although ideally, I would have preferred a slightly more generous crop on top), nothing about the composition or light strikes me as so outstanding as to call out to me for a feature. A QI it certainly is, but to me, not more than that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:34, 16 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I would rather say isnt QI, but might be FP. But many mistakes, unsharp, composition, croped things. --Mile (talk) 05:55, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Too many stitching errors, horizontals leaning, insufficient contrast handling (e.g. the glare on the organ pipes is too much for me). Some annotations added to clarify. Right-hand chandelier being cut off makes the framing look arbitrary. --Kreuzschnabel 15:31, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Per others, technically way subpar—in any photo of a Christian church, the altartop should be level, for starters. Daniel Case (talk) 18:15, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The opposes of Daniel and Kreuzschnabel are quite convincing. INeverCry 00:44, 18 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 01:38, 26 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Heligoland 07-2016 photo15.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2016 at 17:19:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Heligoland / North Sea of Germany. View from the upper island to the cliffs (left: "Lange Anna" / lower right: "Lummenfelsen")
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /INeverCry 01:40, 26 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Panorama vom Aussichtspunkt Via Regia.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2016 at 18:28:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

360°-panoramic view from the lookout-tower "Via regia" near Hünfeld in Hesse, Germany
Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment Are you serious? In the distance you can´t recognize each screw. The Panorama conforms to the single original foto in that direction. Do I need to upload it? --Milseburg (talk) 13:42, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I was serious, but I misinterpreted pylons hidden by valley as stitching errors. My error, sorry. Charles (talk) 19:11, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Not the most interesting landscape for me, but still nice, impressive and well done. I see no stitching issues. --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:34, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Wows with its sheer sweep. The sort of landscape where you have to see it all. Daniel Case (talk) 18:10, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Just not that interesting or detailed. The 360 results in a very narrow strip (did you take the frames in landscape format?) with too little sky. 2000 vertical pixels is really quite small compared to the vertical resolution of your camera (4000). Quite a lot of muddy ground on the left and right edges. I think for a 360 image which naturally lacks any composition, the view has to be pretty spectacular. -- Colin (talk) 21:04, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Pictogram voting comment (orange).svg Comment I can´t follow you. On the attractiveness of the landscape I have no influence. I have cropped top and buttom. What do you think is missing interesting in the lost sky and mud? The Large-Image-Template was already added. The 37 images in original size are difficult to work with and who wants seriously or is even able to upload an 126-MB image. Is sacrificing quality by strong compression for you ok? Just to see more sky and mud? --Milseburg (talk) 21:54, 17 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /INeverCry 01:40, 26 September 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Panoramas

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bodie September 2016 019.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Duisburg, Landschaftspark Duisburg-Nord -- 2016 -- 1115 (bw).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:James Russell Lowell - 1855.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Building on Avenida Paulista.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Saxon Switzerland - view from Festung Königstein.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sunset at old Rixö quarry.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Anfiteatro, El Jem, Túnez, 2016-09-04, DD 41-43 HDR.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Landsort August 2016 10.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ruth Muskrat.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Boeing 737 ES-ENH Madeira Funchal airport 2016 3.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Wooden Window inside Patan Museum-IMG 3651.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Herbstzeitlose, 2.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Karlskirche Vienna, September 2016 -3.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Kreta - Potamon-Stausee2.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Schloss Werneck, 5.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Polar bear (Ursus maritimus) with its prey.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sailboat at sunset in Brofjorden.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Junonia iphita-Kadavoor-2016-08-08-002.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Oversnow heavy tractor Kharkovchanka.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Papilio dravidarum-Kadavoor-2016-07-30-001.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:On the balcony, Paris August 2016.jpg

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Log/September_2016&oldid=208403197"