Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Gran Palacio del Kremlin, Moscú, Rusia, 2016-10-03, DD 28-29 HDR.jpg

File:Gran Palacio del Kremlin, Moscú, Rusia, 2016-10-03, DD 28-29 HDR.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2017 at 21:53:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Gran Palacio del Kremlin, Moscú, Rusia, 2016-10-03, DD 28-29 HDR.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Gran Palacio del Kremlin, Moscú, Rusia, 2016-10-03, DD 28-29 HDR.jpg

• Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
•  Info Night view of the Grand Kremlin Palace, Moscow, Russia. It was built from 1837 to 1849 on the site of the estate of the Grand Princes, which had been established in the 14th century on Borovitsky Hill. The palace, 125 metres (410 ft) long and 47 metres (154 ft) tall, was formerly the tsar's Moscow residence. All by me, Poco² 21:53, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Poco² 21:53, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support - Beautiful. There's a little color noise, but I don't know if there's any reason to edit such a large file. Not necessary for my vote, at any rate. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:50, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support--Peulle (talk) 23:50, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support HalfGig talk 02:13, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:06, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support :-) --XRay ^talk 06:21, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support - Gorgeous Picture. --Sanjay Acharya (talk) 07:36, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Ermell (talk) 07:45, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Very nice! --cart-Talk 09:31, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

* Support --Aczap (talk) 13:30, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

• Sorry, invalid vote. The rules are: "Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote." This vote was your 26th edit. Welcome back later when you have made more edits. :-) --cart-Talk 13:21, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

•  Support --Tomascastelazo (talk) 14:24, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:44, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 23:44, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 00:22, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:00, 5 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Neutral The image is tilt --The Photographer 23:53, 5 November 2017 (UTC)  Support Well done, it's ok now --The Photographer 20:58, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

  True, The Photographer, there was a tilt of 0,1 degrees. I've uploaded a new version --Poco² 18:59, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

•  Support --Karelj (talk) 14:53, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:25, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 07:19, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose I dont like tonality here. What happaned to normal picture, does it have to be HDR. I think it should look more like this one. Fasade of church is very white. Pink color is everywhere. Its disturbing. --Mile (talk) 09:07, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

  Your version looks too bluish (cold) to me. Among us, you don't really need any comments to your oppose votes for my noms, there's a pattern. Poco² 20:24, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

 Comment Poco_a_poco I found very useful the oppose comments (maybe some exceptions like "not wow", for example), however, comment a oppose vote is a requirement accepted for everyone who nominates pictures here. I really find the oppose votes comments more enriching than the positive ones because these comments help to improve the photographers quality and we are only able to improve thanks to constructive criticism. I particularly do not see anything wrong with the Mile comment and If you do not agree, ignore his comment but do not ask people to break the rules. --The Photographer 20:55, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

•  Support --fedaro (talk) 11:26, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /MZaplotnik^(talk) 17:32, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture